Erich von Manstein may or may not have been an actual Nazi. The German ( Prussian, really ) Junkers ( pr. Yoonkurss ) class - and I do mean class in a hereditary sense - would have been more dependent on an honor code than on who happened to be Chancellor at the time.
Manstein was dismissed by Hitler at one point. He helped with the plausible deniability ... thing, the "myth of a clean Wermacht"[ Wikipedia ]. That was a Useful idea in resolving the legalities of the War. Whether it was true or not is almost moot.
No, there almost certainly can't be any stats to back this up. It's barely a just-so story.
The money shot is: "Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the intellectual clarity and the composure necessary for difficult decisions." This statement is roughly descriptive and barely that. But it doubtless contains some measure of wisdom. Clarity is critical. Non delusional clarity is even better.
Another corollary aphorism is "a smart man wouldn't do that; a lazy man wouldn't do that." That's a "koan" about allowing that still small voice that nags you not to do something some credence. Especially in dynamic situations, allowing a situation to run to a critical state may be better than trying to anticipate something that's too complex to map in detail.
I suppose the deeper irony of the piece is assuming away ethics as a given when the subject was imprisoned for "war crimes". This being said, that's one whale of an ethical conundrum, to have been an ostensibly Prussian military officer in those times.
The term 'lazy' here is a bit misleading. In my view it's not meant in the sense of someone who slothful, but rather someone who aims to do things as efficiently as possible.
Sticking with the military context, one of the British Army's principles of war is 'economy of effort', which I think is a better description. Effective leaders focus on the high value activities, use resources well and delegate.
Manstein was dismissed by Hitler at one point. He helped with the plausible deniability ... thing, the "myth of a clean Wermacht"[ Wikipedia ]. That was a Useful idea in resolving the legalities of the War. Whether it was true or not is almost moot.
No, there almost certainly can't be any stats to back this up. It's barely a just-so story.
The money shot is: "Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the intellectual clarity and the composure necessary for difficult decisions." This statement is roughly descriptive and barely that. But it doubtless contains some measure of wisdom. Clarity is critical. Non delusional clarity is even better.
Another corollary aphorism is "a smart man wouldn't do that; a lazy man wouldn't do that." That's a "koan" about allowing that still small voice that nags you not to do something some credence. Especially in dynamic situations, allowing a situation to run to a critical state may be better than trying to anticipate something that's too complex to map in detail.
I suppose the deeper irony of the piece is assuming away ethics as a given when the subject was imprisoned for "war crimes". This being said, that's one whale of an ethical conundrum, to have been an ostensibly Prussian military officer in those times.