Demonization and Wars of Annihilation
To make people fight with the will necessary to win, the other side must be demonized, often dehumanized. We must fight them because they want nothing less than to wipe us from the face of the earth. Within such a framework, it is hard to see the other side as having honor and accept the idea of innocent bystanders. Within such a framework, logical goals and acceptable stopping points get lost.

Since “they” want to kill you, it is better for you to kill them first. The world of limited warfare gives in to the world of total war.

Civilian-Military Split

Ironically, the rise of “civilian” armies ended up segregating the “civilian” world from the “military” world. Before Napoleon, Bell argues, soldiers were civilians. The officers were the nobles of the land. The grunts were part-time soldiers. When not at war, they had to go find other jobs in order to get paid. Every person in the military, from the kings on down, was fully in the civil world.

Then, with the start of total warfare, the “military” world came to be thought of as its own sphere. It has its own rules and status. People would and could do things in war that they would not do as “regular” people. Wars became fought by specialists, by soldiers and warriors. The military became professional.

This last point is extremely interesting to me because it is the opposite of what I had previously learned.

Summary
That’s what makes total war so destructive and desperate. The line between combatants and noncombatants are blurred. Almost everyone is fair game. The levels of hatred and destruction are ratcheted up but they are compartmentalized as exceptional feelings.

These feelings and actions are not acceptable in the normal world, but in a state of war, everything is ok. The actions by “0ur” professional fighters are rationalized as necessary in a state of war when all of “them” are trying to annihilate us. The actors are excused while the targets are undifferentiated and many.

In the meantime, the other side is applying the exact same standards to us.

End of War
Bell points out that our world has a lot in common with Napoleon’s world. For us, before the Communist block broke up, there had not been armed conflict between the major world powers for a while. Then, once the Soviet Union fell, there seemed to be a sense that large-scale world peace may be possible. After all democracies do not fight democracies, right?

We’ve seen how quickly that idea crashed and burned as we’ve been in almost non-stop warfare for the last two decades.

The same pattern occurred with the success of the French Revolution. The thinkers of the day saw the fall of the “old world,” a world of royals fighting for greed, power, and territory. With the people in charge, surely we would not fight amongst ourselves, right? The Enlightenment idea that Man and Man’s history were perfectible was demonstrating itself.

Then Napoleon and his Republican army brought into Europe warfare of a style and scope that they have never seen before.

Civilian Warfare
In fact, it seems that putting warfare into the hands of “the people” only escalates the affair. This is something that the majority of today’s people do not understand.

Tyrants and dictators are relatively easy to deal with. Even if they are “crazy,” like a Gaddafi or a Kim Jong Il (or a Napoleon), they have one goal in mind. They want to remain in power. Everything else is negotiable. Accordingly, they may be scary or dangerous, but you can put them in the rational actors category because what they want is easy to understand.

When the kings of Europe fought each other, the civilian population was, more or less, left alone. There were rules, and it was to no one’s benefit to decimate the population or destroy the lands that the fighters wished to rule. The nobles fought each other, and it was better to capture one of your social equals alive for the ransom that they would bring than to leave them dead on the field.

When “people” fight, they don’t use warfare as a tool. It often becomes an expression of hatred and irrationality. To make the people fight, when they have little to gain from the endeavor, you have to make a very strong “Other.”

Continued in Part 2…

Well truthfully, I don’t feel I have done a lot for my country. Sure I pay my taxes and vote, but I have not really had to sacrifice or serve or endure hardships for the security and prosperity of my country.

There have been a few economic downturns but I’ve gotten through them (/knock wood). I’ve also lived through several wars with very little inconvenience. (Frankly, that just seems ridiculous to me.)

But now, our country is broke. Our states are broke. Our cities are broke.

By all accounts, the 2% Illinois income tax increase is going to go through soon. According to the numbers, this tax increase, which is scheduled to go for four years, will give us a surplus by the end of that time. Our $13 billion deficit will be erased.

No, it’s not a perfect solution, but it is one that can work. Can’t we just stop arguing and whining and just do this? It’s an extra 2% of my income.

This time, I’m willing to sacrifice.

Let us be brave. Let us be stalwart. Let us leave the next generation of leaders a new start and an even ground instead of a hole.

We, the citizens of Illinois, need to insist that all subsequently elected legislators hold spending and cut costs where they can. No increases in spending. Reductions as we go. And yes, they can have the increased collection of revenue.

It’s four years. Surely we can do this.

In a democracy, we always get the government we deserve and to stand around pointing fingers is meaningless. We all let the debt happen. We were too busy. We were too lazy. We were too apathetic.

We didn’t want to try.

Now, we can actually solve this problem with relatively little effort. If we can really hold additional spending (meaning no new programs), we won’t even have to do any work. It’s sit around and let the math work itself out.

Yes, 2% will hurt. But it will hurt a whole heck of a lot more later.

Sure I’ve been pro-Obama before this, but to me, being president-elect is nowhere near the same thing as actually doing the job. And watching him do his job last night? Whoo was he hot.

It was almost too good to be true. A smart guy like him breaking out the triple threat of

1. history,
2. responsibility, and
3. pragmatism.

These are right up my alley, buddy.

Not to mention—the social contract? Are you kidding me? He broke out the social contract?

I’m probably his forever.

I wish it could be communicated somehow that the morality of good citizenry is more effective, more powerful, and farther reaching than any government run according to a morality of religion. A government of citizenship has character. A government of citizenship has integrity.

When the overarching powers of society operate like that, it does permeate through the rest of life. A trickle-down effect if you will.

An ethical standard does make lies, cheats, and crimes more shameful.

Citizenship and posterity are two things that George Washington especially understood. And that understanding makes a difference. He, now and in his own time, holds a revered spot above all the other Founders.

It heartens me to think that we may have placed another man with similar understandings in office last year.

I just wanted to write up something about the inauguration yesterday while the thoughts are still fresh in my mind. There are no words to describe what the feeling was like down there. I was in the masses right in the middle between the Capital building and the Washington monument. The part that amazes me the most was the look that people had because everyone had his/her own personal story and connection to the moment and why they came down there.

Now the story about how to get down there is a story in itself and I will get to that later. Everyone will think it is crazy but for this day, everything was worth it and that was part of the bond everyone had because everyone down there had gone through the same thing just to get there.

I think everyone knows I have been a big Obama supporter form the beginning and been following this campaign throughout. For me to be there at the inauguration was just a sense of pride to feel like I have been a small part of the process and of course hope that things will change in this country. There were many African Americans of all ages. I would estimate the number at over a third to half the crowd. You could see what the moment meant to them but you also met and talked with people from all over the country when you were on the train, at Starbucks, walking to the event, and while you were there.

Now I just wanted to give you a feel of what the logistics were like because it was crazy. Definitely a once in a lifetime experience and you really needed to have that level of commitment to get there. My day started out leaving my apartment at 3:00. I was meeting up with some friends at the plan was to get on the first train out at 4:00 AM. Needless to say the start of the lines was right there getting into the train station.

By time everyone got together we made it into DC at 5:30 and walked to the mall. By the time we settled into our position at 6AM, the middle of the mall is as far as we got. So it was there that I stayed till the event started at 11:30 AM. After 7AM you did not want to move and go anywhere because you would have never been able to make it back.

It was cold but you had to know that going in. I really didn’t feel it till after the event and here was when things got really crazy. DC was in total lock down. They had closed streets and access points to begin with and with the amount of people there in the mall they decided to close off access to the parade route.

If you are not familiar with DC, closing off the parade route meant people could not cross back into the city from the mall and with a million plus people there nobody really knew where to go. After tracing back and forth in the crown we finally found some security people that told us the only way to go the direction we needed was the end of the mall. Keep in mind the mall is about two miles in length. So we basically hung out around the Washington monument waiting for the crowd to thin out.

That is where the cold really hit. But we finally made it out and had to walk another mile after getting out of the mall to access a train station that was not flooded with people. You might have seen the stands had no people for the parade. Well what happened was most people could not get there and it was too long to out in the cold to make it through even if you wanted to. I made it back to the apartment at 4 PM with many memories.

In my neck of the woods, that’s business as usual.

I do want to say that I’m a strong proponent of “innocent until proven guilty.” For me, the governor should be treated as an innocent man until his possible conviction in a court of law. But, treating someone as a legally innocent man and knowing (as in: I don’t have any proof, but it’s so true.) that he is guilty can be two separate things.

In a democracy, we always get the government we deserve. I would extend that to the last two terms of George W Bush as well. Former governor Jim Edgar agrees with me.

In Chicago, everyone who pays attention to government knows that our top three executives, Governor Rod Blogojevich, Mayor Richard Daley, and Cook County President Todd Stroger, are as crooked as they can be. Chicagoans, however, are still realistic. Some of the ways they wheel and deal are accepted. Some are even praised. But the fact that they’re dirty, it’s understood.

It’s a thing that is always there in the background.

That’s why the Feds’ press conference today was so ugly to my ears. No matter how bad I thought things were, it was still a huge shock to have all his laundry laid out like that. I’m mad. I’m embarrassed. But I can’t say I didn’t see it coming.

In that way, as much as the pundits will say that the governor has let his state down, I will say that we let ourselves down. Just watch Daley and Stroger get reelected next time.

To be fair though, Chicago totally depends on the machine to operate. If we tried to clean things up, everything would stop working. Almost everything around here depends on relationships and the trails of money.

We need our city to work so why not have the best machinists in place to run it? Rich Daley has been a central cog for so long, he’s probably the Final Cylon.

Yes, I know. It sounds hollow to my ears too.

The bottom line is, we’ve seen this before, and we’ll see it again. In the Presidential election, the country decided that things have gotten too bad to let continue on the same path. I don’t think we’ve hit that point in Chicago yet. Let’s see what happens when they raise the sales tax again.

A couple of days before the election, everyone I knew, from all different sectors, age groups, and socio-economic backgrounds debated the same question—should I go down to Grant Park?

Talking about who we were going to vote for was pointless. It was all about wondering if the crowds would be too much. “Should I go?”

I was surprised that the national audience didn’t get to see the crowds outside of Grant Park. The rally was a ticketed event. So many others traveled down just to be able to stand blocks away.

And it was an orderly and joyous night. I think it came off better than anyone and everyone could have expected it to.

Since then, the good feelings have continued. Last night, a cold front came in to keep temperatures in the forties. But before that, it was sunny and in the seventies.

People didn’t even question it. It felt like magic and everyone was just going to go with it.

Folks are laughing and sharing where they were and what they did on election night. The cars are still decorated and the lawn signs are still up.

It continues to be the main topic of conversation. People are happy to report that they got held up by the President-Elect’s motorcade. They’re talking about which of the other strong Illinois politicians are going to get a step up now.

Sure, paradise will end soon enough, but for now, it’s still going strong.

If the economy is based on belief, confidence, and optimism, it should pull up a siphon to Chicago.

Which is going to be less horrifying?

I semi-watched game 1 in a group that had a non-sports fan. She didn’t understand the complete disaster of the grand slam. She didn’t understand the reasons for the gloom and doom when it was just the first game. She didn’t understand what getting swept last year would have anything to do with this year.

This non-sports fan though, she is pulling for the Democrats. I explained that the Cubs are like the Democratic Party. It doesn’t matter if they are ahead. In your guts, you just know they are going to screw it up somehow. You don’t know what the mistake is going to be or when it is coming, but you know that it is coming. They may eventually win at the end, but there’s no way they are going to let you have that victory without a lot of anguish, nail biting, and murderous/suicidal thoughts.

And there’s a good chance that they’ll blow it just because that’s who they are.

It’s sad to say that she finally understood more about the Cubs and Cub fans through that comparison.

Now, since people who should know better continue to talk about it, I will.

A political party works on hierarchies. All would be chaos if it didn’t.

The last time a presidential candidate choose the primary’s second placed finisher as his VP was Reagan picking Bush in 1980. And that was a very last minute thing because the original first choice (Ford) fell out of favor so late in the game.

If the primary winner becomes likely to choose the first-runner up, it encourages contenders to stay in the fight for longer than is healthy. They are there not to win but simply to come in second. That means longer attacks, more money spent, and less organizing time for the party in question. Voters would also have a longer exposure to all and potentially develop deep-seeded loyalties and hatreds.

But really more important than all this is that if a politician is able to campaign his/her way into a higher status within the party by tearing down his/her superiors, it would break down the very structure of the party itself. Instead of the parties opposing each other, there would be infighting within each party.

One thing I learned about India from Shashi Tharoor‘s book India: From Midnight to the Millennium and Beyond is that in their parliamentary system, representatives can change party affiliations rather easily. They do it to create a majority, a larger opposition group, because of personal grudges, etc. According to Dr. Tharoor, this makes India’s government and its dozens upon dozens of political parties very unstable.

The prime directive of government is to govern. For us in the United States, that means our two party system must be stably antagonistic. The parties build strength within themselves and oppose the other.

That’s why first-runner-ups can’t be the VP candidate in most cases. It would allow young and inexperienced politicians to give into their ambitious dreams. Any flavor of the moment who happens to catch fire could defy the good of the party and still gain status and prestige.

That’s also why the incumbent VP gets to be the next presidential candidate for his (or perhaps her) party in the next round. The people may vote, but the party’s resources and organization will be pushing for the VP. Hierarchy must be reinforced so members stay in line. It’s about waiting your turn and being the good soldier. If you do, then you may get your own shot at the top. If you don’t play nice, you’ll always be dropped.

For the good of the party, this is the game they play.

McCain/Tigh: military men who suffered greatly in captivity, temper issues, married a younger blond who is sometimes bad for his PR. (Or perhaps first wife Carol McCain is Ellen. That would mean Cindy McCain is Six.)

Hee! This is fun.

Palin/Roslin: names end with the same syllable, strong connections to education and religion, considered too inexperienced to lead, willing to play tough/dirty.

Obama/L. Adama: the last name thing, idealistic, practices law, seems like the golden boy.

Biden/W. Adama: lots of experience, considered not flashy but stalwart, knows the pain of losing a child, the name “Joseph” is significant.