On War

von Clausewitz' classic treatise On War begins with the simple question, "What is War? (Was ist der Krieg)" He answers that question a mere paragraph later with the statement, "War therefore is an act of violence to compel our opponent to fulfil our will." (J.J. Graham translation, 1873).

Note that "our will" and "our opponent" assume a "we" with consensus. This assumed consensus is problematic in societies with diffused power and various agendas. If "we" cannot agree on our intentions, we do not have a shared will to fulfil. This is the principle reason why we are failing in the war on Iraq, the war on terror, and the war on poverty.

Let's take the most important case, the war on poverty. In that case, the opponent is poverty. Poverty is defined as "the state of having little or no money and few or no material possessions". So, now we know which state to attack.

What is the appropriate act of violence? We could choose beheading or cutting off nipples like the ancient Irish? Or, we could blow up some cities like more contemporary warriors. Before deciding how to hurt the state of poverty, we must decide what we want to compel poverty to do.

What is "our" will? Let us assume that our will is to enrich ourselves. By that I mean enrich myself. I don't give a damn about you (for rhetorical purposes). But what of your desire to enrich yourself? When we try to determine the appropriate act of violence to compel the state of poverty to fulfil "our" will, we run smack dab into the concept of "me."

The solution to this dilemma is the immediate suspension of any and all dissention. We need to be united in our violence. Remember, there is no "I" in "team," but there is a "me" "met" "mate" "at" "meat" "tea." That sounds like something a monkey could be taught to say by sign language.

von Clausewitz' model tries to "emphasise the necessary and general, and to leave a margin for the play of the particular and accidental; but to exclude all that is arbitrary, unfounded, trifling, fantastical; or sophistical."

Now do you see the big mistake?