The Fourth Generation of Modern Peace (Nonviolent Ideoogical Net-Struggle)

Mao’s 3 Stages of 4GW (Now with Tractors),” by Dan, tdaxp, 5 April 2005,

4GW’s Peaceful Evolution (Yushchenko as 4GWarrior),” by Dan, tdaxp, 7 April 2005,

Earlier I wondered if Ukrainian President Victor Yuschenko was a fourth generation warrior — a 4GSoldier. The answer is no. He is a fourth generation pacifist — a 4th Generation Citizen.

I argued that the First Intifadah and the Orange Revolution were basically peaceful 4th generation wars. The evolving nature of 4GW made this sound plausible. But ultimately that view is wrong. There is a difference war and peace, warrior and citizen, which should never be forgotten. Enemy warriors are a danger and must be destroyed, whether shot on the battlefield, detained in Guantenemo, or sentenced in the courts. “Enemy” citizens, on the hand, or part of the democratic process. Warriors must be fought and citizens must be protected even when they have the same goals.

Fourth Generation Peace – 4GP – is the peaceful complement of Fourth Generation War. Everything that 4GW does with violence, 4GP does with non-violence. For example, in another post I listed the three stages of 4GW as

  1. Destabilize the enemy while building up a fighting force. Assassinations, bombings, and the like.
  2. Attempt to control areas where the enemy is weak while building up a fighting force. However, do not fight regular battles.
  3. Use your fighting force to conquer the enemy in regular battles.

In 4GP these become

  1. High-profile attacks on enemy networks and hierarchies while building up your own network
  2. Contest other network’s possession of individuals
  3. Directly influence government policy with your network

Remember that 4GP is an ideological or political struggle. Like in 4GW the goal is create laws. A 4GP struggle “ends” when a movement controls government and the movement’s enemies are no longer serious threats. Like in 4GW, 4GP is not quick — it can take decades, even generations. Like in 4GW, 4GP can be in differnt stages in different places at the same time.

What are examples of 4GP? What where the first three generations of modern peace? How does 4GP interact with controls? What does 4GP mean for Barnett’s Gap-Seam-Core progression? Those are questions for another time.

No is Non

Blair hints at a possible U-turn on EU Constitution referendum,” Reuters,, 19 April 2005 (from Pundita through ZenPundit).

Remember when I said

The important news: French intrasigence may save Tony Blair’s political career. Tony Blair has promised a vote on the new treaty, which is deepy unpopular in Britain. Losing a vote of that importance would seriously harm Blair’s credibility. Further, if the other countries vote yes, Britain may be asked to leave the European Union.

However, a French no vote gives everyone cover. Great news!

tdaxp: right again

Prime Minister Tony Blair indicated on Monday for the first time that Britain might shelve plans to hold a referendum on the European Union Constitution if France rejects the treaty next month. Blair’s Labour government, fighting for re-election on May 5, has until now been adamant it will call a vote on the charter in 2006 regardless of plebiscite results elsewhere in the EU.

As fears of a French ‘no’ vote grow, polls show Blair would be very hard-pressed to convince traditionally euro-sceptic Britons to back the treaty.

Most commentators say a ‘no’ vote in Britain could end the pro-European Blair’s career as premier.

Asked on Monday whether he would call a referendum even if France had voted against the charter, Blair said: “You can’t have a vote on nothing.”

Juan Cole Wrong on Unconventional Warfare

Assassination Attempt on Allawi: 70 Bodies Recovered in Iraqi Massacres,” by Juan Cole, Informed Comment, 21 April 2005,

After getting points for stating the obvious

Over 400 Iranian young Revolutionary Guards signed up to commit suicide bombings against Americans in Iraq and against Israelis, at the urging of Ayatollah Husain Nuri Hamadani (al-Zaman). The group included 150 young women. This fatwa is despicable. Israeli civilians deserve to live in peace like everybody else.

Juan Cole misses the point – completely – on unconventional warfare

If the Revolutionary Guards had any courage, they’d fight soldiers face to face, not hide sneakily in cars with hidden bombs.

For a “serious” analyst who can “objectively” implicate American and Iraqi troops in the murder of Shia hostages, this is absurd. Why would any force play to its opponent’s strengths?

It has nothing to do with courage — it is a case of applied morality and effective warfare.

This isn’t the first time Cole was wrong on unconventional warfare.

Hurrah for Aspire Accounts (Free Money for Babies)

A Bipartistan Moment,” by Scott Conroy, CBS News, 21 April 2005,

A victory for the Saniac wing of the Democrat Party, as it embraces part of modern Market Liberalism

While the battle over the future of the filibuster continues to rage in Washington, Congressional Democrats and Republicans have found a domestic issue on which they can agree: free money for babies.

Some of the most staunchly partisan members on both sides of the aisle came together on Thursday to introduce the ASPIRE Act of 2005, a bill that would allow a onetime $500 “kids account” contribution for every newborn child. The bill would affect all American children born after Dec. 31, 2006, but is particularly focused on families that fall below the national median income, who will be eligible for an additional $500 contribution and federal matching funds of up to $1,000 ($500 in the Senate version) for private contributions each year until the child is 18.

I like to regard it as Head Start for your piggy bank,” said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

Even better? The plan uses Thrift Savings Accounts — exactly the same me mechanism Bush is proposing for personal retirement accounts! Great news!

For What Crime

The Overthrowing,” recited by Muhammad ibn Abd Allah, The Recitation, circa AD 620,

US accused of trying to block abortion pills,” by Sarah Boseley, The Guardian, 21 April 2005,,12271,1464644,00.html (from Democratic Underground).

Infanticide — baby killing — is not new, and it is not going away easily.

When the sun is overthrown
And when the stars fall
And when the hills are moved
And when the camels big with young are abandoned
And when the wild beasts are hearded together
And when the seas rise
And when souls are reuinted
And when the girl-child that was buried alive is asked
for what she was slain

And when the pages are laid open
And when the sky is torn away
And when hell is lighted
And when the Garden is brought night
Every soul will know what it hath made ready
Oh, but I call to witness the planets
The stars which rise and set
And the close of night
And the breath of morning
That this is in truth the word of an honored messenger
Mighty, established in the presense of the Lord of the Throne
To be obeyed, and trusworthy.

Babies, both born and unborn, are being killed regularly in the world. We need to figh this. Anti-infanticide laws are one part of the fix. Another part is birth control, both before and after conception.

This makes America’s latest neo-Puritanism even more enraging.

The US government is trying to block the World Health Organisation from endorsing two abortion pills which could save the lives of some of the 68,000 women who die from unsafe practices in poor countries every year.

The WHO wants to put the pills on its essential medicines list, which constitutes official advice to all governments on the basic drugs their doctors should have available.

Last month, an expert committee met to consider a number of new drugs for inclusion on the list. They approved for the first time two pills, to be used in combination for the termination of early pregnancy, called mifepristone and misoprostol. In poor countries where abortion is legal, doctors currently have no alternative to surgery.

For Christianity and Against the New Style

Reflection on a Comment”,” by Michael Forbush, Dr. Forbush Thinks, 21 April 2005,

Forbush saw my lazy use of English, and he pounced

“Individuals can change. But the people (the mean of society, the “average man,” whatever) does not.”

This means that the average of society remains constant. So, for every person who improves himself there is another poor bloke who falls from the grace of God. If this is truly the conservative philosophy it is very nihilistic. What is the point of trying to make things better? If this is the basic philosophy of conservatives, then no wonder they feel so selfish. “Get what I can for myself before I become the poor slob who looses everything” must be the conservative motto.

And he goes in for the kill

I wonder if this could actually be proven by some measurable quantity. So, we could look at some measurable quantities to test this theory. Lets look at education. Students are tested every year. If the conservative theory were correct there would not be any point of making this measurement, because it would always be the same. But, the point could be to point out which schools are on the extreme ends of the spectrum. But, based on this conservative philosophy nothing could be done to change anything on average. If you improve the education at the poor schools, then the better schools must slip into mediocrity. If you are still reading this I hope that you realize the absurdity of this statement.

And then wonders how this effects evangelism

But, maybe he is referring to ethics or morality. After all he is a self-proclaimed Christian and morality may be his only true concern. If this is so, then what is the point of Christian Evangelization. With all the effort in the world the average number of people who are going to be saved must remain the same. Why make the effort if you don’t believe that the effort is going to make a difference. Why not become a monk or recluse and make sure that you are going to be saved. After all the mean number of people who are going to be saved remains constant no matter what effort you make.

It’s all mad worse by a question I answered, poorly

So, you agree that George W Bush is a drunken cocaine fiend that only has his self-interest in mind. He is average in intelligence and has extremely poor management skills. And to top it off he has no faith in God. Because these are all admitted to by George W Bush himself or documented in public record [sic, but the point is taken — tdaxp]. If you believe that people can not change then George must be the same person he was…

I never said persons cannot change. But a New Style People will never be created…

So, to answer…

When I said that “the people (the mean of society, the “average man,” whatever) does not” change, I meant their “virtue” does not change. People will always be as proud, greedy, envious, angry, lustful, gluttonous, slothful, etc. Individuals can truly change.. but rarely. Both Paul and Bush had the same basic personality they had before their conversions as afterwards.

But these “vices” can be controlled and sublimated. The conservative project is to do that well. Conservatives want to maximize happiness and minimize tyranny by attention to man’s limitations. A New Style Man will never be created, be we can still build a future worth creating.

Christian Evangelism serves two purposes. First, it builds a system of horizontal controls. (Progressivism is especially dangerous here, because it attempts to destroy the old horizontal controls.) These create a safe society and preempt the need for vertical controls. Second, Christianity introduces a revolution in social affairs: loving kindness. This doctrine, created by Jesus and expounded by Paul, makes society kinder at the margins and saves us from the worst of horizontal pressures.

Denormalization: From License, to Explicit Horizontal Control, to Implicit Horizontal Control

Fighting for the Culture,” by Perry de Havilland, Samizdata, 20 April 2005,

I disagree with Perry’s history slightly, but in a post on racism Mr. de Havilland outlines a “cutural shift” that denormalized a New Style ideology

Only a wilful fool would dispute that racism moved from being the unremarkable default mainstream view in the western world to being a prejudice which scarcely dare speak its name. I would argue that this did not come about just because a few anti-discrimination laws got passed. A great many things are illegal and yet doing them does not put you ‘beyond the pale’ in polite society. In most circles lighting up a spliff or speeding or paying your builder/nanny/housekeeper in cash are matters of little or no account and few people would think less of you if they discovered you were doing so. Overt racism on the other hand has precisely that effect because regarding that there has been a cultural shift. To be a racist is not just wrong, it makes you a jackass in the eyes of others [non-racism is once again “normal” — tdaxp]. Most racists are now more prone to keep their views to themselves, not because someone will call the cops and have them hauled off to a re-education camp, but because they can no longer safely assume others will share their meta-context.

de Havilland is writing about a horizontal control in transition. The plicitity of a control — its position on the implicit-explicit axis — is shifting. Racism has gone from unquestioned, to a wrong thing to think, to a weird thing to think.

Racism is a New Style ideology that dates from the early 18th century. It is a New Style innovation and it is being destoyed

Other such beliefs — feminism, homosxualism, &c, can be destroyed the same way.

We can win. And we are winning.