The success of an enterprise such as that in Iraq has less to do with whether Iraqis have experience with democracy than whether they are more inclined to resolve differences through democratic institutions rather than tribal butchery.

What we need to be teaching our children are the democratic means of decisionmaking, and we are actually more successful at this than we think. Even at a more fundamental level of society, if you put Americans together they will negotiate and debate and even vote on solutions to problems. Rather than massacre each other.

I think this is exactly right. I was composing a blog in my head complaining about how bloggiticians (trying to coin a new term there) treat politics like it was a war with 'us' vs 'them.' Then when I thought about it, when it comes down to it, politics is war, only with more rules.

I think the “more rules” are mostly definitions. Direct, organized violence would seem to be the only difference between war and politics in a meaningful sense.

Great point on 'us' vs 'them.' Mao and others talked about the “correlation of forces” — everything that helps your team being friend, everything that hurts your team being foe. When people talk about “them” (say, Republicans criticizing Democrats, even though Carter is pro-life and Clinton is pro-free-trade), they are bluntly seeing this correlation of forces and trying to shape it.

Of course, while there are “teams,” the teams are in the eye of the beholder. Pro-life politicians who happen to be Republicans might see Harry Reid as generally being on their team (because he is pro-life), while Republicans who happen to be pro-life might see Harry Ried as being the enemy (because he is a Democrat).

As always, an insightful comment. Most people's orientations are guided more by norms than by beliefs. This is good — norms are much harder to change, so there are less idiotic norms than idiotic beliefs.

The problem with a society used to civics is that in extreme situations, the lack of democratic legitimacy might make them more willing to jump ship. Of course, it could work in the reverse too: a belief in civics might make them more likely to jump in a crisis situation because of the real-ideal mismatch, but if barbarics are “normalized” during a crisis there may be less sentimental attachment to a democracy.

I think you saw something like this in Vietnam: an educated political class was raised in civics but experienced a world steeped in barbarics. How many times have I heard some liberal ruefully compare government actions from the '60s and '70s to what their government classes taught in school.

If those are the options, then the choice is between Kaplanism and Utopianism. Give be Kaplanism any day.