'Foucault asks: what is the boundary between peace and war? If politics is the continuation of war, then does that mean that there is a war that is constantly being waged beneath the surface of peace? Is politics, and the State, a way of waging an ongoing war? Is the government constantly at war with their own people? If so, how is this war being waged? Clearly both war and politics contain an element of control and coercion that is meant to produce desirable outcomes (for political leaders). But is there a distinct difference between the way that control is achieved in war and politics? Or are they one in the same?Clausewitz defines war as “an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will” (Clausewitz, 83). Doesn’t peace contain acts of force that compel people do the will of the government? And doesn’t the government have certain domestic enemies, like criminals, and those who don’t conform to standards?'
I am getting back into the territory that I was in during 'Society's Implicit War', which I wrote between June and August of 2010, and which is my second largest project to date. Only AZI is longer than SIW.
But the notion of an implicit war is so interesting. Trying to tease out the difference between war and peace, trying to understand the role of force and violence in peace, and how that differs from the force and violence used in war.
Anyways, that is where I'm at.
Implicit war is an interesting idea. There might be a better phrase for it. But whatever.