A month ago I was moved to write about the "Warrior Citizen" award. The resurrection of the term "warrior" seemed bizarre if not downright ominous.

I thought that post had put the kibosh on any further loose usage of the word until I came upon an AP story by Andrew Welsh-Huggins in which he quotes the mayor of Columbus, Ohio—a Democrat who wants to run for governor—

"There is a growing sense of opposition to the policies that led us to this war, but also growing support for the warriors," said Coleman.

Coleman's own son is with the Marines in Iraq, so maybe the word means something special to him.

It certainly means something special to me. Every time I see the word I have flashbacks from old Tarzan movies where natives run about with spears, or scenes from the cowboy-and-Indian movies—and of course, who could forget "Road Warrior"? In short the word connotes tribalism.

Lately there's been some speculation as to whether the nation-state is ending its useful life in the face of global economic forces that engulf it—a silly idea since you obviously need a nation-state to control the populations while the "global economic forces" get on with their mysterious work.

But these theorists see a new social order that may be referred to as "neo-tribalism." Peter Leyden, sort of a Blue state futurist, writes—

Picture a world in the next century organized not around nation-states but around a new form of tribes sharing the same culture and values. It's a world where you pledge allegiance not to a republic, but to a clan.

Why wait till the next century? Iraq offers as fine an example of this mode of social organization as may be found anywhere.

These tribes could carry out most of the functions that we now associate with nations or governments. A person at the farthest outpost of the world could use the technologies for day-to-day contact and support from the larger group based far away.

They could get all the same news, entertainment and casual gossip that would reinforce their identities from afar. They could even rely on the group for all levels of education, much of their health care through advanced telemedicine and even their personal security.

People's tribal identities would be so apparent, and tribal affiliations so strong, that no one would physically harm you unless they wanted to incur the wrath of the entire clan. The tribal police of the future would travel the planet pursuing justice for their members, much as gangs do today.

Actually they would not be police; police operate to enforce the rules of the tribe. They would be warriors, just like warrior-ants. Alternatively, you might call them suicide-bombers.

Some fear that such a scenario would inevitably tend toward a riot of parochial sects warring among themselves. They fear the emergence of tribalism in the old sense -- a new form of barbarism.

Count me among them.

But that scenario leaves out the equally powerful forces that are integrating the world. For every step toward more parochial localism, there's a step toward more universal globalism.

This end of the nation-state might not be such a disaster in the long run. In the digital future, we might even see international peace.

Like they don't have internet and cellphones in Iraq?

Well, one thing is for sure—they have plenty of warriors.

Related post
The Reservists' award (7/7/05)