Good literature tends to avoid casting villains with no redeeming qualities. After all, most conflicts between people tend not to be titanic struggles of good versus evil – even if the people involved really hate each other. We understand that an antagonist is not necessarily motivated by “I’m going to be bad” kinds of thoughts. No, generally the problem is a scarcity of resources: two archaeologists want the same artifact, and the like.

There is, of course, one rather famous book that has a rather famous non- sympathetic bad guy: the Bible. In these modern times, it seems almost shockingly anachronistic to see good and evil presented in such stark contrast. The amorality of existentialism has become an important part of our society’s attitude. We try to see both sides of a conflict before deciding which one is right. The Bible, of course, lacks this subtlety – it’s not the purpose of a religious text to entertain us with philosophical conundrums. However, regardless of the number of Christians there are in America, All Good vs. All Bad clashes with our sense of aesthetics.

No wonder then that people reacted with some shock to Lt. Gen. William Boykin’s remarks regarding the war on terrorism. Whereas, even many devout Christians can see terrorists as severely misguided and danger human beings, they are still only human beings. No more, no less. They don’t see terrorists as the wicked finger of the Devil, acting at his command to smash the Judeo-Christian theocracies of the West. Even fundamentalist Christians like George W. Bush believe that this is a conflict of people amongst people, not a war of God’s Chosen against the Children of Darkness; after all, how many times has our president said that “we are not a war with Islam”? How many times will he keep saying it?

Well, if Boykin keeps spouting off, he’ll have to keep saying it. A lot.

That’s not to say that the Bush administration necessarily disagrees with Boykin’s sentiments. Donald Rumsfeld hasn’t felt the need to contradict his statements, averring that “We’re a free people.” Yes, we are, but any administration official who does not accurately reflect his employer’s point of view in public usually gets his ears boxed, and sometimes he’s fired outright. Boykin is welcome to express his opinion – that’s what books, television, radio, and the Internet is for. But publicly contradicting his boss’s stated assessment of the war on terror by casting it as a conflict between God and Islam might be contrary to his job’s function. In fact, one might almost be surprised that he hasn’t been fired for reminding people that George Bush wasn’t elected by a majority of the American people; it might be true, but it’s hardly something that the administration really wants people going around saying.

Some have posited that the administration’s refusal to decry Boykin’s statements indicate a tacit approval of them. This is undoubtedly true. Rumsfeld, Bush, and Ashcroft have never made a secret of their fundamentalist, evangelical, Christian beliefs. We knew all this before they were in office.

No one would contend that evangelical Christians should be kept out of public office. To do so would contradict the Constitutional rights we all hold so dear in this country. Respect for our civil rights is the closest thing to a state religion we have in America. But, that’s not to say that the theological/philosophical beliefs of our elected government officials has no bearing on the way they do their jobs.

You can’t expect someone with an all black and white world view to behave the same way that a relativist would. Why is it so surprising that a fundamentalist Christian would hire another fundamentalist Christian to manage the war on terror? Why is so surprising that that fundamentalist Christian would couch any conflict in the “God is on our side against the Devil” terms of fundamentalist Christianity? Not to say that that sort of thing is wrong, but why are people shocked whenever Christians (or people of other faiths) behave in the way that they clearly said they would?

The GOP is the unofficial “party of evangelical Christianity”. They’ve worked hard to gain that reputation. The part of the country pejoratively referred to as “The Bible Belt” has long be a conservative strong-hold, because of all of the work done by Republican campaigners. For good or for ill, the right wing has subsumed the text of the Bible into itself, with obvious effects. The GOP now sees all conflicts in black and white terms: good versus evil; God versus the Devil.

This attitude explains a lot. What else could explain the religious fervor of those assorted elements at American Spectator and the Heritage Foundation to bring down Bill Clinton? What else could explain the overheated rhetoric of commentators like Robert Novak and Ann Coulter? Liberals are willing to believe that conservatives are doing what they feel is best for the country, regardless of how wrong they believe them to be.

Conservatives don’t think that way. One of Coulter’s more famous pronouncements is, “Everyone says liberals love America, too. No, they don't.” Conservatives like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson believe that liberals are responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. They don’t see compromise as a useful method for solving problems – how could they when every one of their enemies is a servant of Satan? Good Christians don’t make deals with the Devil.

It’s up to the American people to decide if this is the kind of attitude they want deciding our national policy. After all, that’s what democracy’s about. If the majority of American voters want inflexible philosophy to dictate the course of world events, well, by George, they’ll get it.

For Democrats, the question is different. First and foremost, there needs to be a fundamental shift in attitude on the part of Democratic strategy makers. It should be obvious that you can’t “reason” with a zealot. It should be obvious that you can’t expect to be met half way when you’re political opponents believe that the Devil is pulling your strings. They don’t just want you dead – they want you to be tortured in a lake of fire forever and ever. This is not a group of people who are willing to “work with you for the benefit of all”. Not with the soul of the nation at stake.

No, the Democrats own “can’t we all just get along” sort of attitude isn’t going to work anymore. The only course forward, in this escalation of ideological warfare is to lose the finer distinctions between opposing interests that put them at odds with each other, in spite of their common humanity. Democrats must believe in the Devil. And they must know who serves him, too.

-B. C. Silvia