When COVID appeared, American states responded with a mask and lockdown for two weeks, to "flatten the curve."  We saw how that turned out.  Now, in response to a protest relabeled as an "insurrection," the government has responded with 26,000 National Guardsmen.  Will a two-week deployment of three times the normal number of troops to D.C. "flatten the curve" of anger and frustration displayed by a small percentage of the 75 or so million who voted for President Trump?

The Guards are there to prevent another "insurrection."  But would any organization attempting to execute a credible, coordinated, kinetic attack against our federal government to overthrow it choose a time and location when the government is most prepared to defend against such an assault — i.e., the inauguration?  Anyone who has studied Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" would advise that organization to adhere to the second principle: "avoid strength, strike weakness."  Those in our Nation's armed forces know that.

While there may be some protests and even some riots on Wednesday, as occurred during the 2017 inauguration, we will not see any credible use of force this time.  But when will our government be able to "lower its guard"?  As with our COVID response, from this point forward, will our government have to keep America in a heightened state of alertness/readiness with ever-increasing security, lockdowns, and restrictions, both physical and virtual, against a real or imagined threat, even more so than what is in place to combat COVID?

I do not condone, nor do I support, citizens using offensive violence against fellow citizens.  I prefer Sun Tzu's first principle, "win all without fighting," if there is to be any confrontation at all.  For me, winning is defined as all Americans enjoying their lives, liberty, and pursuits of happiness while finding ways to address and confront differences peacefully, openly, and respectfully.  However, I don't think many of those on the extremes share my beliefs, especially considering all the violence we have seen over the past several months across our nation and, recently, at the Capitol.

Therefore, I am concerned that, if our leaders do not truly and sincerely unify our nation, we will no more be able to stop the radical elements within our society from taking fellow citizens' lives than we have been able to prevent the virus from taking lives.  That reality will not deter our government from "acting in our best interest" by continuously limiting our liberty.

Might this lead to a civil war?  Some have suggested we have been in a "cold civil war" for the past four years, if not longer.

While the vaccine may work to reduce our government's and fellow citizens' concerns about the number of people who have contracted or spread the virus, or will do so, what will be the vaccine equivalent to allay our government's and fellow citizens' fear about the number of people who have contracted or spread extremist views (in all their forms) or will do so in the future?

Attempting to silence people, removing people's ability to defend themselves, lumping everyone under the titles of the extremists, and demanding that everyone be silenced or forced to repent for the actions of a few — actions most Americans have already condemned — will not engender trust, confidence, and unity.

Know this: not all Republicans are white supremacists, neo-Nazis, QAnon conspiracy theorists, etc., and not all Democrats are violent members of Antifa, communists, looters and arsonists at BLM protests, etc.  Not all, not a majority, not half, not even a large percent.

If you were able to account for, and label, all those on the violent extremes of both sides, you probably would not count more than one hundred thousand people, at best.  In other words, less than 1% of 1% of all the reportedly 155 million people who voted in the 2020 election could be identified as acting unlawfully based upon extreme left and right views.  But whichever media source you follow for your news, to drive valuable traffic, will highlight those few, reinforcing people's perceptions about "the other side."

Knowing this, let's stop branding all those with different political views "evil."  There are many reasons why someone might vote for one candidate and not another (economy, education, defense, health care, social issues, climate, guns, etc.), while still not agreeing with the extreme beliefs held by the small minority of extremists who may support the same candidate.  Remember, whether you like it or not, we have a two-party system.

I am fortunate to know a good number of Republicans and Democrats.  While we may disagree on any number of issues, to the best of my knowledge, not one of them has ever harmed a fellow citizen nor damaged any property in support of their political beliefs.  Having studied history and observed, firsthand, multiple times, the destructive power of war, I believe we must heed Martin Luther King, Jr.'s words before things spin too far out of control: "we must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools."

Image: American Unity, 1963 Civil Rights March. YouTube screen grab.