I am TOO working on a thesis.

I know nobody at the university, my adviser, my parents, my friends, MBTD, even my husband or former professors actually believe me, but I am.

It’s about this.  And this.  And a little bit of this.  And some of this.

So, anyway, it has to do with war crimes and law.  And other things you are probably way too focused and practical to care about.

I was wondering tonight, as I was legitimately working on my thesis and NOT writing this post, about whether saying jus in bello is any more efficient than saying “law of war.”

I realized it’s not.  It’s just a fancy way of saying “law of war.”  Jus in bello and similar culprits, such as habeus corpus or even “eschatological historicism” are annoying symptoms of humankind’s innate need to create power structures in which the few privileged individuals who have access to resources (in this case terminology) wield unchecked power over those who do not have those resources.

In other words, an attempt to underscore the superiority of those who have Google over those who do not.

Look at this sentence:

“Historicism developed out of dissatisfaction with theories of unilinear socio-cultural evolution.”

Now, what I ask you, is wrong with saying,

“Historicism developed because some scholars did not agree with the assumption that all societies and people progress in one direction”

The truth is you can say something perfectly intelligent without trying to sound “smart.”

And this, not the fact that being knocked up TWICE since I started my thesis, is what is preventing me from finishing it.

That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.