The genesis of this question comes from a piece I am working on regarding changes in war that are a result of the shift in the world's political landscape away from monarchies, theocracies, ideological autocracies or other forms of government where the political system is "top down" versus the world we are only now starting to live in where the political systems are more democratic or "bottom up". The changes which are traced back to Napoleon I include an Army with a more egalitarian officer corps and the idea of Levee en masse or the entire nation supporting the fight rather than a small professional army.

I have found research on the alleged advantage democracies have fighting wars and the idea of the democratic peace (democracies do not choose to fight against other democracies because the nature of a democracy allows for accomidation). I can also link changes in the nature of Terrorism as democracy became its target (The Assassins targeted political leaders as did many of the anarchist because that is where the political power lies but more recent terrorist act are perpetrated against the general population as a way to sway political decisions as in the case of the Spanish train bombings). I can also show that democracies are more likely to wage war against an autocratic system in order to help create a new democracy (evangelical democracy). What I lack is how a democracy deals with losing on their own soil.