Surround Sound: Follow-up

Lots of interesting commentary on 5GW over the last day.  It is this type of chatter, more than anything, that led me to question Dan’s assessment that “The American System of Government is as brilliant at defending itself from 5GWs as from 4GWs.” — as well as the idealized version of Thomas Barnett’s paradigm-shifting strategies for preempting opposition within the Gap, questioned in yesterday’s post.  How much ‘democratization’ of the OODA ‘observe’ will be allowed by grand strategists and grand paradigm builders?  As social systems move away from concrete totalitarian structures and the decision-making process becomes more democratized, more complex, the field for 5GW ripens; the board becomes set by becoming perpetually unsettled.  The OODA is not merely the O; no, it involves other levels of cognition and reasoning, reasoning is always from a limited observational capability which removes it from the strict lines of cause & effect, and although the World may be the same for everyone, individual assessments of it will differ.  Complexity introduces perplexity.

Thomas Barnett considered this in another recent post, “Fifth Generation (political) warfare,” in which he considered the plight of Conrad Burns from Montana:

Constant observation of the foe. Unrelenting surveillance. Every gaffe exposed and then run ad nauseum on the web. His ability to orient himself as desired in the race is disrupted.

Conrad Burns, the incumbent, is trailed everywhere on the campaign by a young operative for the Dems who videotapes him non-stop every chance he gets, waiting for the screw-up.

Why does this sort of preemption of the OODA work?  Because one set of possible observations — Conrad Burns’ legislative history, his political epistemology in action; and his family interactions, etc. — is usurped by the constant introduction of new data sliced quite separate from that history.  I’ve discussed this sort of thing before, in my posts on the Revised OODA; in a way, it is a 3GW cognition attack on the undecided voters, who, being offered a constant stream of new data, are being forced to make snap judgments impulsively.  Or else, for the Democratic party faithful, it is the 4GW reinforcement of an old assessment of Burns, leading to yet more habitual assessments.  (And actually, what starts as a 3GWish attack on orientation may over time become a 4GW reinforcement of assessments, if the data is sliced along the same parameters regularly enough.)

Ad agencies do it, and the process is none too new for political parties.  Ministers and weblog pundits do it as well.  (Can anyone say, “Ms. Malkin”?)  It is so old, we have the example of Cato: “Delenda est Carthago!”

One might attempt the same in a totalitarian system; but the populace, lacking power to do much to change the status quo, are not as apt to act on their assessments, and the head of the totalitarian state is not as apt to follow whatever popular assessment is being whispered on the streets.  In a democracy, things work differently.

Notice how Mark Safranski picks up on the importance of surveillance for a state wishing to defend itself from 5GW:

The state in turn, is vulnerable to a proliferation of such superempowered individuals and will have to defend itself with a combination of surveillance and active cultivation of primary loyalties ( reducing the motivation for such individuals to act out in antisocial ways).

This may actually be true of any state, if we are to think of state-citizen interactions in terms of social contracts.  In any case, the totalitarian state certainly wishes to defend itself from ‘superempowered individuals’ — i.e., from individuals empowered by rights to privacy, the right to vote and demonstrate and meet, the right to carry arms, and so forth.  So this too is nothing new.  The 5GW trick has been to give the populace the belief that it is the state, although Mark appears to separate the two in offering his prescription for ‘the state’s’ consideration.  (In a perhaps not-too-well considered post on Christianity and 5GW, I once suggested that the founders of America had pulled off a 5GW coup.  I also suggested that ‘dispensational premillennialism’ was introduced into Christianity in order to combat the socialist tendencies of amillenialist Christianity:  Give people the power to assess the level of their own personal salvation, the power to achieve it on their own while disregarding the spiritual welfare of others, and you have ‘superempowered’ people who will believe they act entirely of their own free will, and that they may act powerfully.  I.e., you set the 5GW chessboard.)

These things are why I say that Thomas Barnett’s system for change in the Gap and the world is more likely to lead to 5GW opposition than squelch it.  John Robb’s more right than wrong when he contemplates perpetual chaos for the future, which he usually does.  However, as I contemplated yesterday, some shadow lies over the exact shape that the future will take, and this constant lack of settling — this chaos — may not be perpetual violence.  I.e., Barnett would introduce the sort of political chaos he has described for America into the Gap: remove totalitarianism and insert ‘democratized’ OODA loops, and you therefore remove totalitarian methods (concerted violence) while introducing democratic conflict (mass and constant chatter.)  If 3GW and 4GW always threaten world destruction, particularly as technology advances, then even 5GWarriors may be more inclined to find non-violent methods for domination.

Shloky has in fact postulated post-5GW conflict that results from the ‘technological singularity’ predicted by Kurzweil et al.  My first impression is that all the bets of current 5GW theory are off once such a major change occurs; this includes the advent of advanced nanotechnology.  I.e., if I’m alive when these things occur, I’m quite certain I’ll revise my assessment of the fifth generation of warfare.  However, until humans stop being humans, the process of observe - orient -decide - act will continue to shape human activity, and I expect 5GW to adapt & grow with these changes.


UPDATE: Speaking of democracy, it would appear (and has appeared for some time) that advocates of democracy work into their designs 5GW methods as a matter of course; check out “Developing a Strategy for Fifth Generation Warfare” on Democracy Project. (HT: ZenPundit.) I.e., using commercial advertising and focused messages to insert members of one’s own party into key positions…is fundamental to the operation of democracy as currently practiced.