Hi Nettimers,
Yesterday I published a substantial thread on Twitter,
which seems to
have gained some traction. I'm sending it to you, here,
because I'm
aware that Twitter, along with other many other social
media spaces, is
corporate, pseudo-public space, vulnerable and
temporary.
Only after I posted it did I realise that this action
was a very similar
modus operandi to my publication of the 1999 "Lowtech
Manifesto" - [
http://lowtech.org/projects/n5m3/
] a very short piece of text that
precipitated more than a decade of intensive digital,
cultural and
community activity.
Now, the stakes are far higher, and the field of play is
not simply the
world of cultural and digital production, but the whole
political
context in which we operate. I can't tell you how much I
hope that this
small action helps to precipitate progressive change.
It is orientated towards a British audience, but already
I've had
responses suggesting that it's far more widely
applicable, to anywhere
where populist autocracy is emerging. The USA is an
obvious example - as
is Brasil.
It may seem that what follows is just a couple of pages
of writing. Yes
it is, but it's been informed by a decade or more of
learning and
observation. It's what I can do. As I say at the end, I
hope it helps.
James
=======================================================
This is not a normal time. I think we're at the early
stages of an
attempt to turn the UK into an autocracy. There follows
a thread about
the military methodology that I think the
Johnson/Cummings Regime is
using to wage information war against you, and how you
can fight back.1円
Let's resist the illusion that the Johnson/Cummings
Regime is precarious
structure or a static edifice. It's part of a complex,
hybrid,
shape-changing network, only part of which is visible.
Defeating it will
require ceaseless, full spectrum opposition, learning
& adaptation.2円
The Johnson/Cummings Regime is part of a generalised
global direction,
facilitated by digital technologies and driven by the
impulse of the
vastly rich (not just common-or-garden millionaires) to
locate their
wealth above and beyond democratic national
governance.3円
It isn't a conspiracy. Nor is it a structure like
dominoes, or snow
before an avalanche, vulnerable to one intervention
that'll topple the
lot. It's a worldwide tendency, with many drivers. To
prevail against
this sort of diffuse opponent demands a Systems Thinking
approach.4円
We can't win immediately, but we can work to change the
rules, to shine
a light on the political activities of the ultra rich,
& to disconnect
money from undue media & policy influence.
Transnational cooperation
will be crucial, as will educating the public.5円
In Britain, the Johnson/Cummings Regime is, whether it
knows it or not,
the primary tool of the ultra-rich, who are working to
replace genuine,
functioning democracy with opaque, managed states that
amplify their
wealth, reinforce their power and maintain their low
visibility.6円
Successful opposition will involve many actions across
multiple domains.
To succeed it must be continuous, fast, agile &
transformative.
Interventions must be visible & invisible, direct
& indirect, fast &
slow, at all scales. Most of all, it must be a learning
process.7円
This isn't just something dragged out of my fervid
imagination—this type
of complex conflict is a developed methodology (that
originated,
incidentally, in Russia). "Operational Art", or
"Operational Mobility"
is, essentially, Strategy and Tactics meets Systems
Thinking.8円
It'll be helpful for more people who oppose the corrupt,
incompetent
Johnson/Cummings Regime and the plutocratic influences
that appear to
drive it, to get to grips with this type of conflict. It
is certainly
something that Cummings understands—I recognise its
fingerprints.9円
Read Cummings online, and you can be absolutely sure
that he understands
Operational Art. That doesn't mean he knows exactly
what's going on—it
means that he acknowledges that he doesn't know what's
going on, and
operates a system to learn, adapt, reorientate and
respond.10円
He has used terminology like the OODA Loop – Observe,
Orient, Decide,
Act. This is an instance of an operational method
developed for aircraft
combat. But that's just one, glamorous example (I have
no doubt that
Cummings fancies himself as "Tory Top Gun"!)11円
But Operational Art has much wider application. It was
developed by the
Russian military, at a period in which they were in a
serious jam.
They'd just had a revolution. They were weak and
underdeveloped, and
they had a strong, hostile, militarized neighbour:
Germany.12円
How do you win when you're weak? Operational Art makes
use of complexity
and confusion, mixes up information flows in the
battlespace, and
prevents a more powerful opponent from bringing their
forces to bear. It
suggests continuous experimentation, learning &
repositioning.13円
It can even use the strength of an opponent against
itself. It doesn't
have boundaries (spatial, temporal, or conceptual).
First adopted by
Soviet forces for warfare, it's also been implemented by
the KGB, who
(possibly not coincidentally) trained Vladimir Putin.14円
Operational Art is particularly relevant because
governance is getting
more complex. Digital and transport technologies are
linking citizens,
businesses & trading partners ever more quickly and
cheaply. These links
aren't all visible or predictable. The world is
complicating.15円
Why now? Capital is concentrating in ever fewer hands.
Increasing
complexity means the right policy responses to emerging
issues aren't
obvious. Voters aren't experts, so we use gut instinct
& rules of thumb
to decide how to vote. This situation is vulnerable to
exploitation.16円
Numerous indications suggest that the Johnson/Cummings
Regime sees the
British public as targets. They are engaging us with
operational
methods, with objectives in mind that are not in our
interests. It's
time to fight back using the tools of information
warfare.17円
As we engage, we must use each incident as a learning
opportunity. The
objective is to identify the Johnson/Cummings Regime's
critical
components, & what they depend on to operate—its
"centre of gravity".
This will suggest critical weak points that will allow
us to disrupt it.18円
At the same time, we must preserve our own centre of
gravity—the things
that are essential for us to be able to act—so that
however long the
conflict lasts, we can keep taking actions. During this
process we may
need to change form, appearance, position, relationships
& focus.19円
You can consider centres of gravity on different
organisational scales:
you (an individual), a community group, a campaign, a
business, a Local
Authority, a movement, a political party, a government,
a transnational
organisation… Resources may flow between scales.20円
It's a mistake to think that just one of these scales is
everything, or
that the biggest scale is the most significant.
Frequently, in dealing
with complex systems, transformation emerges from
changes at smaller or
larger scales than the one under consideration. You
matter.21円
NATO uses a common symbol system for mapping conflict.
It includes large
objects, like "Aircraft Carrier" or even "Theater
Missile Defence"
(which indicates a whole network of installations)
through to tiny
presences in the battlespace, such as "Graffiti" or
"Pastor".22円
Failure to consider large & small scales can be our
undoing. Coronavirus
is microscopic, but it's disrupted global travel &
trade. Massive
events, like global warming, may have even more
disruptive consequences.
Fast events can be unmitigable. Slow events may be
imperceptible.23円
It could be that your individual efforts at a local
scale end up making
a difference at a much larger scale. If you're engaged
in local action,
talk about what you do. Other people may copy or adapt
your activities.
Together you may effect large scale changes.24円
Another way to understand this conflict is as a battle
of information.
They're attempting to get information to flow from us to
them. We're
attempting to get information to flow from them to us.
Either side may
poison the information their actions generate with
misinformation.25円
You can see this in the Johnson/Cummings Regime's
preoccupation with
surveillance tech & data analysis. They were
preceeded by Vote
Leave—connections to Cambridge Analytica, Faculty,
Facebook & NHSX
aren't coincidental. They conceal or obfuscate their
internal processes.26円
These types of conflict do not necessarily involve
optimisation.
Pursuing the most direct, most efficient course of
action has the
unfortunate side-effect that it makes your intent
obvious. It generates
a very clear signal that your opponent can interpret.27円
Actions should be high speed and chaotic, should
generate confusion and
confound analysis. If they appear to be random—even
senseless—so much
the better, as long as they inform you and don't exhaust
you. Taking
advantage of random, unplanned events is additionally
useful.28円
When devising actions, bear in mind that the ideal
"Operational Idea"
should be (1) Quick to Execute; (2) Deceptive and (3)
Ambiguous. It
should be (4) Unpredictable, not Stereotypical; should
provide (5)
Multiple Options for the next steps; and be (6) Creative
and Novel.29円
Now do you see why the Johnson/Cummings Regime often
appears to be a
shitshow? Sometimes it's incompetence. Sometimes they're
caught out.
Sometimes, their buffoonery is deliberately provocative.
While their
visible actions are chaotic, their intended actions are
obfuscated.30円
Interestingly, it can be useful to mix up deceptions,
provocations &
stochastic obfuscations with undisguised actions &
accurate disclosures.
By making your genuine intentions public, it becomes all
the more
difficult for your opponent to perceive what's real
& what's not.31円
The highest value actions are ambiguous & provide
multiple options. They
may discover something, they may provoke a response,
they may attract or
avoid attention. Once deployed, should an idea's initial
intent fail, or
circumstances change, it can be recast as something
else.32円
The plutocratic right is currently much better at this
type of conflict
than is the traditional left, which values stasis,
structure, clarity
and consistency. "This far and no further" is as
effective in
Operational Art as was the Maginot Line. Progressives
can and must
learn!33円
Right now, we can only guess at the Johnson/Cummings
Regime's centre of
gravity—the critical factors and linkages that allow it
to act. We can
guess that the relationships between Johnson, Cummings,
the "Vote Leave
Gang" and the Parliamentary Conservative Party are
crucial.34円
This said, it's possible that Johnson & Cummings are
more peripheral
than they appear to be—get rid of them, & their
apparently deliberately
destructive programme may continue undisrupted by
another leader. So we
must continue to harass, probe & reconnoitre,
learning as we go.35円
Remember that significant parts of the Johnson/Cummings
network are
invisible. The relationships between the visible parts
of the network
and its plutocratic funders may be few and critical, or
they may be
manifold and redundant, but money appears to be an
important enabler.36円
We may guess that Johnson, Cummings, the Vote Leave
Gang, The Cabinet,
The Parliamentary Conservative Party or others are
simply bumbling
idiots. This is a mistake. We should take them very
seriously, and
assume that each move they make is quite deliberate.37円
Just because it's deliberate doesn't mean it's
optimised. They're
deliberately trying to obfuscate information that they
generate. At this
stage in the electoral cycle, they can afford to look
like idiots. They
have time for purges, new policies, new slogans &
new haircuts.38円
Over-interpreting their actions may be a mistake. Their
modus operandi
appears to be to deliver ineffectual governance. This
may be deliberate!
One of their objectives may be to break down any notion
of logic or good
sense in the relationship between government &
people.39円
Don't imagine that, as we discover vulnerabilities in
the
Johnson/Cummings Regime, they will remain unpatched.
They will
manoeuvre, camouflage, adjust, transform, refocus &
redeploy. No current
understanding is useful for good. However, each change
can derive
further insights.40円
Many political impulses that I see on left and right
alike are driven by
an urge to simplify—to gain the comfort and clarity of
understanding
just what's happening. This may give you peace of mind,
but be assured,
full understanding is an illusion, and it's not the way
to win.41円
On the right, simple answers are used to manipulate
footsoldiers. The
BrexiTrump dullards that tirelessly belt out meaningless
slogans and
dog-whistle racism on Twitter are being manipulated. On
the left,
simplification takes the form of doctrine—texts that
serve as holy writ.42円
For goodness' sake, progressives, leave this stuff
behind! Think about
core values, not doctrine. 19th Century manifestos were
crucial in their
time, and may contribute to our understanding, but
things have changed
and are changing. The game now is about continuous
learning.43円
Here are five useful Operational methods—
(1/5) Surveillance: watch & learn. Don't forget to
record & report your
discoveries.
(2/5) Demonstration: do something JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN.
It doesn't have
to be useful you'll learn about your own capacities as
you go.44円
(3/5) Deception: Say you're going to do something, then
don't. Pretend
you're NOT going to do something. Do it anyway. Seem as
if you're doing
one thing, but do something else. Say you care about
something that
doesn't matter, or that you don't care about something
that does.45円
(4/5) Attack of Opportunity: the enemy's in sight, so
attack! Remember,
though, this wasn't planned & may be a trap. Be
ready to retreat.
(5/5) Supporting Attack. This may not be the knockout
blow, but you're
sure that if you attack right… there, it'll hurt the
enemy. Do it.46円
All of these methods assume that you're NOT YET SURE
where the enemy's
centre of gravity is. They're a dance, in which you goof
around & mix
things up. The neglected one is often Demonstration. It
takes effort.
Did you mean to do that? Your opponent can waste time on
analysis.47円
Only once you're ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that you understand
the opponent's
centre of gravity do you strike. Then, go all out. Hold
nothing back.
Overkill is just fine. We're nowhere near that stage
with the
Johnson/Cummings Regime–on EXACTLY WHAT it depends is
unclear.48円
This makes it important to report what you discover. The
best
information comes from engagement—doing something
that'll get results
and should provoke a response. It's the experimental
part of the method.
If you do an action, report your conclusions back to the
network.49円
This morning I remarked on the possibility that a photo
of Johnson &
Symonds had been doctored. The vigour with which Brexity
Boris Bots
responded was very informative. Clearly they want to
provoke argument
now, today, about something that doesn't really matter.
Interesting. 50円
You may be one of those charming souls who feel
uncomfortable with
conflict analogies. Good for you! You can re-interpret
these methods
without military trappings if you like. I urge you to
look into "Systems
Thinking" – the science of how to deal with confounding
complexity.51円
But, while you may be uncomfortable with the idea of
information war, be
under absolutely no illusion: the Johnson/Cummings
Regime is at war with
democracy, it's at war with notions of transparency,
honesty and
accountability. In short, it's at war with you. Good
luck!52円
P.S. Why have I said all this now? Is it true? Is it a
deception? Am I
saying this just because I can? Is it an attempt to
absorb the
Johnson/Cummings Regime's analytical resources? I know
that they already
know this stuff, but some of you don't. I hope it
helps.53円
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use
without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net
criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of
the nets
# more info:
http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive:
http://www.nettime.org
contact:
nettime@kein.org
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in
Subject: