<nettime> Manifestos, Twitter, and Action Against The Autocrats.

[James Wallbank <james@lowtech.org>]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(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

(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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


#  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: