diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | books/sociology/counterrevolution.md | 315 |
1 files changed, 315 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/books/sociology/counterrevolution.md b/books/sociology/counterrevolution.md index 273dad4..4a29d63 100644 --- a/books/sociology/counterrevolution.md +++ b/books/sociology/counterrevolution.md @@ -1260,3 +1260,318 @@ Counterinsurgency goes domestic: well as the specific NSA surveillance programs, makes domestic total information awareness possible, and in turn lays the groundwork for the other two prongs of counterinsurgency in the domestic context. + + [...] + + This idea of an occupied territory, of a colony within a nation, resonates + perfectly with what we have witnessed in terms of the domestication of the + counterinsurgency. I would just push the logic further: we have not simply + created an internal colony, we have turned the nation itself into a colony. We + govern ourselves through modern counterinsurgency warfare as if the entire + United States was now a colonial dominion like Algeria, Malaya, or Vietnam. + + [...] + + These incidents—large and small, but all devastating for those targeted—also + serve another objective of the domesticated counterinsurgency: to make the rest + of us feel safe and secure, to allow us to continue our lives unaffected, to avoid + disrupting our consumption and enjoyment. They serve to reassure, and also, in + demonizing a phantom minority, to bring us all together against the specter of + the frightening and dangerous other. It makes us believe that there would be, + lurking in the quiet suburbs of Dallas or Miami, dangerous insurgents—were it + not for our government. And these effects feed into the third prong of a + + [...] + + We had seen earlier, within counterinsurgency theory, similar debates + between population-centric and enemy-centric theorists. The enemy-centric + approach tended to be the more brutal, but more focused. The population-centric + favored the more legal and social-investment approaches. I argued then that they + were just two facets of the same paradigm. + + Here the debate is between population-and/or-enemy-centric theories versus + individual-centric theory. But here too, I would argue, this is a false dichotomy. + Again, these are just two facets of the same thing: a counterinsurgency paradigm + of warfare with three core strategies. Like the population-and/or-enemy-centric + theories, individual-centric theory naturally entails both incapacitating the + individual terrorist or insurgent—eliminating him and all of the active minority + —and preventing or deterring his substitution or replacement. + + [...] + + But rather than buy into this dichotomy of counterinsurgency and leaner + antiterrorism, what history shows instead is a growing convergence of the two + models in the United States since the 1960s. Counterinsurgency and domestic + antiterrorism efforts, entwined from the start, have converged over time. The + individual incapacitation strategy meshes perfectly into the counterinsurgency + approach. And it leads seamlessly from the domestication of the second prong of + counterinsurgency to the domestication of the third. + +### Distraction and diversion + + MANY OF US WILL NOT RECOGNIZE OURSELVES, OR A MERICA for that matter, in + these dreadful episodes—in the waterboarding and targeted assassinations + abroad or in the militarization of our police forces, in the infiltration of Muslim + mosques and student groups or in the constant collection of our personal data at + home. Many of us have no firsthand experience of these terrifying practices. Few + of us actually read the full Senate torture report, and even fewer track drone + strikes. Some of us do not even want to know of their existence. Most of us are + blissfully ignorant—at least most of the time—of these counterinsurgency + practices at home or abroad, and are consumed instead by the seductive + distractions of our digital age. + + And that’s the way it is supposed to be. As counterinsurgency is + domesticated, it is our hearts and minds that are daily being assuaged, numbed, + pacified—and blissfully satisfied. We, the vast majority of us, are reassured + daily: there are threats everywhere and color-coded terror alerts, but + counterinsurgency strategies are protecting us. We are made to feel that + everything’s under control, that the threat is exterior, that we can continue with + our daily existence. Even more, that these counterinsurgency strategies will + prevail. That our government is stronger and better equipped, prepared to do + everything necessary to win, and will win. That the guardians are protecting us. + The effort to win the hearts and minds of the passive American majority is + the third aspect of the domestication of counterinsurgency practices—perhaps + the most crucial component of all. And it is accomplished through a remarkable + mixture of distraction, entertainment, pleasure, propaganda, and advertising— + now rendered all so much more effective thanks to our rich digital world. In + Rome, after the Republic, this was known as “bread and circus” for the masses. + Today, it’s more like Facebook and Pokémon GO. + + We saw earlier how the expository society entices us to share all our personal + data and how this feeds into the first prong of counterinsurgency—total + information awareness. There is a flip side to this phenomenon: keeping us + distracted. The exposure is so pleasurable and engaging that we are mostly kept + content, with little need for a coordinated top-down effort to do so. We are + entranced—absorbed in a fantastic world of digitally enhanced reality that is + totally consuming, engrossing, and captivating. We are no longer being rendered + docile in a disciplinarian way, as Michel Foucault argued in Discipline and + Punish. We are past notions of docility. We are actively entranced—not + passively, not in a docile way. We are actively clicking and swiping, jumping + from one screen to another, checking one platform then another to find the next + fix—Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Google, YouTube, and on and on. + Winning over and assuaging the passive majority might be accomplished— + indeed, has been accomplished in the past—through traditional propaganda, such + as broadcast misinformation about the insurgent minority, and through the top- + down provision of entertainment to keep us from thinking about politics. The + new digital world we live in has rendered these older strategies obsolete. As the + counterinsurgency’s mandate to pacify the masses has been turned on the + American people, the third prong of modern warfare looks and works differently + than it did in previous times and in other places. + Things have changed. Just a few years ago, our politicians still had to tell us + + [...] + + Pokémon GO has already run its course, but that is to be expected. Another + digital obsession will follow. These platforms are supposed to capture all of our + attention for a while, to captivate us, to distract us—and simultaneously to make + us expose ourselves and everything around us. This is the symbiosis between the + third and first prongs of the domesticated counterinsurgency: while it pacifies us, + a game like Pokémon GO taps into all our personal information and captures all + our data. At first, the game required that players share all their personal contacts. + Although that was eventually dropped, the game collects all our GPS locations, + captures all the video of our surroundings in perfectly GPS-coded data, and + tracks us wherever we are. Plus, even though it is free, many players are buying + add-ons and in the process sharing their consumption and financial data. The + more we play, the more we are distracted and pacified, and the more we reveal + about ourselves. + + [...] + + The distractions are everywhere: e-mail notifications, texts, bings and pings, + new snapchats and instagrams. The entertainment is everywhere as well: free + Wi-Fi at Starbucks and McDonald’s, and now on New York City streets, that + allow us to stream music videos and watch YouTube videos. And of course, the + advertising is everywhere, trying to make us consume more, buy online, + subscribe, and believe. Believe not only that we need to buy the recommended + book or watch the suggested Netflix, but also believe that we are secure and safe, + protected by the most powerful intelligence agencies and most tenacious military + force. Believe that we can continue to mind our own business—and remain + distracted and absorbed in the digital world—because our government is + watching out for us. + + The fact is, the domestication of counterinsurgency has coincided with the + explosion of this digital world and its distractions. There is a real qualitative + difference between the immediate post–9/11 period and today. One that is + feeding directly into the third strategy of modern warfare. + Meanwhile, for the more vulnerable—those who are more likely to veer + astray and perhaps sympathize with the purported internal enemy—the same + digital technologies target them for enhanced propaganda. The Global + Engagement Center, or its equivalents, will profile them and send improved + content from more moderate voices. The very same methods developed by the + most tech-savvy retailers and digital advertisers—by Google and Amazon—are + deployed to predict, identify, enhance, and target our own citizens. + were before or that we are experiencing a waning of civil and political + engagement. While I agree that the growing capacity of the state and + corporations to monitor citizens may well threaten the private sphere, I am not + convinced that this is producing new apathy or passivity or docility among + citizens, so much as a new form of entrancement. The point is, we were once + kept apathetic through other means, but are now kept apathetic through digital + distractions. + +Voting turnout and Trump election: + + The voting patterns of American registered voters has remained constant— + and apathetic—for at least fifty years. Even in the most important presidential + elections, voter turnout in this country over the past fifty years or more has + pretty much fluctuated between 50 percent and 63 percent. By any measure, + American democracy has been pretty docile for a long time. In fact, if you look + over the longer term, turnout has been essentially constant since the 1920s and + the extension of the suffrage to women. Of course, turnout to vote is not the only + measure of democratic participation, but it is one quantifiable measure. And + electoral voting is one of the more reliable longitudinal measures of civic + participation. But our record, in the United States, is not impressive. + + [...] + + Despite all this, over 62 million people voted for Donald Trump, resulting in + his Electoral College victory. And it was by no means an unusual election. Voter + turnout in 2016 was typical for this country. About 60.2 percent of the + approximately 231 million eligible voters turned out to vote, representing about + 139 million votes case. That number is consonant with historical turnout in this + country, almost squarely between voter turnout in 2012 (58.6 percent) and in + 2008 (61.6 percent), but still above most presidential election year turnouts since + 1972. 16 In all categories of white voters, Trump prevailed. + + [...] + + The cable news network CNN captured this best in a pithy lead to a story titled + “Trump: The Social Media President?”: “FDR was the first ‘radio’ president. + JFK emerged as the first ‘television’ president. Barack Obama broke through as + the first ‘Internet’ president. Next up? Prepare to meet Donald Trump, possibly + the first ‘social media’ and ‘reality TV’ president.” 10 + + [...] + + This new mode of existence and digital consumption pleases and distracts the + majority of Americans. The old-fashioned TV has now been enhanced and + augmented, displaced by social media on digital devices of all sorts and sizes— + from the Apple Watch and tablet, through the MacBook Air and Mac Pro, to the + giant screen TV and even the Jumbotron. And all of it serves to pacify the + masses and ensure that they do not have the time or attention span to question + the domestication of the counterinsurgency. + + And, then, it all feeds back into total information awareness. Hand in hand, + government agencies, social media, Silicon Valley, and large retailers and + corporations have created a mesmerizing new digital age that simultaneously + makes us expose ourselves and everything we do to government surveillance and + that serves to distract and entertain us. All kinds of social media and reality TV + consume and divert our attention, making us give our data away for free. A + profusion of addictive digital platforms—from Gmail, Facebook, and Twitter, to + YouTube and Netflix, Amazon Prime, Instagram, and Snapchat, and now + Pokémon GO—distract us into exposing all our most private information, in + order to feed the new algorithms of commerce and intelligence services: to + profile us for both watch lists and commercial advertising. + +This is compatible with Shoshana Zuboff's Dispossession Cycle: + + This third aspect of counterinsurgency’s domestication is perhaps the most + important, because it targets the most prized military and political objective: the + general masses. And today, in the expository society, the new algorithms and + digital-advertising methods have propelled the manipulation and propaganda to + new heights. We are being encouraged by government and enticed by + multination corporations and social media to expose and express ourselves as + much as possible, leaving digital traces that permit both government and + corporations to profile us and then try to shape us accordingly. To make model + citizens out of us all—which means docile, entranced consumers. The governing + paradigm here is to frenetically encourage digital activity—which in one sense is + the opposite of docility—in order to then channel that activity in the right + direction: consumption, political passivity, and avoiding the radical extremes. + + What we are witnessing is a new form of digital entrancement that shapes us + as subjects, blunts our criticality, distracts us, and pacifies us. We spend so much + time on our phones and devices, we barely have any time left for school or work, + let alone political activism. In the end, the proper way to think about this all is + not through the lens of docility, but through the framework of entrancement. It is + crucial to understand this in the proper way, because breaking this very + entrancement is key to seeing how counterinsurgency governance operates more + broadly. Also, because the focus on docility—along an older register of + discipline—is likely to lead us into an outdated focus on top-down propaganda. + +### Counterrevolution + + The paradigm was refined + and systematized, and has now reached a new stage: the complete and systematic + domestication of counterinsurgency against a home population where there is no + real insurgency or active minority. This new stage is what I call “The + Counterrevolution.” + + The Counterrevolution is a new paradigm of governing our own citizens at + home, modeled on colonial counterinsurgency warfare, despite the absence of + any domestic uprising. It is aimed not against a rebel minority—since none + really exists in the United States—but instead it creates the illusion of an active + minority which it can then deploy to target particular groups and communities, + and govern the entire American population on the basis of a counterinsurgency + warfare model. It operates through the three main strategies at the heart of + modern warfare, which, as applied to the American people, can be recapitulated + as follows: + + 1. Total information awareness of the entire American population…: [by the] + [...] “counterrevolutionary minority.” + + [...] + + 2. … in order to extract an active minority at home… + +Shock and Awe: + + 3. … and win the hearts and minds of Americans: Meanwhile, the + counterrevolutionary minority works to pacify and assuage the general + population in order to ensure that the vast majority of Americans remain + just that: ordinary consuming Americans. They encourage and promote a + rich new digital environment filled with YouTube, Netflix, Amazon + Prime, tweets, Facebook posts, instagrams, snapchats, and reality TV that + consume attention while digitally gathering personal data—and at times, + pushing enhanced content. They direct digital propaganda to susceptible + users. And they shock and awe the masses with their willingness to + torture suspected terrorists or kill their own citizens abroad. In the end, + entertaining, distracting, entrancing, and assuaging the general population + is the key to success—our new form of bread and circus. + +The "new shape" of the State (and it's partners), as a "loose network": + + These three key strategies now guide governance at home, as they do military + and foreign affairs abroad. What has emerged today is a new and different art of + governing. It forms a coherent whole with, at its center, a security apparatus + composed of White House, Pentagon, and intelligence officials, high-ranking + congressional members, FISC judges, security and Internet leaders, police + intelligence divisions, social-media companies, Silicon Valley executives, and + multinational corporations. This loose network, which collaborates at times and + competes at others, exerts control by collecting and mining our digital data. Data + control has become the primary battlefield, and data, the primary resource— + perhaps the most important primary resource in the United States today. + + [...] + + This new mode of governing has no time horizon. It has no sunset provision. And it is + marked by a tyrannous logic of violence. [...] It is part and parcel of the new + paradigm of governing that reconciles brutality with legality. + +The unprecedented, self-fulfilling profecy: + + We govern ourselves + differently in the United States now: no longer through sweeping social + programs like the New Deal or the War on Poverty, but through surgical + counterinsurgency strategies against a phantom opponent. The intensity of the + domestication now is unprecedented. + + [...] + + Counterinsurgency, with its tripartite scheme (active minority, passive masses, + counterrevolutionary minority) and its tripartite strategy (total awareness, + eliminate the active minority, pacify the masses) is a deeply counterproductive + self-fulfilling prophecy that radicalizes individuals against the United States. + + [...] + + “The Islamic State has called it ‘the blessed ban’ because it + supports the Islamic State’s position that America hates Islam. The clause in the + order that gives Christians preferential treatment will be seen as confirming the + Islamic State’s apocalyptic narrative that Islam is in a fight to the death against + the Christian crusaders. The images of Muslim visitors being turned away at + American airports will only inflame those who seek to do us harm.” 6 + + [...] + + We are headed not, as Kant would have it, toward perpetual peace, but + instead, sounding the refrain of Nietzsche’s eternal return, toward an endless + state of counterinsurgency warfare. |