6 ms·

Pentagon study declares American Empire is 'collapsing'

43 points by flowersoldier 9y ago

mindcrime 9y ago
and the authority of governments everywhere is crumbling. Good. potentially undermining trust in incumbent governments for the foreseeable future Even better. Trusting government is a fool's errand. But, the document says, this should not be seen as defeatism, but rather a “wakeup call”. If nothing is done to adapt to this “post-primacy” environment, the complexity and speed of world events will “increasingly defy [DoD’s] current strategy, planning, and risk assessment conventions and biases.” IOW, it's not the Department of Defense at all. It's more like the Department of World Domination.
- madamelic 9y ago
  I especially enjoy the fact they seem to be deeming their own citizens as enemies. Great job guys!
  - mindcrime 9y ago
    To governments, their own citizens are the enemy. We are a potential uprising just waiting to happen.
- sharemywin 9y ago
  Then who do you trust no one? computers? corporations? religious leaders? scientists? How do you run society without trust?
  - mindcrime 9y ago
    Wait, what?? Where did I say anything remotely like "trust no one"? Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though. That got us many wars, untold numbers of people killed, incarcerated and/or experimented on. It got us untold numbers of people inhibited from creating wealth and a better future for themselves, so the existing elite power base could preserve itself. It got us civil asset forfeiture, the "War on Drugs" (aka, war on civil liberties), horrible nutritional advice promulgated by the USDA and their ilk, which has ruined people's health (hey, eat lots of carbs, fat is evil!). It's got us entrenched systems which promote the morality of one religious group (Christians, in the US) regardless of one's personal beliefs. It's got us MKULTRA, COINTELPRO, Room 641a, etc., etc.
    - lightbyte 9y ago
      Are you suggesting any alternate ideas here, or just ranting about "muh gubment"?
      - thatswrong0 9y ago
        All they're suggesting is that trusting the government is a silly idea, and then provided examples of it. I don't think they're suggesting necessarily that we need a brand new kind of government - just that we should for good reason be wary of the one we currently have.
        irickt 9y ago
        "Government" is governance of humans by humans. It has never been "good" because the past is so dismal and because humans collectively have not come to make it good. The challenge for those who critize government generically is that they design a good governance ... whether we call some part of it government or not.
    - krapp 9y ago
      >Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though. On balance, though, for most people, it actually has. Which creates a bit of a messaging problem for anarchy in the general case.
    - candiodari 9y ago
      > Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though. The absence of government, on the other hand, was even better. We have such incredible highlights as the dark ages, the Mongol conquest, islam's spread, ... each of which killed far more people than 40-45 including Japan and the Holocaust, when the total human population was a fraction of what it was during WWII. Collapses of government which are more recent, but on a smaller scale are currently used as laughingstocks for anarchists and ... sorry to say ... rightly so. Among such examples are Somalia, Ethiopia and Sudan as recent examples. Without the government, can you really vouch for all 7 billion humans alive, even for basic things, such as that no group of them would commit mass murder, just because it would provide a better meal tomorrow evening ? How about all 300 million Americans ? I don't think so. How about 10 million New Yorkers ? I wouldn't take that bet. The bet that they wouldn't band together and steal whatever they can is so ridiculous it's barely worth thinking about.
  - nnfy 9y ago
    >how do you run a society without trust? You distribute trust and power among actors in a way that is secure and relatively equitable (compared to current power structures). Enter bitcoin and other more versatile cryptocurrencies like Etherium. Cryptos may form the foundations of a healthier globalism and a new era for the human race, in that we will be less bound to and reliant on government as a separate, opaque power structure. However, there is a long way to go regarding development and adoption, and, let's be real, the overwhelming majority of private citizens may never understand the function or power of cryptos, while government entities will see it as the power threat that it is and may legislate it away while the populace remains ignorant.
  - RUG3Y 9y ago
    I for one don't trust anyone in that list (maybe computers?). But, I think I can trust my neighbor. Maybe that's where it starts.
- Analemma_ 9y ago
  And what is your proposed replacement? I've seen a lot of libertarian/ancap complaining about governments, but never any suggestions where the cure isn't worse than the disease. FFS, look at history. When governments collapse, what springs up is never a wonderful, harmonious, anarchist collective. What actually happens is this: a short period of chaos, followed by the public willfully putting a strongman authoritarian into power when they're sufficiently sick of the instability and just want peace and quiet back. This is a constant pattern throughout history and it is ridiculous to think "this time will be different".
  - mindcrime 9y ago
    There's a first time for everything. And things do change. I'd say we, collectively, have a better understanding of how self-government can work now, than we did in the past. Are we "there yet"? I don't know. But I know that what we're doing now isn't working so great.
  - alexandercrohde 9y ago
    You really can't think of any middle-ground between what we have now and anarchy/libertarianism? How about just this as starters: 1. Legalize marijuana 2. End civil asset forfeiture 3. Stronger anti-trust on the internet and wireless spectrum 4. Improve the legal system to prevent civil cases from stifling free speech (perhaps by offering pro-bono lawyers to individuals sued by corporations for acts of speech only) 5. Work to end corporate influence over government. It's not an all-or-nothing thing, we just need to decide what we care about, talk about it, and it will happen (but slowly).
    - Analemma_ 9y ago
      I am in favor of all four (EDIT: five, my bad). But none of those are related to the GP's comment.
      - mindcrime 9y ago
        But none of those are related to the GP's comment. Actually they kinda are. When I say "don't trust government" you can take that as "grant government ZERO authority which can be abused" (the anarchist position, and, by happenstance, pretty much my actual position), but you can also read it as "trust the government with less authority which can be abused." And even as an anarchist, I'd take any developments in regards to the latter half of that as progress in a generally positive direction. I mean, I'm an anarchist, but I'm also a pragmatist. We won't get an ancap society in my lifetime, but if we could scale back the size and scope of government just a bit, I would be happy(er).
- ivcha 9y ago
  potentially undermining trust in incumbent governments for the foreseeable future Even better. Trusting government is a fool's errand. wow, great... what do you suggest -- remove governments and go back to clan wars? or perhaps we should be asking the question of how did we end up with governments that cannot be trusted...
alexandercrohde 9y ago
Good. Here's how things should go: 1. First America stops being world police. 2. America plays ball with rest of world (adopts metric system, becomes a leader in climate, shares control of internet, turns concern toward to real issues like asteroids, population growth, health issues, cyber security) 3. Citizens acknowledge that war is a tool for siphoning tax money into the coffers of people with connections/government-contracts, and move towards a post-war-era. 4. Citizens start to move to a post-nation era, where we acknowledge have more in common with each other than our own politicians who drive us apart for financial gain. 5. We move toward universalizing language, so we hit a point that declaring war with Iraq seems as absurd as declaring war with Canada. 6. The very concept of "superiority" and "class" becomes meaningless as we move into an era of excess due to automation. [Link to Pentagon's study: https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/download.cfm?q=1358 https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/download.cfm?q=1358]
- mrkrabo 9y ago
  That's a good way of becoming weak. Your enemies will be very glad to watch you try this.
  - EGreg 9y ago
    Please elaborate how exactly this leads to weakness? And how do you define it in the first place?
    - hockeybias 9y ago
      Seriously? Giving away things tends to weaken one.
    - edge17 9y ago
      power and political vacuums tend to want to be filled
  - Bjorkbat 9y ago
    "The Americans have brought their armed forces back home, adopted sensible foreign and domestic policies, and are starting to see eye-to-eye with people whom they once found too foreign to relate to. Now is the perfect time to strike!"
rajathagasthya 9y ago
This was a top post in r/geopolitics a couple of days back. I can't find the link anymore, probably because it was removed. A lot of them commented that this sounded like DoD propaganda to get increased funding, especially when you consider that this study was funded by DoD. Anyway, it is truly scary if they think they need to massively expand the already unparalleled American military dominance.
camillomiller 9y ago
One thing I find particularly funny about the whole Trump-Russia connection and the possibility of Putin & Co. meddling with American Elections, is the disconnect of those that are so blindly outraged about it all. Trump of course should resign if the intervention is proven as deliberate and facilitated by his side, but shall we make a list of all the foreign elections the US have been meddling with in the last 50 years? The real solution? American friends, as much as I love you (and I do, mostly), you should just stop being so way up your own ass all the time. About everything. There's a world out there, across the borders and the two ponds.
- dboreham 9y ago
  The techniques used in the 2016 US election were developed by western governments to interfere in 3rd world countries' elections. Heck the same subcontractors were used. Classic example of a weapon being turned on the maker.
- X86BSD 9y ago
  What's hillarious to me is watching the liberal snowflake safe space left foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs about a non issue, theoretical maybe, crime like Russia collusion while completely ignoring the fact the US has not just meddled in elections in other countries but overthrown leaders, assassinated people, and destroyed entire countries with force! And are doing right this minute in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc! I mean it takes a special kind of bat shit crazy to foam at the mouth looking for any dirt you can on an elected president you hate while totally ignoring the smashing, bombing, murdering the US has done to bring about new leaders, better energy deals, access to resources, and political change.
  - ozmodiar 9y ago
    Since when has the liberal left been okay with those things? In my memory they've been quite vocally opposed to them.
    - X86BSD 9y ago
      That's not how they vote.
moomin 9y ago
Maybe they should consider exactly how badly they used their post-Cold War dominance. Things like the Iraq war leeched their dominance, by showing them as unprepared, by showing them as an occupying power and by splitting them with most of Europe. It wasn't the only decision that had this effect, either. The report might as well say "We used to be rich, but we spent it all on fast cars and drink."
DonCarlitos 9y ago
Edit: "...has collapsed."
petraeus 9y ago
Theres a easy cure that will be the norm in 100 or 200 years, whenever we get sick of capitalism. You're right capitalism is not currently recognized as a form of government, but in reality it is the dominant form of government in the west. The cure is, get this, transparency. It'll take some effort to get to a true transparent government and im calling this new form Transparentism.
mnm1 9y ago
I wonder if this is what the Soviets proposed right before their collapse. I guess when you're a hammer (Pentagon) you only know how to hit things (war). We may or may not be about to collapse as an empire, but I'm certain that if we follow the plan outlined here, we will collapse as a society. We've already been heading there for quite awhile now. Let's spend more on military while our citizens are jobless, homeless, and dying of sickness, then use propaganda to tell them they're living the high life. There are, unfortunately, enough stupid people in this country to keep such a charade going. The current leadership, both political and military, is just a reflection of that.

43 points by flowersoldier 9y ago

and the authority of governments everywhere is crumbling. Good. potentially undermining trust in incumbent governments for the foreseeable future Even better. Trusting government is a fool's errand. But, the document says, this should not be seen as defeatism, but rather a “wakeup call”. If nothing is done to adapt to this “post-primacy” environment, the complexity and speed of world events will “increasingly defy [DoD’s] current strategy, planning, and risk assessment conventions and biases.” IOW, it's not the Department of Defense at all. It's more like the Department of World Domination.

madamelic 9y ago
I especially enjoy the fact they seem to be deeming their own citizens as enemies. Great job guys!
- mindcrime 9y ago
  To governments, their own citizens are the enemy. We are a potential uprising just waiting to happen.
sharemywin 9y ago
Then who do you trust no one? computers? corporations? religious leaders? scientists? How do you run society without trust?
- mindcrime 9y ago
  Wait, what?? Where did I say anything remotely like "trust no one"? Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though. That got us many wars, untold numbers of people killed, incarcerated and/or experimented on. It got us untold numbers of people inhibited from creating wealth and a better future for themselves, so the existing elite power base could preserve itself. It got us civil asset forfeiture, the "War on Drugs" (aka, war on civil liberties), horrible nutritional advice promulgated by the USDA and their ilk, which has ruined people's health (hey, eat lots of carbs, fat is evil!). It's got us entrenched systems which promote the morality of one religious group (Christians, in the US) regardless of one's personal beliefs. It's got us MKULTRA, COINTELPRO, Room 641a, etc., etc.
  - lightbyte 9y ago
    Are you suggesting any alternate ideas here, or just ranting about "muh gubment"?
    - thatswrong0 9y ago
      All they're suggesting is that trusting the government is a silly idea, and then provided examples of it. I don't think they're suggesting necessarily that we need a brand new kind of government - just that we should for good reason be wary of the one we currently have.
      - irickt 9y ago
        "Government" is governance of humans by humans. It has never been "good" because the past is so dismal and because humans collectively have not come to make it good. The challenge for those who critize government generically is that they design a good governance ... whether we call some part of it government or not.
  - krapp 9y ago
    >Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though. On balance, though, for most people, it actually has. Which creates a bit of a messaging problem for anarchy in the general case.
  - candiodari 9y ago
    > Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though. The absence of government, on the other hand, was even better. We have such incredible highlights as the dark ages, the Mongol conquest, islam's spread, ... each of which killed far more people than 40-45 including Japan and the Holocaust, when the total human population was a fraction of what it was during WWII. Collapses of government which are more recent, but on a smaller scale are currently used as laughingstocks for anarchists and ... sorry to say ... rightly so. Among such examples are Somalia, Ethiopia and Sudan as recent examples. Without the government, can you really vouch for all 7 billion humans alive, even for basic things, such as that no group of them would commit mass murder, just because it would provide a better meal tomorrow evening ? How about all 300 million Americans ? I don't think so. How about 10 million New Yorkers ? I wouldn't take that bet. The bet that they wouldn't band together and steal whatever they can is so ridiculous it's barely worth thinking about.
- nnfy 9y ago
  >how do you run a society without trust? You distribute trust and power among actors in a way that is secure and relatively equitable (compared to current power structures). Enter bitcoin and other more versatile cryptocurrencies like Etherium. Cryptos may form the foundations of a healthier globalism and a new era for the human race, in that we will be less bound to and reliant on government as a separate, opaque power structure. However, there is a long way to go regarding development and adoption, and, let's be real, the overwhelming majority of private citizens may never understand the function or power of cryptos, while government entities will see it as the power threat that it is and may legislate it away while the populace remains ignorant.
- RUG3Y 9y ago
  I for one don't trust anyone in that list (maybe computers?). But, I think I can trust my neighbor. Maybe that's where it starts.
Analemma_ 9y ago
And what is your proposed replacement? I've seen a lot of libertarian/ancap complaining about governments, but never any suggestions where the cure isn't worse than the disease. FFS, look at history. When governments collapse, what springs up is never a wonderful, harmonious, anarchist collective. What actually happens is this: a short period of chaos, followed by the public willfully putting a strongman authoritarian into power when they're sufficiently sick of the instability and just want peace and quiet back. This is a constant pattern throughout history and it is ridiculous to think "this time will be different".
- mindcrime 9y ago
  There's a first time for everything. And things do change. I'd say we, collectively, have a better understanding of how self-government can work now, than we did in the past. Are we "there yet"? I don't know. But I know that what we're doing now isn't working so great.
- alexandercrohde 9y ago
  You really can't think of any middle-ground between what we have now and anarchy/libertarianism? How about just this as starters: 1. Legalize marijuana 2. End civil asset forfeiture 3. Stronger anti-trust on the internet and wireless spectrum 4. Improve the legal system to prevent civil cases from stifling free speech (perhaps by offering pro-bono lawyers to individuals sued by corporations for acts of speech only) 5. Work to end corporate influence over government. It's not an all-or-nothing thing, we just need to decide what we care about, talk about it, and it will happen (but slowly).
  - Analemma_ 9y ago
    I am in favor of all four (EDIT: five, my bad). But none of those are related to the GP's comment.
    - mindcrime 9y ago
      But none of those are related to the GP's comment. Actually they kinda are. When I say "don't trust government" you can take that as "grant government ZERO authority which can be abused" (the anarchist position, and, by happenstance, pretty much my actual position), but you can also read it as "trust the government with less authority which can be abused." And even as an anarchist, I'd take any developments in regards to the latter half of that as progress in a generally positive direction. I mean, I'm an anarchist, but I'm also a pragmatist. We won't get an ancap society in my lifetime, but if we could scale back the size and scope of government just a bit, I would be happy(er).
ivcha 9y ago
potentially undermining trust in incumbent governments for the foreseeable future Even better. Trusting government is a fool's errand. wow, great... what do you suggest -- remove governments and go back to clan wars? or perhaps we should be asking the question of how did we end up with governments that cannot be trusted...

alexandercrohde 9y ago

Good. Here's how things should go: 1. First America stops being world police. 2. America plays ball with rest of world (adopts metric system, becomes a leader in climate, shares control of internet, turns concern toward to real issues like asteroids, population growth, health issues, cyber security) 3. Citizens acknowledge that war is a tool for siphoning tax money into the coffers of people with connections/government-contracts, and move towards a post-war-era. 4. Citizens start to move to a post-nation era, where we acknowledge have more in common with each other than our own politicians who drive us apart for financial gain. 5. We move toward universalizing language, so we hit a point that declaring war with Iraq seems as absurd as declaring war with Canada. 6. The very concept of "superiority" and "class" becomes meaningless as we move into an era of excess due to automation. [Link to Pentagon's study: https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/download.cfm?q=1358 https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/download.cfm?q=1358]

mrkrabo 9y ago
That's a good way of becoming weak. Your enemies will be very glad to watch you try this.
- EGreg 9y ago
  Please elaborate how exactly this leads to weakness? And how do you define it in the first place?
  - hockeybias 9y ago
    Seriously? Giving away things tends to weaken one.
  - edge17 9y ago
    power and political vacuums tend to want to be filled
- Bjorkbat 9y ago
  "The Americans have brought their armed forces back home, adopted sensible foreign and domestic policies, and are starting to see eye-to-eye with people whom they once found too foreign to relate to. Now is the perfect time to strike!"

rajathagasthya 9y ago

This was a top post in r/geopolitics a couple of days back. I can't find the link anymore, probably because it was removed. A lot of them commented that this sounded like DoD propaganda to get increased funding, especially when you consider that this study was funded by DoD. Anyway, it is truly scary if they think they need to massively expand the already unparalleled American military dominance.

camillomiller 9y ago

One thing I find particularly funny about the whole Trump-Russia connection and the possibility of Putin & Co. meddling with American Elections, is the disconnect of those that are so blindly outraged about it all. Trump of course should resign if the intervention is proven as deliberate and facilitated by his side, but shall we make a list of all the foreign elections the US have been meddling with in the last 50 years? The real solution? American friends, as much as I love you (and I do, mostly), you should just stop being so way up your own ass all the time. About everything. There's a world out there, across the borders and the two ponds.

dboreham 9y ago
The techniques used in the 2016 US election were developed by western governments to interfere in 3rd world countries' elections. Heck the same subcontractors were used. Classic example of a weapon being turned on the maker.
X86BSD 9y ago
What's hillarious to me is watching the liberal snowflake safe space left foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs about a non issue, theoretical maybe, crime like Russia collusion while completely ignoring the fact the US has not just meddled in elections in other countries but overthrown leaders, assassinated people, and destroyed entire countries with force! And are doing right this minute in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc! I mean it takes a special kind of bat shit crazy to foam at the mouth looking for any dirt you can on an elected president you hate while totally ignoring the smashing, bombing, murdering the US has done to bring about new leaders, better energy deals, access to resources, and political change.
- ozmodiar 9y ago
  Since when has the liberal left been okay with those things? In my memory they've been quite vocally opposed to them.
  - X86BSD 9y ago
    That's not how they vote.

moomin 9y ago

Maybe they should consider exactly how badly they used their post-Cold War dominance. Things like the Iraq war leeched their dominance, by showing them as unprepared, by showing them as an occupying power and by splitting them with most of Europe. It wasn't the only decision that had this effect, either. The report might as well say "We used to be rich, but we spent it all on fast cars and drink."

DonCarlitos 9y ago

Edit: "...has collapsed."

petraeus 9y ago

Theres a easy cure that will be the norm in 100 or 200 years, whenever we get sick of capitalism. You're right capitalism is not currently recognized as a form of government, but in reality it is the dominant form of government in the west. The cure is, get this, transparency. It'll take some effort to get to a true transparent government and im calling this new form Transparentism.

mnm1 9y ago

I wonder if this is what the Soviets proposed right before their collapse. I guess when you're a hammer (Pentagon) you only know how to hit things (war). We may or may not be about to collapse as an empire, but I'm certain that if we follow the plan outlined here, we will collapse as a society. We've already been heading there for quite awhile now. Let's spend more on military while our citizens are jobless, homeless, and dying of sickness, then use propaganda to tell them they're living the high life. There are, unfortunately, enough stupid people in this country to keep such a charade going. The current leadership, both political and military, is just a reflection of that.