Information flows

Introduction

Today, I was sharing impressions with someone about a TV “round table” discussion on the topic of velvet revolutions in Arab countries. The conversation was led by conspiracy theorists who believe that <insert appropriate term> are to blame for everything, as it benefits them. In contrast, there were more pragmatic individuals trying to argue that neither the CIA nor the FSB are the fierce fighters they once were, but rather fat eunuchs. Ultimately, the discussion during the round table didn’t address the causes of the phenomenon at all; instead, it revolved around whether or not to trust conspiracy theories.

What is the reason? Is it possible for this to happen in other countries?

The reason, as I see it, is that all the countries experiencing turbulent events have faced a crisis of information counterflow. They all built a model of social organization based on the existence of a bureaucratic elite that… naturally was completely corrupt. The subordinate position of the rest of society was achieved through the creation, or rather the illusion of creating, a social contract. This refers not to the social contract in its classical understanding , and the system rationalizations The victims of humanity to society. The essence of it all is that the masses were not controlled by force, but rather an idea was instilled in them. The machinery of mass propaganda was at work, which anyone who had been in those countries could easily observe in the form of portraits of leaders on every corner. And those who understood the language and could watch the propaganda box could hardly distinguish what was shown there from the plots of Soviet TV during the height of stagnation.

The Role of Propaganda

Sooner or later, any society comes to the invention and active use of propaganda to motivate the people to submit to the bloodsuckers. In Europe, this realization came in the 1930s and 1940s. Propaganda turned out to be the “absolute weapon” against which society had no tools or means of resistance. Everyone heard certain ideas from all sides and thought that they shared these ideas, even though it was the same broadcast playing through different speakers. The elite, taking advantage of this in great detail… described The laws of society pushed him into a crowd of like-minded individuals, ready to sacrifice something personal now for the sake of an idea, the goals of society, the future, and so on. Essentially, in the slogan “bread and circuses,” it became possible to provide less bread by compromising the quality of the “circus.”

Any local rebellion was quickly suppressed and did not spread precisely because the authorities swiftly and effectively blocked information leaks and presented events to the rest of the population in a “correct” manner. Lenin’s tactic of “post, telegraph, telephone” was not just words, but a brilliant idea for controlling public consciousness. Yes, “we will take a different path,” the newspaper “Iskra” — all that. Society had no immunity to propaganda.

The Great War gave Western society a serious vaccination against propaganda. People learned to identify it, evaluate it, and understand the true motives of propagandists. Perhaps natural selection played a role, allowing those who weren’t completely brainwashed to survive, as they ultimately decided that family and children were more important than illusory ideals.

The winners were unfortunate. In particular, the USSR and the USA. In these countries, propaganda was still a very powerful tool for controlling society. In the USA, the doctrine of social control had to be re-evaluated after the Vietnam War, when the rising flow of information about the war was in stark contrast to the official position. In the USSR, the situation was completely different.

The thing is that in the USSR, they figured out (whether intentionally or by chance) to separate the secular bureaucratic elite from the ideological one. Practically, this meant that people had to support two parallel structures (managers and party officials), but it also meant a limitation on corruption. Both bureaucratic hierarchies kept an eye on each other. One would undermine the other “along party lines,” while being forced to maintain a clean image itself.

A very good and effective model allowed the regime to last a long time and to collapse for reasons different from those in the Middle East, but also related to the population’s rejection of propaganda. Afghanistan, Chernobyl, Pavlov’s reforms, the August Coup, glasnost, “enemy voices,” and the increasingly noticeable gap in economic development combined with open borders—this was too much for the propaganda machine to effectively counter grassroots protests without resorting to shootings. Ultimately, the regime was dealt a fatal blow by something that went unnoticed. As a result of Perestroika, people were allowed to engage in business. These were cooperatives and the first joint-stock companies. Privileges and preferences in this process were granted to representatives of the party and Komsomol nomenclature. In fact, the idea of separating secular and ideological power collapsed.

Are there such regimes today? Yes, of course: North Korea, China, Iran — prominent examples of this idea — the idea of dividing the ideological and secular elite into two branches. In Iran, there is even a separate military — the IRGC, which exists alongside the armed forces. It is a very powerful and very stable system. Why is it stable?

A classic of the genre.

Let’s consider the classic bureaucratic corruption pyramid. Positions are bought, and each official It generates income from its position by exploiting information asymmetry. To maintain its position, it shares the income with the higher-ups. The higher-ups become interested in grassroots corruption. The total corruption “tax” imposed on society becomes unbearable, and society is kept in submission through propaganda. If the propaganda becomes even slightly ineffective, society will explode. The flow of information created by propaganda keeps public thoughts aligned in one direction. The source of problems is sought everywhere but in the authorities themselves. The goals imposed on people as priorities can lead anywhere, but certainly not to the improvement of their family’s well-being. And even if there are some “kitchen conversations,” they remain a secret and do not lead to the unification of people around any alternative idea simply because those who “talk in the kitchen” believe that there are few like them—dissenters. Thus, the stability of society depends on the strength of the information flow. If an informational counterflow emerges in society, related to, say, differing assessments of certain events by the authorities and the people, then the stability of society declines. The more corrupt a society is, the less counterflow is needed for its downfall.

Party members and mullahs

In the case of a separation between secular and ideological bureaucracy into two independent but interconnected branches, the very foundations of the corruption pyramid disappear. Mutual guarantees within a single bureaucratic chain do not ensure a stable position for its members, as there is always a competing yet cooperating chain nearby. The status quo is also maintained through propaganda, but in this case, a) the propaganda is carried out by individuals who are members of the ideological pyramid; in fact, the information flow from above does not diminish but rather escalates like an avalanche, and is echoed and supported from the bottom up by members of the “ideological” branch of power, as they have a direct interest in maintaining the system, and b) any public discontent can be easily quelled by simply finding a scapegoat within either the “ideological” or “secular” pyramid. This does not undermine the mutual guarantees. The presence of a well-structured upward information flow from the bottom allows for the phenomenon to manifest. self-induction or, in the environment of journalists, self-censorship. When people write about and sincerely believe in what official propaganda conveys. It is worth noting that the “search for the guilty” in a corrupt, ideologically bankrupt bureaucracy is technically difficult, as removing one link from the chain can break the entire chain. And no matter what the intentions of Ukrainian President Yushchenko were to imprison the criminals, he simply could not do it technically. Thus, the ideologically bankrupt bureaucracy must eventually reach a stalemate, where the masses are dissatisfied, but it is impossible to “appoint” a guilty party, as everyone is implicated.

Middle East

If we look at the issue of societal stability as a problem of the stability of the informational “wind” or flow, the situation in the Middle East becomes clear. An idea-less, corrupt bureaucracy has been unable to cope with the challenges of the 21st century — the internet, with its flat surface where everything is laid bare and where anyone can easily… will find a like-minded person and will not consider themselves outcasts, which will lead them to express themselves even more loudly. Any event that propaganda could previously hide or distort in a “correct” way is now spreading from person to person. The downward flow of propaganda is struggling to keep up with the upward surge. Society is bubbling and boiling over. Converging streams always create turbulence, and there is no ideological, compensatory, rebellious upward flow from below. There is no ideological branch of power. As a result, there are no guilty parties. This is a natural process. The only question is how it will end. But first, we will try to look at some specific and general cases from the perspective of the “information flow” doctrine. For example,

The era before the invention of propaganda

Why was society stable back then? The downward flow of information was weak and depended on the number of heralds, the development of the postal service, and road networks. The more centralized the empire (like Ancient Persia or Ancient Rome), the more attention was paid to these aspects. However, there was still no propaganda, and the opinions of every minor noble were often heard more loudly in local matters than the opinion of the king. What cemented society? Naturally, it was the ideological branch of power. The church bureaucracy, orders, and monasteries served as conduits for the informational avalanche descending from the supreme church authority, and they helped to solidify society. People compared their actions to the “correct” templates imposed by religion. Hence phrases like “you don’t have a cross on you” or “that’s not godly.” And as soon as the church’s informational flow experienced turbulence, society would either immediately or with some delay erupt as well. The Revolutions in the Netherlands and England are prime examples of this. In the first case, it was about the emergence and flourishing of Protestantism, while in the second, George VII first announced church reform, and then his dynasty did not last beyond his children. The first representative of the next dynasty faced serious problems with Parliament, which escalated into what we now call a revolution. It’s important to note that we consider religion natural because it has always existed. However, we should also recognize that we simply do not know of any successful societies without religion. They disappeared in the turbulence of a chaotic, upward, ideologically void flow of information. We are only observing the surviving societies. By the 20th century, religion could be replaced by mass propaganda.

Western world

Western democracies (along with similar countries like Japan) have practically implemented the idea of a “parallel tree” in the form of a two-party system. Yes, the party and business are in cahoots. At the same time, the presence of two competing (or pseudo-competing) forces prevents the establishment of a corrupt pyramid. Lower-level officials cannot rely on the patronage of their superiors, as those superiors are already party-affiliated. Grassroots corruption disappears entirely, while high-level corruption is not tied to mutual protection. There is always someone who can be “designated as guilty.” An official does not gain more stability by engaging in theft. Yes, corruption exists. Very serious corruption. Otherwise, for example, it would be hard to explain why taxpayer money is spent to satisfy the overseas oil interests of large corporate management. However, the absence of grassroots corruption helps reduce the compensatory flow of descending propaganda that addresses the injustices occurring, while the presence of an alternative party allows propagandistic ideas to be channeled through “superconducting” party lines, which also participate in shaping loyalty to the existing order of the ascending flow. Everything is calm. We fight for Democracy, even though we don’t really know what it is, and let my son die for the cause of Democracy in a distant desert on the other side of the world. Interestingly, the Western world pays a lot of attention to the very attributes of power that the ancient Romans and Persians focused on: roads, communications, infrastructure.

Russia

Strangely enough, Russia is following the path of Arab republics. Business and the ruling party are one and the same. Moreover, there is no ideology at all. However, the propaganda machine is working hard to squeeze national unity out of patriotism, “democracy,” and the fight against terrorism, which has conveniently surfaced, and, what is even more terrifying, on the alleged lack of alternatives to the existing power. Understanding the danger of the rising tide, the authorities in Russia are using “troll factories” to suppress and discredit it. These troll factories generate a stream of information that can be perceived as “rising,” but which completely aligns with the descending flow. The Russian segment of the internet is now filled with hysterical propaganda that influences minds just as much as Nazi propaganda did. The bad news is that people are gradually starting to distinguish between propagandists and real users, and this tactic is becoming less effective by the day.

As a final touch, a corrupt pyramid has been established. Why didn’t what happened in the Arab countries happen in Russia? Yes, there is an upward flow. It is being shaped by the internet, social networks, and blogs. It exists, although it is drowned out by the propaganda of internet trolls. At the same time, the population of Russia is aging. There are few young people who are “in the know.” “Their circle was narrow, and they are too far from the people.” In contrast, in the Arab countries, the majority of the population is young. They are citizens of the information age, not immigrants. They all use social media, they use internet messengers, they go to internet cafes, they love smartphones, and what significantly supports their engagement with information technology is their sexual instinct. In these countries, burdened by the hypocrisy of official morality, there is a belief that finding a friend of the opposite sex is much easier online. They seek, they communicate, and they share opinions. And they are the majority. In Russia and Ukraine, however, they are the minority. In Ukraine, for instance, 65% of the population still does not understand why they need the internet at all.

It is important to note that until recently, all successful political projects in Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus relied on a “non-internet” electorate for their political victories. In Ukraine, Tymoshenko was able to find support among pensioners, while Yanukovych sought and found backing among the working class. Yushchenko and his associates simply did not understand what had brought them to power, and instead of addressing the needs of the rising tide and opening up, they first built a fence around the Presidential Administration, which was a visible metaphor for the closed nature of power and its reliance on old propaganda techniques—glorifying the Orange Revolution, and so on. Lukashenko in Belarus will lose power with every pensioner who dies and with every budget worker and proletarian who moves online. The same goes for Putin.

A characteristic reaction

Of course, all of Medvedev’s modernism, whether genuine or superficial, will not be able to tackle the existing corruption pyramid that was built before him. He will either be removed or turned into a clown if he tries to make any radical changes. And if he doesn’t want to (or realizes in time that he can’t), then he will have only one option left — a beehive in the village, discussions about a national idea, and a nice national shirt.

Why are revolutions called velvet?

Most of the recent uprisings have been characterized by a low number of casualties or even a complete absence of them, a sort of “velvet” quality. In this seemingly unnatural “velvetness,” some see the machinations of special services and resort to various conspiracy theories. In reality, the culprit is the same old internet, which facilitates easy exchange of opinions and information. People who share the same knowledge will draw similar conclusions and arrive at the same ideas. Whereas in the past society would split into factions and descend into civil war, which would continue until complete mutual understanding was achieved, now society quickly reaches, if not a consensus, then at least an understanding of the acceptability and legitimacy of others’ opinions. There’s no one to fight against. Essentially, everyone agrees with everyone else. This is a very interesting characteristic of a grassroots, non-ideologically provoked, rising movement. It unites people through shared thoughts and ideas. Of course, for now, the boundary of opinions lies along the line of “with internet – without internet.” This is why the Orange Revolution in Ukraine is sometimes referred to as the revolution of office plankton — those who have internet access.

Islamism

It’s no wonder that many are concerned about the rise of Islamism and the cloning of the Iranian political system.

First of all, it’s convenient. There’s no need to come up with new ideas or compete with religious worldviews. You just need to amplify the traditional religious information flow with megaphones. And I mean that literally.

Secondly, the division of bureaucratic pyramids into “ideological” and “secular” provides stability and creates a properly oriented upward flow, as we discussed above.

Thirdly, the greedy power holders from Arab countries find it difficult to accept the idea of multipartyism and the thought of having to share power with others. They still want to appoint their relatives or buyers of these positions to key posts. Therefore, they do not see a threat in the rise of “non-partisan” forces, as they would have to share positions with the forces of an “alternative” party and would have to fear exposure of corruption.

Fourthly, and this is the most interesting part, there is no need for any particular drive towards Islamism. Simply put, among all the alternatives mentioned, Islamism is the most resilient, and with the “explosion” of the internet, it is gaining a well-oriented upward flow of supporters for Sharia and fundamentalism. In other words, the events in the Arab world will lead to successive changes in the ruling elite, which will not be able to offer anything new compared to the old regime, until supporters of the Iranian model accidentally or evolutionarily come to power, at which point the changes in leadership will cease.

The elite of Arab countries, mostly Sunnis, believe that secular power should be separated from religious authority. Shiites (Iran) argue that the supreme ruler should be a representative of the religion. It seems that the Iranian model is likely to lead to corruption and the establishment of a unified corrupt ideological pyramid. However, it is in Iran that the ideological and secular powers have managed to be separated. In Sunni societies, there is virtually no ideological authority. Religion has been pushed to the periphery, despite the number of its followers among ordinary people. This is why Arab leaders have a strong dislike for Iran. The Iranian model poses a direct threat to their wealth, prosperity, and the right to plunder without consequences.

There was an idea, it was good.

We often complain about the “lack of ideas” in our society. The argument goes that when there is an idea, there is a goal. Yes, an ideologized society is more stable and predictable. Life is more comfortable in an ideologized society, but as a consequence, those who live comfortably pay less attention to how, who, and to what extent they are being exploited. Ideological societies are not always stable. They remain stable until the next turbulence. Their instability is a result of the artificial efforts required to maintain the ideological information flow. Any ideological society will experience revolutions. On the other hand, a society without ideas will eventually self-destruct. Is it really that bad? No. Precisely because we now have social networks, because transparency is increasing day by day, and because the voice from below is growing louder, we can confidently say that a society without a unifying downward flow can only exist stably if the upward flow is equally, if not more, stable, simply because people who share the same knowledge come together. identical viewpoints Текст для перевода: ..