On the way into work yesterday morning, I heard a story on NPR's Morning Edition (no doubt the revisiting of the ideas in this piece, which features the ideas in this book), about how the Tea Party's future may be endangered by the very elements that made it such a successful political insurgency: it's a sort of headless, anti-hierarchical confederation of people with similar aims but different perspectives and priorities. It operates virally. Its members will temporarily enter into all sorts of alliances, as long as that member stands to benefit, momentarily, from that alliance. It is a leaderless organization
It wouldn't have been possible, the analyst who was interviewed said, without social media.
In this respect, it resembles Al Qaeda: it's Al Qaeda in Armani.
But we shouldn't shake our heads in horror. We should get used to it. From now on, this is increasingly how agendas will be promoted, how alliances will be forged: through viral transmission, shifting alliance, leaderless leadership. It will be true in business and in education and in religion, as it is true in contemporary warfare and insurgency.
This poses an existential threat to all kinds of government, and, ironically, all kinds of spontaneity. Never again can a public meeting or a debate or a meeting of Iraqi police recruits or a council of tribal elders convene without fear of the explosive (all too often, literally) intervention of one individual. Decision-making will retreat behind a maze of protective barriers. Those responsible will fade into the woodwork. New alliances will form.
And in the end, the main victim may well be Democracy.
It wouldn't have been possible, the analyst who was interviewed said, without social media.
In this respect, it resembles Al Qaeda: it's Al Qaeda in Armani.
But we shouldn't shake our heads in horror. We should get used to it. From now on, this is increasingly how agendas will be promoted, how alliances will be forged: through viral transmission, shifting alliance, leaderless leadership. It will be true in business and in education and in religion, as it is true in contemporary warfare and insurgency.
This poses an existential threat to all kinds of government, and, ironically, all kinds of spontaneity. Never again can a public meeting or a debate or a meeting of Iraqi police recruits or a council of tribal elders convene without fear of the explosive (all too often, literally) intervention of one individual. Decision-making will retreat behind a maze of protective barriers. Those responsible will fade into the woodwork. New alliances will form.
And in the end, the main victim may well be Democracy.
Comments