The gaslighting guide to strategy

Not telling the truth is serious art. Outright lying is silly, as most educated people see through it. But gaslighting or artfully bs’ing is an in-demand skill.

Some cow manures make me chuckle, such as posts on my feed that open with

“We are often asked…”

The reason for this opening is to make the person posting looks more like an “authority” than he is. Pretending to answer the question “objectively” but then sneaking in a favorable mention of your product (e.g., software piece) is not artful. This shtick defeats the whole stance as an “objective expert.” If you are not good at bs’ing don’t try it. You look disingenuous.

If you are not good at bs’ing don’t try it. You look disingenuous.

Some cattle pies just make me shake my head in amazement. A “tip” from a content consultant that popped up advised beginners about creating posts on LinkedIn. Tip #6 stated: “Avoid engaging with controversial content or comments. All your activity is featured on your profile.” That’s where the b--s of marketers shines through: If you shy away from controversies, post images of kittens. It’s the same people who state, “politics doesn’t belong on LinkedIn.” I’d agree if they also said politics doesn’t belong in the economy and Woke doesn’t belong in Corporate. Otherwise, being vanilla doesn’t show strength, it shows vanilla.

Being vanilla doesn't show strength, it shows vanilla

But these examples pale against the more serious gaslighting regarding strategic options.

The worst kind of b--s

If you read news analysis these days, you get the impression that there are always only two options for major decisions and nothing in between. The middle disappeared under mass media bias.

In politics, bs’ing is part of life we all accept and expect, but one loses all credibility if one produces too many piles. That is what happened to Trump as he veered more and more into an alternate reality. But the other side, claiming superiority of intellect and integrity, then got…Biden.

The Biden administration presented the unmitigated, unforgettably humiliating bolting of the US from Afghanistan as a choice between the commitment of hundreds of thousands of troops forever vs. “bring our guys back home.” Of course, this is the worst kind of b--s: manipulative, disingenuous, slippery, suitable only for total sycophants like Colbert. It seems independent voters are catching up to this gaslighting, and Republicans may win back Congress in 2022. Sometimes, just one option is good.

In discussing Covid and various measures to combat it, it seems, again, there are only two options. Life-destroying lockdowns, 7 layers’ masks, vaccines every Tuesday, fines/prisons/online-education for disobedience versus dead bodies lining the streets like Brazil. The other side presents it as totalitarian dystopia, herding the sheep to re-education camps just for asking people to cover their orifices in closed quarters. But are these the only two options? A comparison of Sweden’s approach to UK (the much more apple to apple comparison than to say, Finland) has shown an insightful and uncharacteristic middle of the road’s perspective (backed by ample data) that is rare. In this case, the article in The Spectator (link in the comment section) just expanded the view from Covid alone to a more balanced view of life (and death) in a rational society and showed why Sweden comes up on top. Alas, more than two extremes are hard for cognitively-challenged mainstream media (e.g., NY Times).

Why are strategic options so hard?

“Progressive” hypocrisy is nothing new, and they are not alone. The other side is full of it as well, though it isn’t as self-righteous. Trump betrayed the Kurds. Obama betrayed the Syrians. Washington seems to be turning into BC, not DC- the Betrayal Capital of the world. But morality and decency aside, the question is this:

Why did the Biden administration so carelessly and blindly select the worst option in Afghanistan?

Strategic options are the hardest part of my war games. Imagining options that are logically consistent with both the environment and the internal capabilities is hard enough, but when one adds the layer of management’s schema (known as dynamic consistency), strategic options can become a nightmare.

Strategic options are the hardest part of any war game. They require thinking about other players' reactions.

I reckon that the Biden admin just cared more about its base than it cared about women’s rights or anything right under the Enlighted Taliban. I am sure it didn’t hurt that some political advisors probably muttered under their woke mustaches that a panicky retreat could be blamed on Trump, somehow. Or on Nixon. Or Jefferson. Anybody but Biden.

Trump would have at the least offered the Taliban a Trump Tower in Kabul if it agreed to get all Americans out first in an orderly fashion. Biden offered CRT, so the Taliban had no choice but to take over Kabul quickly.

Perhaps next time, Biden will call me first before making any decision (including which bathroom to use). I’d tell him to consider the following proven techniques to decide which options to choose:

1.?????Scenario development looks at possible future scenarios and attempts to find a robust strategy in as many cases as possible.

2.?????Wargaming/game theory/simulation consider the likely reactions to your strategic move by third parties and choose the one with the most trade-offs (for competitors). You must think through trade-offs, not just assume competitors, to quote the shameless Biden, are “highly unlikely” to react.

3.?????Consider “white spaces” where conventional wisdom suggests there are no opportunities. Ask: What if…

4.?????Ignore those who think strategy changes every five minutes and the fundamentals lessons of strategic failures are irrelevant because of???????(fill the blank, Saigon stars with S and Kabul with K, is one example)

5.?????Have some values. Have integrity. Take responsibility when you fail to listen to your own intelligence agencies. It’s hard, but it is worth it. Ooops, I am back to b---s produced by hypocrites. Sorry.

For an alternative view of CI in cartoons, follow us at https://twitter.com/InfoAcademyci/status/1435545549437034498. A new CI cartoon every other Wednesday.?Data worshippers may want to skip that to go sell more data.