The Knowledge Gap is Killing American Public Trust
At Ease, Soldier
A few weeks ago, I started writing this thought piece centered around the role of technology and how those who are proficient in its use play an essential role in our country's defense. Not long after, the events in Afghanistan began to unfold. I paused to reassess what I wrote, as it presented an incredible opportunity to dive deeper into this topic. Ultimately, I was left with the question, "What is the current state of American public trust, and how have geopolitical disputes and technology affected it?"
A note to all the new kids (welcome); make sure to check out why MWF @ 8 is valuable to you
If you’re a regular, share MWF through the button below or by forwarding the email to someone else who would enjoy today’s content. We could use some more readers like yourself!
Lastly, follow me on Twitter and the newsletter on Instagram for ways to connect. I want to hear from you on how to make MWF better!
👇 👇 👇
In the 21st Century, an overlooked part of turning 18-years-old as an American male is registering for Selective Services. There was a point in time, not too long ago, when this was a nightmare for families. Fortunately for me, I did not think twice about registering. It's been 80 years since World War II and 50 years since the Vietnam War. Nobody under 65 in the U.S. (83% of the population) has ever had their name in a raffle.
But global conflict, or wars for that matter, have not stopped. Since the last draft in 1973, seemingly every year, the U.S. is involved in geopolitical disputes that teeter with or create violence. Lucky for us, modern warfare looks a whole lot different than wars we grew up studying. Modern warfare is highly technical in every sense of the word.
Today, with the help of war history, we will look at the current state of America's public trust. Its unlikely war will ever consist of large battlefield fronts again. This post is not meant to be highly technical on specifics of modern warfare. Instead, the battlefield has moved to the internet. Therefore, people proficient in technology are the most valuable assets to our defense, just like they are the most valuable assets to the private sector. This institutional shift is a part of the growing knowledge gap crumbling American public trust. And it's becoming larger by the second.
Before I go any further, this is in no way an indictment on those who serve our country. They freaking train for combat (for events like the escalation in Afghanistan), and I write a newsletter. They are the reason everything we do is possible. This thought piece simply involves the transition of war.
History of War
War is about as fundamental to human existence as oxygen. In Carl von Clausewitz's book, On War, he describes war as "The continuation of politics carried on by other means." Political power struggles have plagued humanity since the beginning. World conflict has been so prevalent that, of the last 3,400 years of recorded history, we have spent only 268 of them in peace2.
The origins of war strategy are two fronts separated by a comfortable distance between the two armies. Once battle commenced, soldiers would charge each other with sword and shield and fight till one side retreated. Day after day, this would go on until there was a surrender. As time went on, weapon technology advanced, and battle strategies shifted seismically with it.
Archers and cannons expanded the battlefield
Forts impeded close contact
Muskets forced distance between fronts
Telegraphs allowed for quicker communication
This brings us to the World Wars. WWI is the first war headlined with modern machine warfare. Ironically, at the beginning of WWI, the all-mighty German Army battle strategy was centered around cannons and forts – like something out of medieval times. The German's pivoted quickly as automatic weapons, grenades, tanks/turrets birthed "trench warfare." It was suicide to charge an army, so soldiers on the battlefield would dig trenches to avoid overhead fire.
As WWII rolled around, battle strategy is unrecognizable from previous wars due to radar and accurate bombing (and eventually the atomic bomb). We now have known enemy locations and precise bombing to destroy miles of area. Thus, the world enters nuclear warfare.
What's the strategic trend among the thousands of years of war? Militaries developing solutions to be as far away from the enemy as possible. Every new weapon seemed to take armies another step backward to safety. The trend continues today, where we don't even have to see the enemy face to face. Battles are going on with people in a secure room on a secure connection controlling online structures thousands of miles away.
War Wages in Darkness
Another pivotal piece of technology in the World Wars was the start of mass communication. Across the world, anyone could hear about the war news not long after it had happened. Photographers and videographers followed the events and documented the scenes to the world. But not all of these graphic scenes would be broadcasted; the government would only relay specific heroic images of U.S. soldiers to the public.
Even if the U.S. was victorious, we know the scenes of the war were horrific. Tom Lea was an exception to valiant U.S. propaganda and created WWII's most graphic images for Life Magazine. Lea stated about his work:
I did not report hearsay; I did not imagine, or fake, or improvise; I did not cuddle up with personal emotion, moral notion, or political opinion about War with a capital W. I reported in pictures what I saw with my own two eyes, wide open.
One of his most famous images is the "2,000 Yard Stare" of a soldier at the Battle of Peleliu in the Pacific:
The Battle of Peleliu raged in 1944, with Germany neutralized. It was at a point in the war that many started to question the efforts. Are thousands of soldiers dying by the day for no reason? This question began to decimate American public trust in the war. Since Japan would not surrender, we had to deliver a decisive blow in a nuclear bomb to stop the fighting.
Like Americans at the end of WWII and especially Vietnam, we can comprehend why there would be calls to stop the war efforts. Americans can see it and understand the implications. Everything is clear when events are out in the open; we can only speculate when war is waged in darkness.
Modern Warfare
The United States Department of Defense is the largest federal branch of the government, not to mention, it's the single largest employer in the world. There are 1.4 million on active duty and another 700,000 in civilian personnel. Naturally, many agencies form the Dept. of Defense. The government is even confused by how many there are, but we recognize 17 central agencies. With respect to the Army, Navy, and Air Force, these agencies work in mostly "intelligence" roles at the Pentagon.
We know the government keeps copious amounts of information from the public. That's just part of running a country (the most prosperous country ever, for that matter). Much like how fast technology advances in the private sector, the government stays right behind in the technology race. But increasingly, these institutions make vast tech advancements while most of the general public nods their head along.
Moore's Law is the observation that the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years. This aspect of technological progress is important as the capabilities of many digital electronic devices are strongly linked to Moore's Law1. Below is a chart of how Moore's law is progressing, highlighting technology overall:
Now, compare that to the Pew Research chart showing public trust in the government over a similar period:
You could correlate a plethora of circumstances to the decline of public trust, but the rise in technology is the most sensible. What happens to American public trust when information becomes incomprehensible? In other words, if the government told/showed/broadcasted what is going on behind the scenes, would the majority of the population understand it to support it?
Afghanistan
I would consider myself a decent learner, but for the life of me, I cannot figure out the Afghanistan war - or Iraq war - or whatever we've been doing in the Middle East for the past two decades. Call it incompetence, political games, nation-building, or any of the like; it's been one different story after another. I read a good quote recently on government conspiracies that went something like, "Why would I believe the government is up to some elaborate plan when they can't fix potholes in the road?"
I have never believed the government is incompetent. Yes, the decision in Afghanistan was ultimately Biden's and one of the biggest gaffs in recent history. But has the past 20 years not been one big gaff? Biden said it best when he laid out this has been on the shoulders of four U.S. Presidents, two Republican, two Democratic. Someone had to play the role of villain. What do bipartisan dilemmas mean? A. It's a mistake, but B. There is a scheme in place above party politics. Every President, minus 1st term Bush, wanted to end this struggle.
Remember, we have hundreds of thousands in defense intelligence committees. I'm highlighting the concern: We're losing public trust as more of these conflicts play out behind closed doors. Thus, we are left with occasional horrific scenes like Afghanistan, which raises questions about everything.
Russian Pipeline Hack
I could not meticulously explain to you how the internet works. The big picture makes sense, and I could Google the details but never confidently explain it. With the internet's fundamental to our society, that's the equivalent of saying I don't know how my shower turns on.
Now, multiply the internet x10, and we come to where our connected infrastructure is. A few months ago, a hack of the Colonial Natural Gas Pipeline's systems produced a gas scare that stretched across the eastern part of the U.S. It created shock and panic as many rushed to fill up on gasoline in fear of a severe shortage. Not too long after the incident, the government indicated growing suspicion that the cyberattack came from Russia. Millions of Americans are affected by one single system hack, and all we can do is believe the government.
Let's compare the Colonial Pipeline incident to the 1980s "Cold War" with Russia. Instead of a modern systems attack, pretend Russia bombed our east coast natural gas pipelines, a plausible scenario in the 1980s. Americans would immediately see this, know the implications, and support any U.S. response. Whereas a tiny systems hack can cause the same hysteria, we are entirely in the dark of how it happened and any U.S. response.
And who knows how many other cyber instances there have been?
We withdrew 2,500 U.S. troops from Afghanistan, and everyone has lost their minds. We can see the repercussions. When these types of events used to unite us around a cause, it now divides us at the core. That's what technology does.
"Nerds" Rule the World
When you drive through small-town America, 2021 hadn't produced much change since 1996 (or 1960, for that matter), when I was born. As I become increasingly immersed in the tech world, it constantly occurs to me that half of our country lives in rural environments or "urban" places that embrace rural lifestyles. Generally, they don't care about blockchain, cybersecurity, A.I., robotics, or the like. They care about having a job and nobody bothering them.
But it wasn't that long ago that these people were the reason for U.S. stardom. From being the manpower in wars to farming to factory jobs, it's blue-collar workers that shaped America. Many have tried to predict technology being the downfall of these communities, but right now, there is a great need for blue-collar jobs occupied by rural participants. One of my friends in the supply chain said there are dock hands that load and unload shipments making six figures, more than his desk job salary.
Thus, technology has stayed siloed in cities. When valuable information remains siloed for certain people to access, we create what is called a "knowledge gap." We haven't seen the wave of job demolition tech was predicted to spurn, but we have seen the disparity it produces. Sure, rural America is still producing the manpower, but we need the brainpower more than ever. ~ This is very fixable, but our education system is a sitcom at this point. We'll leave that rant be for the day. ~
2%
When government institutions depend on technology as criteria, the last thing you want is only a few people capable of serving. The frustrating part is that nobody cares. We've always relied on Silicon Valley minds to solve our problems to live more efficient lives. That's happened tenfold, so why move a finger? But with every technological step they take, everyone else takes two steps backward.
Our whole day-to-day life abides by computer coding, yet only about 2% of Americans can code (and probably much less if that count is including immigrants, which it should). I'm not arguing that everyone should code, but this 2% is actively building our world. They create everything we consume.
Since the public sector follows the private sector, government decisions are at the complete mercy of this 2%. The world is racing to be the most technologically advanced. Domestically, we're in the political environment of predictive models and analytics making policy decisions. What if the questions shift from whom we want in office to whom we want to build these systems?
The trends of geopolitical disputes portray how the power has shifted from manpower to brainpower. If our wars transition to the internet, we can expect almost everything the public sector does to be in the same category. "Nerds" rule the world, and the knowledge gap is only going to get more extreme. How do we turn American public trust around? For starters, the public has to understand what's going on.
Final Thoughts
If you have followed along with MWF, you know I'm an optimistic person. I'm not too fond of scary tech pieces because technology has made the world such a better place. But this is a caution of how we have to figure out governing with technology on the fly. There is no historical playbook for this.
What has made our country so prosperous is an agreed-upon set of ideals of individual freedom, so much so we showed the willingness to kill each other to keep. This past year, more than ever, I've seen the graphic that says, "Hard times create strong men; strong men create good times; good times create weak men; weak men create hard times." While abhorrible in nature, American conflict and struggle unite us.
The "Greatest Generation" probably has more love for the country than anyone because they saved it. Additionally, why do you think our brothers and sisters in the black community are so unified? Their heritage is rooted in overcoming struggle. The same goes for Christianity; we're a group of people who identify in the same struggle.
Technology doesn't produce any struggle. If struggle is a criterion for unity, technology creates division - at least at its current state.
References:
1. https://ourworldindata.org/technological-progress
2. https://www.greynun.org/gn2/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/US-Involvement-in-War.pdf
3. https://www.nammo.com/story/what-could-the-next-war-look-like/
4. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/05/17/public-trust-in-government-1958-2021/