Worth Reading: 1993 Paper On Strategic Fraud ... Applies To Diverse Contexts (& OODA Loops)

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)

OODA Loops aren't active ONLY in warfare, as the 1993 paper linked to below clearly shows.

Looting: The Economic Underworld of Bankruptcy for Profit

The authors received a Nobel Prize based on this work, about just one aspect of 2G-5G war by parasites on their host, the USA and it's MiddleClass.

That Nobel award actually shows how naive people in other fields can be about the scope for applying misdirection when mastering Policy OODA Loops. After all, the "OODA" loop has been actively studied since circa 1926-1939, as Walter Shewhart's PDSA Cycle, and it's actual existence certainly predates the human species. The bigger the group brain, the more feedback loops contribute to the statistics of it's process control. Only the scale and the methods change.

We're all politicians now. That's what Democracy means. Hence, fraud and misdirection are our constant companions, everywhere, even in our own mirrors.

If we can't trigger an honest effort to re-orient after our own acts - in the midst of an unending FutureShockWave - then we can't possibly make adaptive adjustments in response to all the repercussions we ourselves trigger.

And if we're not re-assessing our own impact on our own outcomes, we can't hope to field OODA loops that are better/faster/leaner than the OODA loops of others - including diverse frauds, Innocent or not, both domestic and foreign.

Ironically, complacency involves actively defrauding ourselves of our future options.

Have you ever actually visualized a Control Fraud lobby arresting a Democracy's OODA Loop? It happens. Remember the Keating-5? The neutering of Brooksley Borne? Or the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act?

There have been more examples, in all disciplines and all arenas, and more are undoubtedly in the works. It's up to us to safeguard our policy OODA loops. That's possible, since none of us is as smart as all of us ... but that only matters if enough of us participate in our national OODA loop.

Until then, a group brain is a terrible thing to waste.

Biology-101 ..... Does Institutional Persistence Without Change Slow Adaptive Rate? (Does a Duck Swim?)

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)





So was Minsky the only economist who ever took biology 101?

Why don't all economics students learn this BEFORE starting college?

"The very stability of institutions .. is .. the source of political decay [as] circumstances change and institutions fail to adapt."

Ya think? (Really, I had no idea that people in other professions had NOT learned that at the onset of their education!)

That observation was the STARTING point of the theory of evolution - articulated and discussed as early as 1840 - and the onset of modern biology.

170 years ago, and that's not an axiom of economics? What the hell happened to the fundamental concept of a well-rounded education? Today's specialists wander only among their own choir?

If at least 10% of an electorate doesn't understand some prerequisite for democratic organization ... then that electorate won't require their politicians to understand. Consequently, Policy Space will shrink, and Policy Agility will dwindle. Without an informed electorate, an informed policy staff is highly improbable.

It's that simple?

"We" as a people are what we (in aggregate) train and practice becoming? Failing to quickly incorporate adaptive perspectives into preparatory education amounts to yet another shabby trick - played on ourselves!

This naturally leads to a simple conclusion, borrowed from the field of statistical process control. "Cease, forever, checking for [Adaptive Value] after the fact. Instead, [continuously manage Adaptive Value from the onset of the development process]."

In short, if we don't revitalize K-12 education, we can't succeed in our own Adaptive Race. Nor will our erstwhile democracy.

With Process Issues This Gaping ... Who Knows What HASN'T Fallen Through Cracks In Our Bureaucratic TARP?

Commentary by Roger Erickson

How on earth could a junior analyst, possibly improve the world .. over the decisions of those with .. authority?

This is a curiously loaded statement with multiple implications, whether intended or unintended.

Controlling fraud, at all levels? How on earth can any whistleblower EVER speak truth to power?

If a person this compromised and unprepared, no matter how intelligent, could be haphazardly saddled with so much responsibility for shepherding our own military risk exposure ... what does that say about the level of competence - and responsibility - of those in ranks above him or her?*

If we have to worry more about our own people talking to our own citizens about our own actions ... than we worry about what supposed enemies are doing ... then we're clearly doing the wrong things from the get go!

Given this example, it's no wonder that more sophisticated people in government and on Wall Street - even with less intelligence - were embezzling such massive amounts of fiat from the US Middle Class, by diverting it to maladaptive purposes. What good is Public Purpose if it's stolen, and misapplied to purposes that cause net harm to public purpose?

*Haven't yet heard any summary of how many heads rolled above Bradley Manning's command level, while taking responsibility for the more than one train of incompetent events that led up to the whistleblowing actions.