This infuriatingly undefined question is one of the reasons I decided I don't have time to struggle with this game. I like having a reputation as a superforecaster from GJP4, but this game seems designed to teach us humility by forcing us in cases like this to forecast the organizers of this game instead of the apparent question. Instead, now I'm concentrating on the upcoming Hybrid Forecasting Competition. I hope to help design one of the competing versions of this game, but if I turn out to not be on a winning proposal team, then I'll jump at the chance to forecast on some other contractor's version of the game. http://www.iarpa.gov/index.php/research-programs/hfc
@000, I don't think the comparison class for this question is analysis of U.S. politics. Nor do I think I would call what we have in the U.S. a "deep state," as I understand that term. It's more like Versailles in the 18th century. As I understand it, "deep state" implies something if not conspriratorial as such, that least completely hidden from view. I think the comparison class for this question would be to Soviet-era Kremlinology. Plenty of people had a great deal to say about power in the USSR, but decision-making in Moscow was opaque and meant to remain that way. Even the most knowledgeable people in the west were guessing. So the matter isn't about knowing of the existence of the Mostazafan Foundation; it's about knowing what the board members of the Mostazafan Foundation say to each other outside the minutes of their meetings. That's the deep state, and that's what we can't know.
@000 and @rjfmgy: While direct access to communications of the deep state would be preferable, I believe that it is always possible to "surmise" an understanding via reverse-engineering from observables. It's just an advanced Theory of Mind application. I'm seeking to build a theoretical library on this.
@rjfmgy, have you ever tried to have a real conversation and get a real response from any elected official in this country, from Mayor on up? I have, multiple times, for non-crazy items like health insurance, commuter rail and highway construction, and there is really a glass ceiling there that I don't think most people understand exists. Do you really think that people with crazy amounts of money don't make assumptions about their place in the world, and don't use the power that is given to them? When Donald Trump goes to kiss Sheldon Adelson's ring, do you think the transaction means nothing and has no consequences on how our country is governed? And do you really think most people understand what unelected non-government people hold what power in this country, and how they exercise it? I know this country is better off, but in many ways, I don't think it is qualitatively different in terms of Deep State existence and topology from Iran. Panama Papers really set the tone for how things work at a certain level. Seriously. There's your private school folks and your public school folks, and there really is a difference in what space they are operating in.
@000: I'm looking to build a theoretical knowledge base of exactly that which you are describing. I'm thinking that the term "deep state" is not a satisfactory label for this phenomena, and in that sense it remains unnamed. I take for it granted that such a phenomena exists. I'm sticking with informal versus formal for the time being (perhaps because these are the labels I adopted when I undertook an undergraduate independent study investigating this phenomena). You touch upon a number of interesting aspects: "most people understand exists," "the power that is given to them." I'd add the power that they are allowed to exercise, and that it is the exercise of informal power that can be cognitively penetrated and understood, if one only has but the proper framework.
That would be a start to parse the issue of whether someone who "earns" a billion dollars "is given" or takes or whatever the power that they have. But the power is there.
"Deep State" is a handy term that can be defined by something like number of connections. You could define someone is "deep" in the "deep state" if they have very many connections in a social network diagram. A synonym: "very well connected". Someone with thousands of connections presumably is more influential. However it is also possible but less likely that someone with few connections exerts much influence.
Another term we don't use in this country, almost as a taboo, is "class". It is nearly impossible for anybody to hold in their mind the idea that there is an upper class in the United States, with upper class privileges distinct from those of other classes. Yet, this may in fact exist, and not just in the cabin of an airline. The median apartment in New York City costs $1.15MM. Who has that kind of money? It is simplistic to use money as a dividing line for class separations, but also not entirely incorrect. If you cluster people on a graph who have $1MM to spend on an apartment with say apartment cost as X axis and "power" in some measure on Y axis, I think you'd find there is a big clear separation between the cluster of people who can afford a $1MM apartment and those who can afford a $100K apartment, with a big void in purchasing power between the $100K level the $1MM level. This airless void between one purchasing power level and the next is tempting to use as a class-defining boundary.
@000, Here's what I'm saying, and this is all that I'm saying: Assuming the article you linked is accurate, (and I assume it is), there is no way to meaningfully forecast this question. A forecaster can research every Iranian political figure, religious figure, political party, religious organization, foundation, etc. and still be unable to forecast the question since the resolution of the question will be decided by a comparatively small number of persons in deliberations that are held in secret. If we don't know who these persons are, what criteria they will use to decide the question, and the conditions by which they decide, we can't make any kind of educated forecast.
As for the deep state, it doesn't merely mean that people at the top are isolated from the rest of us. It means there is a secret shadow government. Of course unelected people have too much power, and government at all levels in unresponsive. This is not the same thing as being governed by an invisible cabal. You say,
"...I don't think it is qualitatively different in terms of Deep State existence and topology from Iran."
Your examples don't indicate the existence of a deep state; they simply demonstrate that the United States has the same kind of social relations and governing class that have been the rule throughout history. In a country with a true deep state, we wouldn't have any obvious examples of a deep state. That's the whole point of a shadow government.
Everybody knows this question is crap. It even drove one of our colleagues to commit 1/3rd cyber hara-kiri.
The question is whether there is any related question you could pose that somehow better expresses what it is we think the sponsors might want to know about the subject. Unfortunately the sponsors, entirely ignorant of Iranian culture and politics, bought into the Washington Post framework. Imagine a sponsor that actually knew something about Iran, and ask what question such a person might want to pose.
The questions I would ask are: "When will Iran man it's own consulate in Washington?" and "When will Iran ask the US to open it's own consulate in Tehran?"
@rjfmgy, one year I sent my son to a kindergarten for the elite in Manhattan that cost $40,000 a year and had it's own intelligence agency on contract to ferret out and identify sources of negative commentary in social media. True story, and I'm not saying that with any Christopher Walken Deer Hunter watch-related overtones. I may be having you on but maybe not. There are a lot of power structures in this country that are low profile but real and need to be seen to be believed. I'm not saying we don't live in a democracy but, as Manhattan resident Donald Trump will now attest, it's not always obvious who holds the keys to the kingdom.
"There are a lot of power structures in this country that are low profile but real and need to be seen to be believed."
Yes, but we all know that.
"... one year I sent my son to a kindergarten for the elite in Manhattan that cost $40,000 a year and had it's own intelligence agency on contract to ferret out and identify sources of negative commentary in social media."
This infuriatingly undefined question is one of the reasons I decided I don't have time to struggle with this game. I like having a reputation as a superforecaster from GJP4, but this game seems designed to teach us humility by forcing us in cases like this to forecast the organizers of this game instead of the apparent question. Instead, now I'm concentrating on the upcoming Hybrid Forecasting Competition. I hope to help design one of the competing versions of this game, but if I turn out to not be on a winning proposal team, then I'll jump at the chance to forecast on some other contractor's version of the game. http://www.iarpa.gov/index.php/research-programs/hfc
Anyone who wants to follow me offline as I seek the Holy Grail of a more powerful aid to us forecasters, you can reach me at carolyn.meinel@cmeinel.com. Meanwhile I'll do my best to get OFF this game instead of being listed as inactive. So hasta vista to my followers who aren't already interacting with me outside this game: @Xsess @Dwight-Smith @thmnewman @Gil-Edgar @tmahoney @lsgold7 @Counterintelligence @Enthu @Hochstetler @Delorean @g @howard @facetious @The_Gnome @BG1 @DrStrangelove @Flyn1200 @PianoPicasso @AndersAsa @writeitdown @HW15 @tkimble @Doudtful @firemansghost @mparrault @lindsey @Dima-K @crntaylor @azivkovic @Mos @MattWard @AlexisTocqueville @luckyomari @Ermonic @Pstauble @Edwinian @Clairvoyance @ACurmudgeon @ @ts2m @M3T1tus @dada @GeneH @S1 @ConnorM @peterhansen90 @Bklyn_j @dniewood @deggen @Etsudo @praedico @Spyglass @Manfred @VoxVox @FuturoMAGE @subject1138 @MAA414 @richtyge @gkamstra @RCScheffers @Random @Spandrelbarca @Rene @gstaneff @fifty-sixty @spotter @dbealick @davidk @terobrandstaka @RobK @walt @Rectitude @malcmur @dominich @Konrad @balbec @Ioana @Raisinville @rjfmgy @Rote @TopQuark @ESR @Xu @sharms10k @Paul15 @NickLutz @Ritam @seveDB @Jean-Pierre @Bill @Agent0090 @RolandKofler @Aches @JoeG @madre @Paul_Theron @September @DariusX @AgentCarter @JeanP @tumbleweed @Reynard @SmallTown-Gal
@000, I don't think the comparison class for this question is analysis of U.S. politics. Nor do I think I would call what we have in the U.S. a "deep state," as I understand that term. It's more like Versailles in the 18th century. As I understand it, "deep state" implies something if not conspriratorial as such, that least completely hidden from view. I think the comparison class for this question would be to Soviet-era Kremlinology. Plenty of people had a great deal to say about power in the USSR, but decision-making in Moscow was opaque and meant to remain that way. Even the most knowledgeable people in the west were guessing. So the matter isn't about knowing of the existence of the Mostazafan Foundation; it's about knowing what the board members of the Mostazafan Foundation say to each other outside the minutes of their meetings. That's the deep state, and that's what we can't know.
@000 and @rjfmgy: While direct access to communications of the deep state would be preferable, I believe that it is always possible to "surmise" an understanding via reverse-engineering from observables. It's just an advanced Theory of Mind application. I'm seeking to build a theoretical library on this.
@rjfmgy, have you ever tried to have a real conversation and get a real response from any elected official in this country, from Mayor on up? I have, multiple times, for non-crazy items like health insurance, commuter rail and highway construction, and there is really a glass ceiling there that I don't think most people understand exists. Do you really think that people with crazy amounts of money don't make assumptions about their place in the world, and don't use the power that is given to them? When Donald Trump goes to kiss Sheldon Adelson's ring, do you think the transaction means nothing and has no consequences on how our country is governed? And do you really think most people understand what unelected non-government people hold what power in this country, and how they exercise it? I know this country is better off, but in many ways, I don't think it is qualitatively different in terms of Deep State existence and topology from Iran. Panama Papers really set the tone for how things work at a certain level. Seriously. There's your private school folks and your public school folks, and there really is a difference in what space they are operating in.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/sheldon-adelson-trump-220860
@000: I'm looking to build a theoretical knowledge base of exactly that which you are describing. I'm thinking that the term "deep state" is not a satisfactory label for this phenomena, and in that sense it remains unnamed. I take for it granted that such a phenomena exists. I'm sticking with informal versus formal for the time being (perhaps because these are the labels I adopted when I undertook an undergraduate independent study investigating this phenomena). You touch upon a number of interesting aspects: "most people understand exists," "the power that is given to them." I'd add the power that they are allowed to exercise, and that it is the exercise of informal power that can be cognitively penetrated and understood, if one only has but the proper framework.
@redacted, as @Littlefinger said, "Knowledge is power", but as Cersei replied "Power is power".
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/04/18/the-raw-appeal-of-game-of-thrones
That would be a start to parse the issue of whether someone who "earns" a billion dollars "is given" or takes or whatever the power that they have. But the power is there.
"Deep State" is a handy term that can be defined by something like number of connections. You could define someone is "deep" in the "deep state" if they have very many connections in a social network diagram. A synonym: "very well connected". Someone with thousands of connections presumably is more influential. However it is also possible but less likely that someone with few connections exerts much influence.
Another term we don't use in this country, almost as a taboo, is "class". It is nearly impossible for anybody to hold in their mind the idea that there is an upper class in the United States, with upper class privileges distinct from those of other classes. Yet, this may in fact exist, and not just in the cabin of an airline. The median apartment in New York City costs $1.15MM. Who has that kind of money? It is simplistic to use money as a dividing line for class separations, but also not entirely incorrect. If you cluster people on a graph who have $1MM to spend on an apartment with say apartment cost as X axis and "power" in some measure on Y axis, I think you'd find there is a big clear separation between the cluster of people who can afford a $1MM apartment and those who can afford a $100K apartment, with a big void in purchasing power between the $100K level the $1MM level. This airless void between one purchasing power level and the next is tempting to use as a class-defining boundary.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/nyregion/manhattan-apartment-prices-reached-1-15-million-mark-in-2015-reports-say.html
@000, Here's what I'm saying, and this is all that I'm saying: Assuming the article you linked is accurate, (and I assume it is), there is no way to meaningfully forecast this question. A forecaster can research every Iranian political figure, religious figure, political party, religious organization, foundation, etc. and still be unable to forecast the question since the resolution of the question will be decided by a comparatively small number of persons in deliberations that are held in secret. If we don't know who these persons are, what criteria they will use to decide the question, and the conditions by which they decide, we can't make any kind of educated forecast.
As for the deep state, it doesn't merely mean that people at the top are isolated from the rest of us. It means there is a secret shadow government. Of course unelected people have too much power, and government at all levels in unresponsive. This is not the same thing as being governed by an invisible cabal. You say,
"...I don't think it is qualitatively different in terms of Deep State existence and topology from Iran."
Your examples don't indicate the existence of a deep state; they simply demonstrate that the United States has the same kind of social relations and governing class that have been the rule throughout history. In a country with a true deep state, we wouldn't have any obvious examples of a deep state. That's the whole point of a shadow government.
@rjfmgy, how do you know we aren't being governed by the International Order of St. Hubertus? http://www.vocativ.com/290321/inside-scalias-very-very-weird-secret-hunting-society/
Everybody knows this question is crap. It even drove one of our colleagues to commit 1/3rd cyber hara-kiri.
The question is whether there is any related question you could pose that somehow better expresses what it is we think the sponsors might want to know about the subject. Unfortunately the sponsors, entirely ignorant of Iranian culture and politics, bought into the Washington Post framework. Imagine a sponsor that actually knew something about Iran, and ask what question such a person might want to pose.
The questions I would ask are: "When will Iran man it's own consulate in Washington?" and "When will Iran ask the US to open it's own consulate in Tehran?"
@000, Were you having me on all this time? And I fell for it?
@rjfmgy, one year I sent my son to a kindergarten for the elite in Manhattan that cost $40,000 a year and had it's own intelligence agency on contract to ferret out and identify sources of negative commentary in social media. True story, and I'm not saying that with any Christopher Walken Deer Hunter watch-related overtones. I may be having you on but maybe not. There are a lot of power structures in this country that are low profile but real and need to be seen to be believed. I'm not saying we don't live in a democracy but, as Manhattan resident Donald Trump will now attest, it's not always obvious who holds the keys to the kingdom.
"There are a lot of power structures in this country that are low profile but real and need to be seen to be believed."
Yes, but we all know that.
"... one year I sent my son to a kindergarten for the elite in Manhattan that cost $40,000 a year and had it's own intelligence agency on contract to ferret out and identify sources of negative commentary in social media."
Yeah, but that's not what "deep state" means.