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
Vladdy has missiles in Syria and Iran. MIG's are now in Armenia. The longer the Russian empire stays in the Middle East the bigger the seat at the bargaining table. Remember that Russia has Christianity again. It'a a given that Turkey will pay a price and it will be a dish served cold by a Russian Tsar.
@rjfmgy, you say 'that's not what "deep state" means'. OK so now we have to use the OFFICIAL definition of Deep State. Where can we find it? Wikipedia? OK, it's an entity in Turkey:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state a group of influential anti-democratic coalitions within the Turkish political system, composed of high-level elements within the intelligence services (domestic and foreign), Turkish military, security, judiciary, and mafia
Too specific? How about WikiSpooks:
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Deep_state The leadership of intelligence agencies;
Deep politicians, i.e. individuals who broker agreements between other members of the deep state.
Some senior or longstanding non-elected officials within government (e.g. top civil servants);
Selected individuals with effective control of key commercial, military and/or criminal groups in:
The 'defence' and (anti-)terrorism industries;
The financial sector;
Corporate media[6]
Well, how can we FIND people in this thing? How about PowerBase:
@rjfmgy, how about if attendance at that school leads to snobby high school leads to snobby college and to snobby professional degree along which relationships are formed which lead to fast-track corporate or government jobs with more rapid advancement, much higher pay scale and so on? Are you saying that social networks do not exist in this country which act in effect as labor unions protecting certain classes of jobs and opporunities and keeping those opportunities within that network? Are you claiming that this does not exist in our society and could not constitute a building block of a "deep state" under any definition you wish to propose?
I'm not saying that straight-up meritocratic advancement does not exist in our society, however I would claim without blushing and without having you on that there is a fast track and there are many people who do whatever it takes to get on and stay on that fast track. I would also claim that if there was a "deep state", you would find more fast-trackers claiming membership in that entity than you would up-from-the-bootstraps meritocrats.
Full disclosure here: I'm voting for Bernie. So you can discount what I'm saying just based on that.
@000 the meritocracy window is a lot smaller than when I was a lad. You need ruffles and flourishes to get into a good school these days. We had the privileged in our midst: http://www.paperdiscoverycenter.org/georgemead/ Fortune magazine pretty much had them in the mid-30's in terms of wealthiest in the country. Whelps from other such families were the Spaldings of Caddyshack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhOvYLOkw4c
"Are you saying that social networks do not exist in this country which act in effect as labor unions protecting certain classes of jobs and opporunities and keeping those opportunities within that network?"
No.
"I'm not saying that straight-up meritocratic advancement does not exist in our society..."
Neither am I. Nor am I saying that connections, birth, education, the right schools, social classes and all that don't matter. I am merely saying that I find your definition of the "deep state" to be all over the place, and I therefore don't find it a useful comparison to what I infer the author of the article you linked meant by the term "deep state."
That said, I stand by my contention that the question is unanswerable because the factors governing its resolution are unknowable; according to the article, the composition of the next Majlis will be determined in secret, we don't know exactly by whom, and we don't know how the members they select will conform to the term "conservative," however defined. Since we have no insight into of these things, we are just guessing.
@rjfmgy, I totally agree that this question is not well posed. If you look at Wikipedia they haven't figured it who won the last election years ago, much less this one. The definition of the parties and who belongs on what list is complex and fluid. It is a dictatorship and who gets to show up at the Majlis is not determined at the ballot box. To that extent trying to measure whether Iran has become more politically moderate by looking at the vote count in this election is a fruitless exercise. This is independent of whether you can propose a satisfying and universal definition of deep state. I have offered some. You are critical, so it's up to you to find a better definition or argue that the term should not be used. The question should be voided and we should move on. @kmcochran please note.
@000: "one year I sent my son to a kindergarten for the elite in Manhattan that cost $40,000 a year"
The $40,000 per yer tuition is part of the formal structure. The implicit understanding, the favor you were beholden to return, is part of the informal structure. I am of course not speaking of you personally, nor am I suggesting that you were so beholden, but only of how a single political system may have two aspects. The informal aspect often dominates the formal aspect. I have often used the very example you describe here in discussions, although I have always made it a pre-school. Such placements are highly prized. Can you imagine the keeping of with the Jones' and the scarcity etc. that drives of the value of such placements? I guess you can. So the favor (which is often the quo in a quid pro quo) begins in some far away location (as measured by, say, social network hops) and works its way through a clandestine system to pop-out as a privileged placement at an elite pre-school. That it is such a quo that often turns a corrupt quid act is bad. That it works it way through a system and pops out at a private institution can be expected. The same process exists in institutions that pretend to be public, where "objective" criteria are supposed to be used. Here there are two definite bads, but disassociated in time and space to such an extent that the connection becomes less obvious. I suggest there is little theoretical work on such significant phenomena as informal political systems.
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
Well I guess talking about doing totalitarian states top down is off then? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-D4I7XdTEM
Vladdy has missiles in Syria and Iran. MIG's are now in Armenia. The longer the Russian empire stays in the Middle East the bigger the seat at the bargaining table. Remember that Russia has Christianity again. It'a a given that Turkey will pay a price and it will be a dish served cold by a Russian Tsar.
@rjfmgy, you say 'that's not what "deep state" means'. OK so now we have to use the OFFICIAL definition of Deep State. Where can we find it? Wikipedia? OK, it's an entity in Turkey:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state
a group of influential anti-democratic coalitions within the Turkish political system, composed of high-level elements within the intelligence services (domestic and foreign), Turkish military, security, judiciary, and mafia
Too specific? How about WikiSpooks:
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Deep_state
The leadership of intelligence agencies;
Deep politicians, i.e. individuals who broker agreements between other members of the deep state.
Some senior or longstanding non-elected officials within government (e.g. top civil servants);
Selected individuals with effective control of key commercial, military and/or criminal groups in:
The 'defence' and (anti-)terrorism industries;
The financial sector;
Corporate media[6]
Well, how can we FIND people in this thing? How about PowerBase:
http://powerbase.info
What does it all MEAN? Let's ask Christopher Walken for guidance:
https://youtu.be/I1ukjdwLAIc
@000, Define it however you like, but it doesn't mean a snobby grammar school obsessing over who's badmouthing it.
@rjfmgy, how about if attendance at that school leads to snobby high school leads to snobby college and to snobby professional degree along which relationships are formed which lead to fast-track corporate or government jobs with more rapid advancement, much higher pay scale and so on? Are you saying that social networks do not exist in this country which act in effect as labor unions protecting certain classes of jobs and opporunities and keeping those opportunities within that network? Are you claiming that this does not exist in our society and could not constitute a building block of a "deep state" under any definition you wish to propose?
I'm not saying that straight-up meritocratic advancement does not exist in our society, however I would claim without blushing and without having you on that there is a fast track and there are many people who do whatever it takes to get on and stay on that fast track. I would also claim that if there was a "deep state", you would find more fast-trackers claiming membership in that entity than you would up-from-the-bootstraps meritocrats.
Full disclosure here: I'm voting for Bernie. So you can discount what I'm saying just based on that.
@000 the meritocracy window is a lot smaller than when I was a lad. You need ruffles and flourishes to get into a good school these days. We had the privileged in our midst: http://www.paperdiscoverycenter.org/georgemead/ Fortune magazine pretty much had them in the mid-30's in terms of wealthiest in the country. Whelps from other such families were the Spaldings of Caddyshack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhOvYLOkw4c
@000,
"Are you saying that social networks do not exist in this country which act in effect as labor unions protecting certain classes of jobs and opporunities and keeping those opportunities within that network?"
No.
"I'm not saying that straight-up meritocratic advancement does not exist in our society..."
Neither am I. Nor am I saying that connections, birth, education, the right schools, social classes and all that don't matter. I am merely saying that I find your definition of the "deep state" to be all over the place, and I therefore don't find it a useful comparison to what I infer the author of the article you linked meant by the term "deep state."
That said, I stand by my contention that the question is unanswerable because the factors governing its resolution are unknowable; according to the article, the composition of the next Majlis will be determined in secret, we don't know exactly by whom, and we don't know how the members they select will conform to the term "conservative," however defined. Since we have no insight into of these things, we are just guessing.
@rjfmgy, I totally agree that this question is not well posed. If you look at Wikipedia they haven't figured it who won the last election years ago, much less this one. The definition of the parties and who belongs on what list is complex and fluid. It is a dictatorship and who gets to show up at the Majlis is not determined at the ballot box. To that extent trying to measure whether Iran has become more politically moderate by looking at the vote count in this election is a fruitless exercise. This is independent of whether you can propose a satisfying and universal definition of deep state. I have offered some. You are critical, so it's up to you to find a better definition or argue that the term should not be used. The question should be voided and we should move on. @kmcochran please note.
@000: "one year I sent my son to a kindergarten for the elite in Manhattan that cost $40,000 a year"
The $40,000 per yer tuition is part of the formal structure. The implicit understanding, the favor you were beholden to return, is part of the informal structure. I am of course not speaking of you personally, nor am I suggesting that you were so beholden, but only of how a single political system may have two aspects. The informal aspect often dominates the formal aspect. I have often used the very example you describe here in discussions, although I have always made it a pre-school. Such placements are highly prized. Can you imagine the keeping of with the Jones' and the scarcity etc. that drives of the value of such placements? I guess you can. So the favor (which is often the quo in a quid pro quo) begins in some far away location (as measured by, say, social network hops) and works its way through a clandestine system to pop-out as a privileged placement at an elite pre-school. That it is such a quo that often turns a corrupt quid act is bad. That it works it way through a system and pops out at a private institution can be expected. The same process exists in institutions that pretend to be public, where "objective" criteria are supposed to be used. Here there are two definite bads, but disassociated in time and space to such an extent that the connection becomes less obvious. I suggest there is little theoretical work on such significant phenomena as informal political systems.
@redacted, social network analysis provides at least some raw meat for analysis of informal political systems. Check out these links:
http://china.fathom.info/
https://fathom.info/china/
http://influencemapping.org/
http://noduslabs.com/cases/influence-dynamics-social-networks/
http://noduslabs.com/cases/russian-protest-network-analysis-facebook-gephi-netvizz/
http://noduslabs.com/research/information-epidemics-viral-social-contagion/
If you Google "informal political systems" I would guess it's actually been studied out the wazoo, here's one link that pops up near the top:
http://www.gsdrc.org/topic-guides/political-systems/
Comment deleted on Apr 16, 2016 08:16PM UTC