Kill Decision

by Daniel Suarez

No, the best way he knew of to defuse these conflicts was to provide opportunities and education to women. Independence. Once that took, population growth would ebb, and actual plans could be made for the future. This was not a methodology favored by weapons manufacturers.

“Which is why human society mostly works; people avoid trouble. But behind every law is the implicit threat of force, and behind every vote is the implicit threat of rebellion. That’s the bargain that holds a free society together. And no society with a wide power imbalance remains free for very long.”

If you go back to the Middle Ages, the state-of-the-art weapon system was the armored knight. He cost a fortune to train, feed, and equip. But a mounted armored knight could overpower almost any number of peasants on a battlefield. And the distribution of political power in medieval society reflected that; authority was vested in a tiny minority, and the people had no choice but to obey. “Then, with the advent of gunpowder, that all changed. Suddenly you didn’t need a highly trained specialist warrior to win on the battlefield. All you needed was a warm body who could fire a gun. Anything they could aim at, they could kill. And at that point the edge in warfare went not to highly trained warriors, but to the side that could field the most people. At which point we saw the rise of nation-states—and nationalism as a concept—as the logistical requirement for fielding an ever-larger conscripted army. But this changed the political dynamic. The nobles could no longer ignore the demands of their subjects. Those subjects now had the power to kill them or refuse to fight in their wars, and so kings began to cede more political authority to representative bodies of the people—parliaments, and so on.”

“It’s so like a soldier to come to the conclusion that the gun created democracy. You do remember how many African nations are awash with guns without even a hint at democracy, right?” “My point is that with autonomous drones, you don’t need the consent of citizens to use force—you just need money. And there might be no knowing who’s behind that money either. Drones tell no tales.”

War isn’t a purely military endeavor—especially nowadays.”

military-industrial complex wants us dead.” “Not the entire military-industrial complex.” He looked calm and sipped his coffee. “Just part of it.” She threw up her hands. “Oh. Well, then it’s the part that can monitor the FBI, fake your satellite communications, launch killer drones, and manipulate the media.” He nodded. “Most of the military’s logistics have been privatized. Its computer systems. Its networks. Satellites. But there are still people behind it all, and most people who work in defense are just plain folks trying to protect their country. That’s our advantage. We just need to uncover who’s behind this. And I’m guessing it’s not a large group. That’s the appeal of these machines. They seem like something that would save American lives, but once built, they can be quietly controlled by a small number of unaccountable people. No coffins coming home from their secret wars.”

“There’s no better time to celebrate friendship than when things are at their worst.”

She remembered this from war-torn areas of the world. No one treasured happy moments more than those going through dark times.

Nothing like the thrill of influencing events. It’s amazing what a few people and a little money can accomplish online. Our puppets have turned whole elections. Especially when the oppo-research people give us something to go public with. And then our puppets up-vote the shit out of it, even if it’s no big deal. We can create public outrage from almost nothing.” McKinney gestured to Evans. “How can you be proud of this? What you’re doing is creating false consensus. A ‘popular’ movement that doesn’t exist.” “The term is astroturfing, and, yes, it’s quite a challenge.” Odin nudged McKinney back as she started getting angry. “Focus on the mission, Professor.” Evans chuckled as he sipped his mai tai. “Is she really upset?” “People need to know what these guys are doing.” “Pffftttt! Give me a break. Everyone knows. Why do you think they all want a piece of it? Detecting and neutralizing opposition or promoting your agenda—that’s what social media’s for.” “The purpose was to get around media gatekeepers.” He waved her off. “Yeah, and look how that turned out. Everyone on the Internet is talking about television and everyone on television is talking about the Internet. The whole damned thing is a self-licking ice cream cone, and you’re blaming me? The big boys have taken over. They’re fencing the Net off. Hell, even the CIA has a social media desk with hip young intelligence analysts ‘monitoring the threat/opportunity profile’ and reporting back in 140-character bursts of TWITINT.”

At least I’m not a bottom-feeder like the data cosmeticians and trash consultants—monitoring celebrity effluent to tell a consistent ‘brand story.’ Everything the public sees is managed. If there’s a valuable brand to protect—whether it’s a person or a dish soap—these fuckers are out there protecting it, shaping the narrative. I mean . . . who the hell follows dish soap on Twitter? How does anyone believe that shit’s real?” Just