Taken hostage

VIEWS ARE MY OWN

Europe is in crisis. Every politician calls for “resilience,” for bolstering our shared security, for defending our borders against potential Russian invaders — but in truth we are being held hostage. Citizens are the pawns in a cynical game of chess played by our leaders.

What are the most important lessons to be drawn from all the wars of the 20th century and the opening decades of the 21st?

First, we must understand how a war is actually won. No, it is not by defeating the enemy’s army. It is by seizing control of the existing state power-structures, thereby cementing one’s grip on an entire country by bending an established apparatus to the victor’s will.

Whether it was Britain’s colonisation of India or Hitler’s conquest of Europe, the key was not winning battles but gaining control of the power structures already in place. Once British rifles were pressed to the Indian ruler’s temple, it was the Indian institutions — the Indian police — that enforced policies decided in London. Once Hitler had taken control of the French government, all he needed was a puppet — Pétain — so that French police and institutions would carry out Nazi orders.

A telling counter-example is the First Gulf War in the early 1990s: the United States easily defeated Saddam Hussein’s armed forces, yet chose not to overthrow and replace his government. Washington retained some influence over Saddam’s policies thanks to the thrashing it had dealt his army, but that is not the same as directly taking command of a government.

There are also lessons in lost wars: Vietnam in the 1960s; the USSR in Afghanistan, 1979–1989; and the 21st-century wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. When one has to fight entire populations organised into militias and guerrilla bands — especially once the existing government power structures collapse— victory can come only through genocide: killing men, women, and children alike, because anyone, anywhere, can be a combatant.

So what can we learn?

Centralised power structures are the prime military objective, just as the King is the most vulnerable piece on a chessboard. The obedient little soldiers (pawns) exist only to shield him; once he falls, the surviving pawns — and the Queen, the “motherland” — automatically pass under the victor’s control.

Our leaders’ rallying cries thus echo a King ordering his pawns into battle to defend his “territory” on the chessboard.

But this is the 21st century. A hundred years ago there was no alternative: centralised power structures — nation-states, governments, institutions — were the only organisational models available.

Today we have alternatives. How can we truly protect ourselves from an invader like Putin?

If our leaders genuinely aim to make Europe resilient, they will introduce three measures:

1. Shift from debt-based, centrally controlled money (private banks and central banks) to a system founded on the Relative Theory of Money, running on a public blockchain in which citizens themselves co-create the currency.
   What does this look like in practice? Existing bank accounts and their balances are converted into non custodial crypto-wallets based on the Relative Theory of Money. Each citizen designates one wallet to receive a universal dividend (a kind of basic income). In such a system there is no longer any central institution that can be “targeted” to seize control of the financial apparatus. Ideally transactions occur peer-to-peer, powered by a mesh network in which each phone connects to nearby devices. Simultaneously, the communication network relies on a mix between the existing centralized infrastructure, satellites and mesh networks, making it impossible for an invader to interrupt or take control of communications. Citizens can keep exchanging goods and services, and communicate/organize, without an invader hijacking the system.
2. Relocate power to the municipal level, and gradually automate and decentralise local decision-making through public blockchains and smart contracts, allowing society to self-organise.
   What does this look like in practice? Municipal public funds are locked in smart contracts on public blockchains and may be spent only after a citizen vote to release the funds. All publicly funded services — road repairs, hospitals, schools, police — are paid directly via these automated contracts.
3. Create specialised resilience and collective-defence depots, storing firearms and other military equipment under tight security, guarded by the army and police.
   What does this look like in practice? Citizens receive an annual paid leave, funded from public coffers, to train in the use of these weapons and tools. In wartime, citizens issue a vote that unlocks the depots, and an optimal distribution system ensures every citizen is armed; serial numbers allow weapons to be tracked and returned once the threat is gone.

These three measures would make any country un-invadable: they would turn every citizen into an armed militia that cannot be defeated, and — crucially — they leave no “target,” no central decision-maker or power structure for an invader to threaten or replace.

This is real resilience. Nuclear deterrence is a global threat maintained by centralised governments for their own security; the above measures are local deterrents, established by the people themselves without having to rely on “Daddy” for protection.

Until such measures are enacted, Europe will remain far from resilient. At best, citizens will be at the mercy of their Kings’ decisions, hoping they outplay the opponent at chess and praying their Kings do not sacrifice too many pawns in the process of protecting their “territory” and their “citizens”, but in reality, protecting their ultra vulnerable centralised power structures from falling into the wrong hands.

Maybe it’s time to move away from international chess played by Kings.