Building Digital Fortresses Against Government Overreach
Asymmetrical Defenses in a Globalized Era
In the previous series of articles, corresponding to Chapter 7 of my forthcoming book, we saw how to break the shackles of monocountrism and become free.
This article is the 1st in a new series on how to go further by integrating asymmetrical defenses against overeager states.
Many nation-states, trying to apply the recipes of the last century to our own times, will be increasingly prepared to do anything to balance their books and preserve their relevance.
They will institute ever more intrusive digital surveillance, try to hold back those who seek to leave, and endeavor to keep those who do manage to leave within their tax net.
They will outdo each other in regulation, interpreting their own laws to their advantage, not hesitating to overturn decades of jurisprudence. Sometimes, they'll even cheat by contradicting their own rules. We analyzed in detail why and how in the (many) previous articles.
So how do you protect yourself against those states that will fail to adapt to this new paradigm, while still benefiting from the services offered by those who have understood the new world we live in?
Remember the 5th principle to be learned from history: an inversion of the balance of power between attack and defense technologies is highly disruptive to the powers that be.
The Internet, new technologies and globalization are providing us with new, asymmetrical defenses against states - defenses that are easy for individuals to use, but difficult for states to defeat.
Remember the feudal era: it could never have existed without the fact that, before the invention of gunpowder, it was easier to build a castle than to take it.
Note, however, that in general, the king, often the most powerful of the lords, could take any castle, and maybe even two or three, but not ten, twenty or thirty, forcing him to negotiate with the nobles.
It's important to understand that nobody is untouchable. But you can make yourself impregnable enough for someone to prefer to attack a target less well-defended than you.
Let's take an example.
The hidden ratio that determines whether a government agency will attack you or not
Let's imagine you're an honest web entrepreneur, and you become the target of a government agency for a relatively trivial reason: because of a routine check, because an inspector got up on the wrong side of the bed and came across a post or video on your social media that pissed him off, or because you were wrongly reported for a minor infringement.
So it's fair to say that the agency's motivation to investigate you isn't very high, but it does exist.
If you are mono-country, as most people are, here's the ratio between the complexity of your case and the agency's motivation to investigate you:
The agency's motivation is higher than your defense: you're being controlled.
Now let's assume that you're not a mono-country company, and that you've applied several of the principles that we will see in this series.
How complex is your case going to be in relation to their motivation this time?
Your defense is greater than their motivation: the agency drops the case and instead investigates a single-country person whose defense is less than their motivation.
Note again that this doesn't make you untouchable in any way: if, for example, you're an international drug smuggler using the principles in this series, here's how the agency (or agencies) will be motivated to track you down :
Their motivation will be greater than your defense, so the agency will be ready to do whatever it takes to stop you.
So we see that this asymmetry works perfectly well for honest people who just want to protect themselves against the excesses of the States, and that it's when you're honest that you'll get the best ratio between the energy you personally spend and the defense you gain.
Because, for the same offence or suspicion, nation-states will always prefer to attack a mono-country person rather than an international individual or entity.
I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that, obviously, by publishing this book, and maybe this Substack, I've greatly increased the motivation of several government agencies against me, perhaps even beyond the complexity I present.
But of course I'm aware of this, and even if I trust government agencies to always find the obscure bit of regulation with which I won't be in compliance, I didn't write this book and substack to be quiet, but simply to share my ideas and vision with as many people as possible.
If I'm ever investigated by certain agencies following the publication of this book, I'll be sure to share my feedback in a future edition!
But you, dear reader, who have no intention of writing about it, this mechanism for increasing the government's motivation to investigate you is obviously not available to you. You can use this strategy quietly.
And owning this advantage is far from anecdotal: many honest people dream that their state would leave them a little more in peace1 and let them live more freely2 .
With the structure presented in this series, that's exactly what you'll get: a smaller exchange surface with your state, and other states in general.
A freer, less regulated life, but also one in which you'll have more responsibility, for better or for worse.
For example, in many cases, it will be up to you to build up your own retirement income... but as we saw in “A Ticking Time Bomb for Nation-States”, it's not very difficult to do a better job than the State on this subject!
Be a smooth square
I've given a name to having an asymmetrical defense while being honest: being a "smooth square".
This means that what you do is square (= law-abiding), but if a government agency tries to seize you, you're smooth, and their fingers glide over you.
As long as you're honest, their low motivation should make them stop there - again, easier targets are at hand.
On the other hand, if you're not, this may increase their motivation enough to decide to dig your square to create asperities.
If such a life, with more freedom and more responsibility, interests you, let's now look at how to become a smooth square by building up a cost-effective defense using asymmetrical defenses.
Coming soon
In the next article, we’ll take a look at how to use the 7 flags to use borders as ramparts, and build the most impregnable castle possible in the least amount of time and energy.
Stay tuned ! In the meantime, feel free to follow Disruptive Horizons on Twitter and Linkedin, and join the tribe of Intelligent Rebels by subscribing to the newsletter :
"Simplifier la vie des Français, une nécessité vitale", Gaspard Koenig, Les Echos, 2021.
"Entreprises : le ras-le-bol face à la bureaucratie", Fanny Guinochet, L'Opinion, 2018.
Thank you Roland