Sunday, December 18, 2016

American Intelligence Test: Is There a Russian Bear Under the Table?

The ‘buzz’ persists around the question of did the Russian’s interfere with the 2016 Election. As with all national issues, there are various groups strategically placed around the political board attempting to win the ‘game’ or at least strengthen their position and options. But even though there are a lot of statements, assertions, and answers being presented by each entrenched pack of partisans; is the ‘discussion’ based on sound and reasoned judgement?

The answer to this question should be obvious. But before you agree or disagree with it, the smart thing to do is see if the members of those different groups competing for the public’s opinion can pass a basic intelligence test on this disputed topic. As you are either a member of one (or more) of those groups or are amongst the non-aligned crowd, you represent a surrogate for the aggregate intelligence of the group. Don’t be nervous, you are most likely of normal intelligence both in the context of your self-selected group(s) and the public as a whole.

If you take the test and disagree with the provided correct answers then you can take comfort in the expectation that most others in your group(s) would probably agree with you. Of course, the test of intelligence is not whether other’s agree with you or not. Rather the correct answers are determined by whether they demonstrate an informed and accurate understanding and knowledge of facts and conditions, if your answers lead to actions and decisions that respond effectively and efficiently to reality, if they conform to the laws of physics, and if your answers are superior to answers provided by others. With that, here is the American Intelligence Test on:

ISSUE: Determining If There Was Russian Interference in the 2016 Election

Question 1. Would it be unusual for Russia to interfere with a US Presidential election?   Yes  /  No

Question 2. Do other nations interfere with our Presidential elections?   Yes  /  No

Question 3. Which, if any, of the following activities by a foreign nation would constitute an unacceptable type of interference in US elections?

A.      Statements of concern about one candidate, but not the other
B.      Statements of support about one candidate, but not the other
C.      Contributions (which are illegal for foreign entities) made indirectly via some ‘backdoor’ means to one or even both candidates
D.      Disclosure of information obtained by ‘hacking’/cyber-intrusions (acts that are illegal for US citizens)
E.       Dissemination of ‘false’ information created by a foreign state about a candidate
F.       Intrusion into the voting process/systems to alter the data, and thus the results, of an election
G.      All the above are unacceptable interference
H.      None of the above would be an act of unacceptable interference

Question 4. Who would you rely on to determine if some nation had engaged in ‘hacking/cyber-espionage or data-corruption/manipulation to impact US elections?  Select the following items that you would depend upon.

A.      Persons/entities that are experts in internet/cyber-security risks, threats, methodologies, and processes
B.      Politicians / elected officials
C.      Appointed government officials, including those heading departments, agencies, organizations that are engaged in internet/cyber-security surveillance
D.      News media entities reporting on events related to ‘intrusion’ events
E.       Individuals with educational background, work-experience, and recognized track-record in cyber-attack detection, interception, prevention, analysis, tracking, and research
F.       Leaders/representatives of foreign nation associated with the event(s)
G.      Spokespersons, surrogates or members of a candidate’s election team
H.      Reports from the following entities:  NSA, CIA, FBI, DHS, various military intelligence groups, and other government security organizations
I.         Congressional Intelligence Oversight committee
J.        All the above
K.       None of the above

Question 5. Is there a difference between interfering in an election via pre-election false news, private/internal campaign information disclosures and ‘hacking’ activities; and during the election’s actual voting period by cyber-based acts to disrupt/delay the vote casting process, alter voters’ data, or manipulating the counting/tabulation or results process(es)?   Yes  /  No

Question 6. Which is more dangerous to the nation?

A.      The news media being incapable of framing the issue to and for the public, nor in exploring what the basis is for any group that supports opposing position
B.      A foreign nation covertly engaging in supporting one candidate by providing illegally obtaining information about that candidate’s opponent
C.      A nation’s leader that doesn’t bring this issue to the fore because it will become a political partisan issue
D.      A foreign nation covertly attempting to change the results of an election’s voting data
E.       A nation’s leader relying upon their own judgement absent relevant expertise
F.       The public/voters who judge this issue along partisan lines

That’s it. You’ve completed the test. You need not read any further, any value you may have derived will have occurred if you thought about what your answers are. If, however, you are curious about how your answers relate to the correct answers, those are given below.

Correct answers:
Q-1: No
Q-2: Yes
Q-3: C, D, E, F
Q-4: A, E, H
Q-5: Yes
Q-6: F

If you don’t agree, while it may not help, here is the reasoning I would expect you to refute with more than “No, that’s wrong” and have a superior rationale for why there is a ‘more’ intelligent answer.

Rationale for why these are the ‘intelligent’ answers.

Q-1: The issue isn’t that no interference is to be allowed. American elections are an international political process.  The political parties, inept as they are, acknowledge that Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policies are one of the primary areas that a President is responsible for and that the public should be considering in how to assess which candidate will handle this task most competently. Russia will always attempt to ‘influence’ our elections. They have their interests to consider and the US, and even its’ elections, involve their interests. So, the issue isn’t that they shouldn’t try to influence our elections but that they should behave in an intelligent manner. The hacking and cyber-attacks are high-risk and low-reward methods. There are smart people in Russia, but perhaps just like in America they are not represented effectively in their leadership.

Q-2: The logic of Q-1’s rationale applies to all nations, not just Russia. We should recognize that other nations will ‘interfere’ but that interference must be based on expressing what their interests are and why they support or don’t support US policies that affect them. They can, of course, refrain from engaging in expressing support for any candidate over another.

Q-3: Items A and B are excluded by the rationale provided in Q-1 & Q-2.
Items C and D are already illegal, and do not become tolerable even during US election campaigns.
Item E is stupid for the nation perpetrator, stupid for the candidate beneficiary, and stupid for the public to encourage politicians to lie, dissemble, distort, or misinform any more than they already do.
Item F is fundamentally an act of war, to overturn our democracy and derive the public of the one thing that protects our freedoms: voting.

Items G and H’s rationale should be self-explanatory, if not, reading further is ill-advised.
Q-4: I would hope that given the issue that everyone included A, E and H in their criteria. If not, I would suggest pondering if you would omit comparable criteria from what you would require about an issue on what medical treatment you would follow for a terminal illness that requires state-of-the-art diagnosis and treatment. A, E and H are the answers that relate knowledge, expertise, and they are the individuals that we employ to actually protect us from cyber-attacks.

All the other choices are useless. They either get any relevant and valid information from the A, E and H types or they are witless fools. If any of these other choices could demonstrate the basis for their analysis and detailed information supporting it, then it would assuredly come from someone who matched an A, E and H background.

Q-5: Yes. There is a big difference. Both are unacceptable, but attempting to influence the voters by manipulation them and through them their votes is very different from attempting to determine the election by choosing the candidate of their choice by changing the votes and/or the tabulation of results. The former can be combated, though only if the public actually cares that an outside entity is attempting to manipulate their votes. The latter is that entities’ attempt to enslave you. They are not the same.

Q-6: If F didn’t surprise you then you don’t need the rationale. If it did, then I doubt you will believe my rationale. The only things that protects a democracy is that the public chooses it leaders, even if they choose poorly or stupidly. They get the results of their choice; not of their desires, wishes, ideologies, hopes, or beliefs but of their choice. Those results come from how the laws of physics, of ‘cause and effect’, of economics, and of nature determine what will happen based on what actions and decisions that happen because of that choice. Good choices will lead to better outcomes and bad choices will not.

No comments:

Post a Comment