The Origins of Modern Information Strategy:
If someone explains the significance of the Internet without using techno-jargon, or buzzwords, they’ll be left with this: The Internet is a communications tool which allows many people to broadcast information to many people. Unlike traditional broadcast and publishing methods, the Internet allows anyone with a computer to send photos, books, videos, and music to anyone in the world without distribution costs or travel time. This many-to-many network of computers defines the information age. As we enter the second decade of the Internet, networks of alternative media and political activists have taken root. Numerous trends, some recent, others as old as agriculture, indicate we are at the beginning of a revolutionary shift. It is my contention that social and political activists are in the best position to gain from this shift. The goal of this research is to provide insight into the nature of this revolution, and to suggest rules of thumb for those who wish to exploit it.

John A. Deway of the RAND corporation was the first to explore the possible historical significance of the Internet as many-to-many medium. Deway asserted that the only comparble advance in communications was the printing press; the first true one-to-many medium. Radio, television, and film were merely advances in one-to-many communications. Dewey observed that the printing press’s improvement of information dissimination and distrubution allowed the reformation, and the enlightenment. Dewey asserts that the Internet will cause changes of comparable significance in our society (4). However, Deway’s prophecy does not attempt to predict the nature of these changes beyond their likelyhood of being “unintended and unforseen.” Dewey even concludes, “…these changes could take decades to see clearly” (28).

Like John A. Deway, David Ronfeldt, the senior social scientists at RAND concluded nothing less than society was on the verge of complete reorganization. In 1996, he observed a migration of power and influence from traditional institutions to individuals with skills at developing multi-organizational networks. These individuals tended to be environmental or social activists who communicated over the Internet. He predicted that these actors would eventually make life rather difficult for traditional hierarchical organizations like the governments, and corporations (6).

Ronfeldt asserted that the network was a new layer of social organization; it would form on top of America’s current tribal, institutional, and market layers. From this observation, he proposed his “TIMN framework” (Tribal, Institutional, Market, Network), as model for societal evolution. Even today, the TIMN framework provides releveant and logical insight into the Internet’s possible futures. Indeed, Ronfeldt argues that these four forms-“and evidently only these”- describe the organizational forms of all societies; the ability of society to evolve and survive is a function of its willingness and ability to utilize and combine these four forms (7).

The most primitive and universal form is the tribal form. The members of these “T” Societies are bound by kinship and common survival. They tend to be egalitarian: with neither a strong central chief, nor significant specialization of duties amongst its members. In modern times, “T” societies only exist amongst ethnic or religious nationalists, streetgangs, or extended families(10). However, ever since the agricultural revolution, “T” societies have been dominated by “T-I” (tribal-institutional).

Unlike tribes, institutions could create chains of authority and obedience. Institutions have hierchies and customs which reinforce their authority (11). From the “T-I” form emerged beurocrats, churches, armies, and finally culminated in modern nation-states. Ronfeldt maintains that without Institutions, societies are unable to organize themselves beyond the standards of prehistoric society. However, hierarchial structures can niether effectively process large amounts information, nor guide the complexities of modern economies (12).

The free-market was the next form to emerege. Since Adam Smith’s published his Wealth of Nations in 18th century, power has steadily migrated from state officials, to wealthy capitalists. These capitalist by no means control governance, but rather the flow of capital, and trade (13). The first full on “T-I-M” socities were 19th century Great Britian and the United States. In fact, much of the advantages which the US and Great Britian possess can be attributed to their early embrace of free-markets. Both countires allowed unprecedented latitude for individuals to pursue their own self interst; this motivation accelerated their rate of technological advance. As a result, they both led the industrial revolution.

Before discussion the network form, it is necessary to reiterate this historic trend: The agricultural revolution directly corrosponded with the emergence of the hierarchical-institutions. Subsequently, the Industrial revolution directly corrosponded with the emergence of the free-market. Now in the midst of the information revolution, the network appears to be the corrosponding advance in social organization. Ronfeldt contends that societies which fail to embrace this new level of social organization will risk decay and total collapse. Communism failed because it refused to embrace markets, just as the Greek democracy failed because of it’s ineffective hierarchy. Similarly, we are seeing the same trends regarding network: Iran, China, and other nations who's survival is dependent on the control of information are beginning to teater (15).

As we enter this “age of the network” it is important to note that while the role of the nation-state will change, it will by no means disappear. To put it another way, if the United States was a human body, our tribal nationalism would provide a protective skin, our hierchial instutions would provide a supporting skeleton, and free-markets would provide a circulatory system. The network appears to be filling the role of a sensory/central nervous system (Ronfeldt 22).