In his seminal study Science of Coercion, Christopher Simpson observed that communication might be understood as both the conduit for and the actual substance of human culture and consciousness. As Simpson noted, psychological warfare is the application of mass communication to modern social conflict.

In the U.S. Army War College manual on psychological warfare, the stated objective is to destroy the will and ability of the enemy to fight by depriving them of the support of allies and neutrals. Some of the methods used in the manual are sowing dissension, distrust, fear and hopelessness.

In the decades since these publications were first published,a new form of psywar has emerged in the form of false hope. With unlimited funding and organizational support from foundations like Ford, Rockefeller, Gates and Soros, U.S. Government propaganda now has a vast new army of non-profits that, along with corporate media and academia, serve as both a third wing of mass consciousness and a fifth column for destabilization campaigns worldwide.

As Cory Morningstar captures The Simulacrum in her multi-part series on the non-profit industrial complex, domesticating the populace is a fait accompli, and the only question remaining is what will happen if and when capitalist activism is seen for what it is. By following the money from aristocratic derivatives to embodiments of false hope like Avaaz, MoveOn, and Change, Morningstar steps through the looking glass to expose how NGOs have become a key tool of global dominance using social media as a means of social manipulation.

When the smoke generated by phony progressives clears, all that is left is an industrial wasteland of false hope and real threats. When the betrayals of NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are known, we can finally begin to exercise our responsibilities. Until then, programs like Democracy Now remain little more than adult versions of Sesame Street for the toy Che brigades.

[Jay Taber is an associate scholar of the Center for World Indigenous Studies, an author, a correspondent to Fourth World Eye, and a contributing editor of Fourth World Journal. Since 1994, he has served as the administrative director of Public Good Project.]

In 1996, when David Ronfeldt and John Arquilla wrote their prophetic paper  on netwar, they foresaw the powerful impact new forms of social organization could have on international politics. Using the Zapatistas and other examples of networks involved in opposing such things as globalization, Ronfeldt and Arquilla went so far as to suggest that civil society might have the upper hand — at least for a while — as institutional actors scrambled to catch up with the dynamics involved.

Examining the 1999 WTO Ministerial in Seattle, Paul de Armond expounded on the netwar aspects of anti-globalization networks. In 2001, Ronfeldt and Arquilla examined its usage by terrorists and transnational criminal networks, in addition to social activists as they engage in the fight for the future. In 2005, Michelle Shumate, J. Alison Bryant and Peter R. Monge looked at how storytelling in the form of narratives about globalization are deployed in netwar.

Today, as noted by observers like Wrong Kind of Green, it appears institutions have caught on. Using corporate and government funding to create and co-opt international NGOs like Amnesty International, covert agencies like the CIA now work hand in hand with State Department puppets manipulated by USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy.  Able to choreograph fake revolutions as well as control dissidents, institutions like the National Security Agency are arguably back in the drivers seat.

Networks, of course, are only as effective as their understanding of conflict, and that means having a working knowledge of the principles of psywar.  False front networks, with the aid of corporate media, might be able to deceive public opinion, but they also present an opportunity to illustrate the difference between cover stories and back stories through investigative journalism. Using authentic communications networks to differentiate between players and pawns exposes both the hubris and moral corruption of institutions, while simultaneously using research as organizing tool.

Keeping our eyes open to the reality of netwar is as vital to indigenous networks as any. Given our limited resources, we need to conserve our energy, choose our battles, and pick our targets, before we marshall our resources. Otherwise, we risk being played against each other by powerful forces working behind the scenes.

[Jay Taber is an associate scholar of the Center for World Indigenous Studies, an author, a correspondent to Fourth World Eye, and a contributing editor of Fourth World Journal. Since 1994, he has served as the administrative director of Public Good Project.]