network state

'Bursts of authoritarianism'

The United States is currently evolving into a Network State, says a military analyst who writes regularly on the subject.

Gil Duran

05 Mar 2025 — 9 min read

A respected military analyst sees Elon Musk "building a new control system."

Summary: The U.S. is shifting toward a Network State model driven by AI governance, says military analyst John Robb. He sees this change as inevitable but flawed. I analyze Robb's refreshingly forthright take on the subject. Part 1 of 2.

The Point: The United States is currently evolving into a Network State, says a military analyst who writes regularly on the subject. John Robb, who publishes a small but influential newsletter called Global Guerillas, sees this as a positive development.

“We’re currently building a new control system because the old one isn’t providing us with high performance and/or cannot dampen instability,” he writes.

However, he predicts trouble: “The Red Tribe’s early alpha attempt to build a network state based on performance optimization will likely fall far short of a viable solution.”

(Note: "Red Tribe” is Network State-speak for Republicans. “Blue Tribe” = Democrats. “Gray Tribe” = new tech authoritarian faction.)

While I firmly oppose transforming the United States into a Network State, let’s explore the perspective of someone who supports the concept. At least, you will see another person talking about the Network State in a serious way.

The Back Story: I first heard of Robb during the annual Network State conference in 2023. A security consultant named Spencer Macdonald mentioned him during a presentation titled “Parallel Security of Network States,” which focused on using technology and former military Special Operations personnel to protect future Network State enclaves.

Macdonald encouraged the audience to read Robb’s newsletter to stay abreast of the latest developments in “5GW/InfoWar” (5th Generation Warfare, which includes cyberattacks and propaganda, and “perception management.”)

Robb is a strategist, entrepreneur, and former United States Air Force pilot (“Tier one, special ops. Deployed globally”). His website identifies him as a military analyst, tech executive, and consultant for top government agencies and corporations. He graduated from the United States Air Force Academy and Yale.

He is the author of Brave New War, a book on the future of warfare, and his insights have appeared in major media outlets like the New York Times and Wired. “For my money, John Robb, a former Air Force officer and tech guru, is the futurists’ futurist,” wrote Reihan Salam, now president of the Manhattan Institute, in 2006. Robb’s website says he recently assisted “the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff on his vision for how AGI and robotics would transform how the Joint Force fights in 2035.”

Since 2004, Robb has written a newsletter called Global Guerillas Report. He describes his focus as “predictive frameworks for making sense of the world at the intersection of war, technology, and politics.” The newsletter regularly discusses the strategic concerns of building network states. His writing generally supports the concept in a somewhat detached and analytical style.

His most recent post was headlined “Prototyping the Network State.”

“We’re currently in the process of building a viable network state,” writes Robb of what Elon Musk is doing in Washington. “Let’s dig in.”

The essay is behind a paywall ($5 a month, click below), but I will summarize the arguments.

Robb's Pro Network State Argument

In his short essay, Robb argues that traditional governments are too slow for today's fast-moving crises. He sees the Network State as a necessary alternative.

Using an aircraft metaphor, he compares our current government to a stable traditional aircraft piloted by humans. He suggests that modern challenges require an inherently unstable high-tech aircraft:

The problem is that when we add instability into an aircraft’s design, it quickly becomes uncontrollable by a human pilot. To fix that shortfall, a computer system (fly by wire) is used to make the millisecond inputs necessary to stabilize and control the plane (translating what the pilot wants to do into action).

Therefore, Robb says, we need a government that operates more like a modern combat jet. That is, a Network State government designed for instability and piloted by computers.

Robb sees two competing models for global government:

The Stability Model (“China’s Approach”)

Uses censorship, surveillance, and centralized control to suppress dissent and enforce ideological uniformity.
This model (Robb says) was briefly tested in the U.S. (via social media bans and deplatforming) but the effort collapsed after Elon Musk took over X (Twitter).

Robb:

The attempt to use this model in the US failed (mainly due to Musk’s acquisition of X). The jury is still out on China. However, the long-term prospects are bleak. Narrowing thought down to a narrow orthodoxy will likely eliminate the innovation China needs to keep pace with the rest of the world.

The Performance Model (The Red Tribe’s Attempt)

The new U.S. administration is trying to modernize governance using AI and centralized data tracking.
DOGE is being developed to monitor government operations and remove opposition within the bureaucracy.
Goal is to make government leaner, faster and more aligned with Red Tribe ideology by eliminating internal opposition through firings and purges.

Robb:

DOGE is centralizing control over the government’s data, from finances to personnel. Think of it as building an organizational dashboard for the entire US government, making it possible to manage, measure, and control programs and personnel in a way that has never been possible before. Also, and this will be important going forward, this data centralization makes it accessible to AI analysis and control.

Network State Challenges

Robb says the attempt to create a U.S. Network State is fraught with challenges and likely to fail:

Due to the complexity of the problems being addressed, many of the novel ideas and alternative truths (unorthodox patterns of understanding) implemented at these agencies will not work better than what they are replacing nor is there a way to rapidly prototype alternatives. It’s also unclear how effective this method of novelty production will be during the next crisis.

Robb identifies these key challenges:

Fierce Opposition from the “Blue Tribe"

Democrats and establishment figures will use legal and media tactics to slow or block changes.
Expect a narrative war focused on the damage caused by government cuts.

Robb:

The Blue Tribe’s scorched earth retreat (court cases, etc.) may give the tribe the time to a) reconstitute itself and b) mount a new guerrilla campaign to oppose it. The tribe will fight this guerrilla campaign in the moral sphere, focusing on the harm caused by the government cuts (empathy triggers, etc.).

Internal Divisions in Red Tribe

The Red Tribe is not unified, and infighting could sabotage reforms.
Some agency heads are already resisting DOGE’s efforts to purge bureaucrats.

Robb:

DOGE’s attempts to use e-mails to identify government employees to fire are already being opposed by agency heads — the Pentagon (Department of Defense), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Energy (DOE) have been noted for instructing their staff not to engage with DOGE initiatives.

No Reliable System for Experimentation

There’s no proven way to test and scale new governance models quickly.
Many of these ideas may not work better than the system they are replacing.

Robb:

While reforming the government may yield performance improvements…navigating a complex environment requires more; novel ideas (knowing what to do).

Creation of New Spoils System with “Bursts of Authoritarianism”

Every change in administration could lead to mass government purges, as each ruling faction replaces the bureaucracy with its own political loyalists.
This increases instability and “bursts of authoritarianism.”

Robb:

In this network spoils system, we will soon see government employees exchanged en masse with every change in government (routing around civil service laws) … it will increase turmoil and likely generate bursts of authoritarianism.

My Analysis: Government by Tech Billionaire

Robb believes that the current version of the United States is failing and that a Network State is emerging to replace it. He sees this as a good thing. However, he believes the current attempt to build this new system is poorly structured, unstable, and unlikely to succeed.

I disagree with Robb’s politics. His portrayal of old Twitter as an authoritarian force and of Elon Musk as the savior of the country is ridiculous and will not age well. However, I do agree with his assessment of Musk’s meddling as a Network State-type project.

I don’t see chaos when I examine Musk's actions. I see the realization of a radical ideology that a particular cadre of tech plutocrats have pushed for years. Not all of them call it the Network State, but many of them do. While some portray it as a path to decentralized governance, it's true goal is to concentrate power in the hands of tech billionaires and their systems. Just look at the news.

While Robb appears to see Musk’s destruction as necessary, I find it virulently anti-democratic. Most Americans have never heard of the Network State. They certainly didn’t vote for it. Perhaps there's merit in having a public conversation about whether our nation is built to survive the 21st century. However, the idea of a foreign-born billionaire imposing a new form of governance without the consent of the American people seems immoral and risky.

The risks are obvious, even to Network State supporters. Robb writes about the possibility of “bursts of authoritarianism” but does not seem to view the situation with urgency. Yet many of Musk’s changes seem designed to destroy systems created to combat corruption and cronyism. Apparently, the Network State's idea of technological progress is to weaken democratic structures and create a political spoils system enhanced by AI and authoritarianism.

This is a situation that demands attention and action.

Conclusion: An Advanced Struggle

While alarming, it is also validating to see someone else speak openly of the Network State. I disagree with Robb’s vision, but his insights provide a window into the thinking of those trying to make it happen.

As someone whose career spans journalism and politics, I know it often takes a voice like Robb’s to convince journalists and elected officials to take something seriously. He’s been writing on this topic for a long time, and his dispassionate tone reveals that he sees massive transformation as inevitable.

While establishment journalists and politicians struggle to explain to what’s happening, Robb makes it clear that we are in the middle of an advanced struggle. It's about imposing a Network State model on the United States and using a tech takeover to seal the deal.

The good news: Robb believes the current project will likely fail, and he has painstakingly outlined the Network State's vulnerabilities. I’ll deal with these in my next post.

This paywall-free newsletter is brought to you by paid subscribers. If you can, please join hundreds of fellow readers in supporting this work. I don't have corporate sponsors or billionaire backers, but I do have readers like you.