permaculture

[Lawrence London <lfljvenaura@gmail.com>]

[Steve will like this. It seems to have a purpose similar to the (real)
Permaculture movement, which to my way of thinking is not faith based other
than fostering a "keep the faith" mindset.
Would this project be useful in providing a template for furthering the
spread of Permaculture and encouraging acceptance of its core values,
principles and methods. - LL]

>From ECHELON to NOLEHCE: enabling a strategic conversion to a faith-based
global brain
http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php

26 August 2007 | Draft From ECHELON to NOLEHCE enabling a strategic
conversion to a faith-based global brain

- / -
------------------------------
Introduction <http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#intr>
Strategic approach
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#stra>
Paradigmatic distinction
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#para>
Contrasting ECHELON and NOLEHCE
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#cont>
Transformation of ECHELON capacities to NOLEHCE priorities
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#tran>
Emergent global brain
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#emer>
Patterns of global order: a common structural symbol
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#patt>
Faith-based dimensions
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#fait>
Socio-political "revolution"
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#soci>
Cognitive fusion and groupthink
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#cogn>
Tipping point to reversal through enantiodromia
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#tipp>
Symbolic inversion
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#symb>
Paradoxical partnership
<http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#part>
References <http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/nolehce.php#refs>
------------------------------
Introduction

ECHELON <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON> is the name used to describe
a highly secretive worldwide signals intelligence and analysis network that
is alleged to be operated by the intelligence agencies of five
English-speaking nations (otherwise known as the UKUSA Community
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Community>). Its existence has been
documented by a number of sources -- most notably in a report by the
European Parliament (European Parliament Report on ECHELON
<http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/rapport_echelon_en.pdf>, 2001).

It is claimed that ECHELON can capture radio and satellite communications,
telephone calls, faxes, e-mails and other data streams nearly anywhere in
the world and includes computer automated analysis and sorting of
intercepts. However the European Parliament concluded that "the analysis
carried out in the report has revealed that the technical capabilities of
the system are probably not nearly as extensive as some sections of the
media had assumed". However it is necessarily unproven that it is operating
in the best interests of the population of the world enjoined to engage in
democratic processes in response to the challenges of the future.

One of the early researchers into ECHELON, Steve Wright (*The ECHELON
Trail: an Illegal Vision*
<http://www.surveillance-and-society.org/Articles3%282%29/echelon.pdf>.
*Surveillance
and Society*, 3, 2005) usefully distinguishes between its former nature and
its currently supposed nature:

ECHELON is a (now out-of-date) code name given to the US National Security
Agency's worldwide facility for the mass interception of electronic
telecommunications including, phone, fax and email using key words and
context.... Essentially, the system can work because for some of its
journey, telecommunications traffic is travelling as an electronic stream
that can be intercepted if the appropriate infrastructure is in place.

However, the current wisdom is that ECHELON does not exist in the way it
was originally construed but is a now thought to be a collection of subsets
of interception capabilities using a range of code names of which we remain
ignorant. Nevertheless, for the sake of simplicity, it makes sense to
continue to use the generic label 'ECHELON' whilst recognizing that new
surveillance algorithms have evolved since the early researchers built
their crude paradigms.

As an operation of the "shadow world", the issue explored here is the
possibility of the "conversion" of ECHELON into a counterpart, with a
reversal of style and intent -- and therefore to be suitably named as
NOLEHCE. The lessons of history and psychodynamics point to strategic
vulnerabilities within operations like ECHELON that render them vulnerable
to such reversals at critical "tipping points" associated with "paradigm
shifts". Just as the security services of the modern democracies have
ensured implementation of measures abhorred in the totalitarian systems of
the past, such a role reversal (otherwise termed enantiodromia) may be
anticipated (and possibly enabled) with respect to ECHELON.
Strategic approach

The intent here is not to repeat descriptions of ECHELON, nor to assess
their validity or the significance of the cases variously made by
conspiracy theorists, civil rights campaigners, or those justifiably
concerned with the implications for industrial espionage and unfair
commercial advantage. That is the focus of an extensive body of literature
accessible via the web (see *Wikipedia* entry
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON>, for example).

The catalyst for the argument here was a BBC interview with the retiring
head of a UK intelligence agency who indicated, in effect, that their main
focus was the prevention (or destabilization) of relationships understood
to be potentially threatening to UK security. To this end a vast security
apparatus is deployed under budgets whose nature and extent is necessarily
concealed. The same is believed to be true of other countries -- notably
those collaborating with the UK in ECHELON.

As a counterpart to this secretly controlled activity -- essentially
undemocratic -- are the activities of myriads of civil society and other
bodies. These are enjoined to openness and democratic principles, which
they may fiercely defend. Typically they are extremely under-resourced in
terms of the challenges they feel impelled to address. Typically also they
are fragmented and uncoordinated in their efforts, however valuable may be
the sociodiversity they represent and the psychocultural ecosystems they
enrich.

The question to be asked is: *what would be the consequence of allocating
the resources -- currently devoted (through ECHELON) to preventing or
destabilizing civil society relationships -- to the process of building and
enriching patterns of relationship, whether societal or cognitive?* More
generally, what is the information system appropriate to a learning
society? This is the anticipated orientation of NOLEHCE -- following the
strategic conversion of ECHELON.