As of late, I have been doing extensive reading into the future use of drones as weapons of warfare. While I cannot possibly summarize all of my readings into one blog post (and even if I could, it would be such a long post that no one would read it), I have developed some burning observations that have driven me to write this evening.
The Brutal, Pareto-Optimal History of Warfare
Throughout the course of human history, males of various tribes have warred with each other over natural resources, the pillaging of accumulated wealth, and sexual access to the females of other tribes. We will ignore in this thought the relatively recent phenomenon of the large-scale deployment of women as frontline combat troops. Of course, women have fought in warfare in ages past (e.g. Russia on the Eastern Front during WWII, the French Resistance, and female Viet Cong soldiers during the Vietnam War), but these are exceptions overwhelming focused on irregular partisans.
A crash course in the concept of Pareto-optimality in engineering usage: A “Pareto-optimal” airfoil design set from a research team in Japan. The black slivers on the far right are cross sections of an airfoil. Cd and Cl are drag and lift coefficients. Not all objectives can be extremized simultaneously, leading to a set of optimal designs (denoted by the red points on the scatterplot)
To borrow a mathematical concept I have already written about previously
(see also here
), warfare throughout most of human history has not
been the smartest males against the smartest males, or the strongest males against the strongest males, or any combination of those maximized traits. Win or lose, capable armies sent out into the field to do battle have always been the Pareto-optimal
set of males that a particular tribe or nation has been able to produce. Such men are unlikely to be professional bodybuilders, champion sprinters, eagle-eyed marksmen, expert alpine skiers, expert mountaineers, or any other set of traits that can be competitively ranked. It is not necessary (or even feasible) for every soldier to be a total expert at every possible skill. All other things being equal, the army with the most males composing “the right stuff” are likely to prevail in war.
No fatties or retards make it through BUDS training.
I hedged a bit with “all other things being equal.” The fecundity of a tribe’s females could itself be argued to be part of the Pareto-optimal set, even though for most of human history women were never involved in combat. As a thought experiment, a “master race” that had mastered all skills of military importance will eventually die out and be forgotten without a shot being fired if their females do not produce enough sturdy males for effective defense of their tribe. A tribe with many fecund females will produce more males, and thus generally have a larger Pareto-optimal set of combat-ready males to draw from. This high-birth-rate strategy can itself be considered a method of waging war. One could feasibly argue that the African population explosion of the 21st century is a de facto tactic of warfare, where the African women have so many children that their economies cannot possibly support, thus forcing their males to head north to Europe in search of their fortunes. While they carry no weapons, it could further be argued that they are in fact waging a brutally-effective psychological warfare campaign against white Europe, as white Europe is so paralyzed with guilt over Hitlerism, colonialism, and racism, that they feel no other choice but to permit these invaders into their countries.
The coming black tide (from The Economist).
What are some traits? Obviously, physical fitness is important for a soldier – but to reiterate, one need not be a champion athlete. Intelligence is also required (as Steve Sailer has written about at length
), but you do not need to be a rocket scientist or brain surgeon. Psychological sturdiness is also required, but you need not be utterly desensitized. What is required is the appropriate admixture
of these traits, in order to form the most combat-capable force possible.
In addition to maximizing these criterion in a Pareto sense, most armies have multiple hard constraints on minimum performance from their pool of male recruits, such as:
- A minimum amount of intelligence (e.g. a minimum IQ or AFQT score)
- A minimum of a college education for the officer corps
- A minimum level of self-discipline and propensity for following orders (no felonies or serious debt problems)
- A minimum level of physical fitness (must meet height and weight, must meet minimum scores on a fitness test)
- No alcohol or drug problems
- No history of certain mental illnesses (e.g. psychopathy, sociopathy, schizophrenia)
This combination of high physical strength, high intelligence, high psychological stamina, and sufficient force size, all subject to minimum requirements for selection, has been the rule for warfare since the dawn of the practice.
The Advent of the Drone
However, the drone turns this paradigm on its head. Instead of all those requirements needed to fight and survive the horrors of war, the Pareto-optimal set has simply collapsed down to whichever tribe (or rather, nation-state) has the highest-intellect male and female science nerds on their team in order to design the slickest drones they possibly can to fight their wars for them. Today, drones are almost wholly air-based platforms, but future drone systems will be land-based, naval sub-surface, and naval surface platforms.
One of our future four-star generals.
The rise of the drone portends the death of the masculine warrior male elite in civilized society. Having high levels of testosterone, high levels of aggression, and being “full of piss and vinegar” will increasingly be seen not as a military asset, but as a liability needing control and management by the security organs. One can foresee a future where scrawny, wimpy nerds wear a general’s regalia, while muscular, physically fit, masculine, high-testosterone males languish in prisons with no outlet available for their aggressive urges through military service or combat.
The future graveyard of men that once would have made prime soldiering material.
The Future of Soldiering
“How many points for that camel?” “It depends – is anyone riding it?”
To reiterate, I predict that the rise of the drones will lead to a collapse of the Pareto frontier regarding combat-ready males from a wide variety of combat-relevant traits to an overwhelming emphasis on pure intelligence (e.g. IQ, cognitive ability) in the service of drone development. One can envision a future where the military officer corps is overwhelmingly composed of degreed science geeks with extensive mathematical and technical training, and employed entirely toward drone R&D and deployment.
As Steve Sailer has astutely pointed out, a wide swath of the general public is simply too dumb to join the military. This trend is only going to get worse, as future drone systems will become far too mentally taxing for all but the brightest people to effectively pilot – and development will only be accessible to the brightest of the bright. Opportunities for actual human-based soldiering will be limited likely to occupation forces, sent in to clean up the remnants of resistance after the drones have slaughtered all serious resistance.