Proposed Model for Reasoning, Explaining, and Predicting Statements About the Idea of a Deep State

I. Context

In the complex landscape of current political speech, the "deep state" concept has become a fundamental lens through which the new administration and others interpret the machinery of government" (MoG). Traditional and social media often report on presidential nominees and administrative policies without sufficiently exploring the underlying concept of a shadow government. Grasping the concept is essential for understanding the new administration's viewpoint on disrupting or transforming the current state of the government. Additionally, it is necessary for private organizations to analyze scenarios that anticipate potential actions for adapting to changes in policies and regulations affecting their operations.

 

In writing this article, we seek to suggest a framework for understanding the mental model that emerges when debating the deep state idea, the possible motivations of those who invoke it to justify their actions, and those who criticize it.

The concept of the “state within a state" or "shadow government,” often called the deep state, has been examined in numerous books and academic papers. It typically describes a concealed government operating behind the scenes, made up of established bureaucrats, intelligence agencies, military officials, and other influential groups that manipulate national policy without democratic oversight. Although the idea of a deep state as a single, conspiratorial entity lacks strong support among academics, scholars acknowledge and investigate various theories regarding how unelected officials, elite networks, and institutional frameworks impact government policy and decision-making.

Here's a preview of using the model: The first discusses dealing with the deep state's disruption, and the second discusses how private organizations could address the changes' effects on their structures.

Example 1: Input statement: "every day would be a battle for the deconstruction of the administrative state."

Output: 

Actors:

Elites, Bureaucrats, Interest Groups, Political Leaders: 

These groups could be seen as either supporting or resisting the deconstruction of the administrative state. Elites and interest groups might be pushing for deconstruction to reduce regulations affecting their interests.

Structures:

Institutional Frameworks, Networks and Alliances, Economic and Social Systems: 

The statement implies a challenge to these structures. Deconstruction would target bureaucratic institutions, regulatory frameworks, and possibly the alliances that support the current administrative setup.

Processes:

Policy-Making, Influence Mechanisms, Communication Channels: 

The battle would involve altering policy-making processes, changing how influence is exerted within the system, and controlling the narrative through communication channels.

Perceptions and Ideologies:

Public Trust, Ideological Beliefs, Conspiracy Theories: 

Public trust in the government could be affected, with ideological beliefs playing a significant role in either supporting or opposing deconstruction. This process might also emerge or fuel conspiracy theories.

Reasoning About Statements:

Identify the Source and Motivation:

Who is making the statement? Likely a political figure or commentator advocating for less government intervention.

What is their motivation? Could be ideological (libertarianism, small government philosophy) or economic (business interests favoring deregulation).

Analyze Contextual Factors:

Political Climate, Recent Events: 

This could be part of a broader political movement or reaction to recent government actions perceived as overreach.

Evaluate Structural Influences:

Institutional Actions, Elite Interests: 

The administrative state itself might resist changes, while certain elite groups might support it for economic gain.

Explaining Statements:

Applying Theoretical Frameworks:

Bureaucratic Politics Model, Iron Triangles and Issue Networks, State Capture Theory: 

These theories could explain the dynamics at play, where different groups within the bureaucracy and outside interest groups vie for power and influence.

Understanding Perceptions:

Loss of State Capacity, Ideological Lenses, Political Discontent: 

The deconstruction could lead to a perceived loss of state capacity, influenced by ideological views on government size and role, potentially increasing political discontent.

Predicting Statements:

Monitoring Trends:

Policy Shifts, Election Cycles: 

We might expect policy shifts toward deregulation and changes in election rhetoric focusing on reducing the administrative state.

Assessing Actor Behavior:

Elites and Leaders, Media Narratives: 

Elites might push for reforms beneficial to their interests, while media narratives could either support or challenge the deconstruction narrative.

Evaluating Structural Changes:

Regulatory Actions, Institutional Reforms: 

There could be a push for significant regulatory rollbacks and reforms in institutions' operations, aiming to reduce their size and influence.

The input statement reflects a complex interplay between various actors, structures, and processes within the administrative state. These are influenced by ideological and economic motivations and could lead to significant changes in governance and public perception.

Example 2: Input statement: Operate the model to advise private organizations that are highly dependent on the current state of the government, what recommendations would you make regarding the development of potential scenarios to address and predict the effects of changes in government operations?

Output:

Actors:

Engage with Bureaucrats and Interest Groups: 

Since these actors are deeply involved in policy-making and regulatory frameworks, private organizations should foster relationships with them. This can help them understand upcoming changes, influence policy in favor of business interests, or at least mitigate negative impacts.

Structures:

Institutional Frameworks: 

Organizations should analyze how changes in these frameworks might affect their operations. For instance, what sectors would benefit from a move towards deregulation? How can the organization adapt or leverage new compliance demands if regulation increases?

Networks and Alliances: Building or strengthening alliances with other businesses, industry groups, or even academic institutions can provide a collective bargaining power or shared insight into government directions.

Processes:

Policy-Making: 

Develop internal teams dedicated to policy analysis and forecasting. This team would track legislative changes, participate in public consultations, and prepare strategic responses or adjustments to business models based on emerging policies.

Influence Mechanisms: Understand and perhaps engage in lobbying or public affairs strategies. This is about reacting to changes and trying to shape them.

Perceptions and Ideologies:

Public Trust and Ideological Beliefs: 

If public trust in government or certain ideologies (like small government, deregulation) becomes prominent, businesses can align their corporate social responsibility (CSR) or public communication strategies to resonate with these ideologies, thereby gaining public and possibly, political support.

Model Framework:

Scenario Planning: 

Use the model to predict various government transformation scenarios. For each scenario, develop strategies, including financial restructuring, diversification of services/products, or technological investment.

Strategic Partnerships: 

Collaborate with entities that are likely to be less affected or benefit from government changes. This could include tech firms if the government is moving towards digital solutions or consultancies specializing in regulatory compliance if regulations tighten.

Regulatory Foresight: 

Set up a regulatory foresight unit within the organization. This unit would track current regulations and anticipate future regulatory landscapes based on government trends, thereby staying ahead of compliance requirements.

Predicting Statements:

Monitoring Trends: 

Monitor election cycles, policy shifts, and public opinion closely. This can help predict when and how government transformations might occur.

Assessing Actor Behavior: 

Assess the behavior of key political figures, bureaucrats, and influential groups regularly. Their actions can be early indicators of policy direction.

Evaluating Structural Changes: 

Prepare for potential regulatory bodies, funding models, or procurement process changes. For instance, if there's a shift towards more public-private partnerships, how can your organization position itself advantageously?

By integrating these elements into private organizations' strategic planning, they can better navigate or even influence the transformation of government operations, ensuring their interests are protected or advanced in the evolving landscape.

Some key interpretations and historical usage of the deep state from academic literature include the following:

Definitions and Characteristics

1. Coercive Institutions: 

The deep state is often described as a set of coercive institutions, actors, and relationships that operate beyond formal defense, intelligence, and policing bodies. These entities justify their actions by claiming to protect the nation against existential threats.

2. Secret Networks: 

A secret network is also defined as a network of unelected government officials and private entities that operate without legal authority to influence government policy. This network is characterized by its experience, knowledge, relationships, and shared values, which enable it to function as a super-government accountable to no one.

3. Second-Order Government: 

According to Peter Dale Scott, the deep state can be considered as a “second-order government” that operates behind the constitutional state. This includes non-accountable agencies like the CIA and NSA, supported by financial interests such as Wall Street and big oil.

Historical Context and Usage

1. Origin in Turkey: 

The term “deep state” comes from the Turkish phrase "derin devlet," which refers to a hidden network within military and civilian sectors that works to maintain secular order. Historically, this concept has been associated with networks formed during the Cold War

2. American Context: 

In the United States, the deep state is often associated with a hybrid association of government elements and top-level industry that can govern without formal political consent. It has been a point of contention during the Trump administration, where it was perceived as an obstacle to presidential policy goals.

3. Conspiracy Theories: 

The deep state is frequently discussed in the context of conspiracy theories, suggesting that segments of public administration prevent the people's will from being reflected in policy. This notion has gained traction among certain political groups as a critique of bureaucratic autonomy.

II. Model's Purpose

We designed a model incorporating various academic theories to analyze statements related to the deep state. This model will help understand these statements by explaining their origins and implications and predicting future occurrences. It emphasizes the interactions between actors, structures, processes, and perceptions within political and social systems.

III. Components of the Model

1. Actors

Core Actors Associated with the Deep State:

• Unelected Bureaucrats: Career government officials who operate within agencies and significantly influence policy implementation.
• Intelligence Agencies: Organizations like the CIA, NSA, or FBI, which possess classified information and operate with a degree of secrecy.
• Military Officials: High-ranking officers who have substantial influence over national security and defense policies.
• Influential Groups: Entities such as think tanks, lobbyists, or private sector elites that can exert pressure on policy-making outside democratic oversight.

Other Relevant Actors:

• Elected Political Leaders: While not part of the deep state, they are crucial in the narrative as they may claim to be undermined by it or may interact with the deep state actors.
• The Public: Citizens whose perceptions and reactions can influence and be influenced by deep-state narratives.

2. Structures

• Institutional Frameworks: The organization of government bodies and agencies, especially those operating with autonomy and secrecy.
• Networks and Alliances: Relationships among unelected officials and influential groups that may operate outside of public scrutiny.
• Secrecy and Lack of Oversight: Mechanisms that allow certain government functions to occur without transparent democratic processes.

3. Processes

• Policy Implementation: How unelected officials carry out policies, potentially deviating from elected leaders' intentions.
• Influence Mechanisms: Non-transparent methods used by deep state actors to shape policy, such as classified operations, covert actions, or bureaucratic resistance.
• Information Control: The management and sometimes manipulation of information, including intelligence and classified data.

4. Perceptions and Ideologies

• Public Trust: Confidence in government institutions, which can be eroded by perceptions of a deep state.
• Conspiracy Theories: Beliefs that secretive groups are manipulating events behind the scenes.
• Ideological Beliefs: Frameworks shaping how individuals interpret government actions, often influencing susceptibility to deep state narratives.

IV. Model Framework

The model focuses on how interactions among unelected actors, structures lacking democratic oversight, hidden processes, and public perceptions contribute to statements about the deep state.

1. Reasoning About Statements

• Identify the Source and Motivation

• Who is making the statement? Consider if it's an elected official, a media personality, or a member of the public.
• What is their motivation? Are they aiming to gain political support, deflect criticism, or raise awareness of genuine concerns?

• Analyze Contextual Factors

• Conflict Between Elected Officials and Bureaucracy: Tensions may arise when unelected officials are perceived to oppose or undermine elected leaders' agendas.
• Secrecy and Lack of Transparency: Classified operations or opaque bureaucratic processes can fuel deep state allegations.

• Evaluate Structural Influences

• Autonomous Agencies: Bodies that operate independently can be perceived as unaccountable.
• Historical Precedents: Past government overreach or misconduct can influence current perceptions.

2. Explaining Statements

• Applying Theoretical Frameworks

• Bureaucratic Politics Model: Explains how unelected officials' interests might conflict with elected leaders, leading to perceptions of undermining or sabotage.
• Administrative State Concerns: Highlights how complex bureaucracies can operate beyond direct democratic control.
• Elite Theory (Adjusted): Focuses on unelected elites within government institutions influencing policy for their interests.

• Understanding Perceptions

• Distrust in Government: Historical events like Watergate or COINTELPRO have sown seeds of mistrust.
• Ideological Lenses: Certain political ideologies may be more prone to view unelected officials with suspicion.

3. Predicting Statements

• Monitoring Political Dynamics

• Policy Conflicts: Deep-state accusations may arise when elected leaders' initiatives face resistance from within government agencies.
• Investigations and Leaks: High-profile leaks or investigations involving intelligence agencies can prompt deep-state narratives.

• Assessing Communication Channels

• Media Amplification: How media outlets report on bureaucratic actions can influence public perception.
• Social Media Trends: Viral content can spread deep-state theories rapidly.

V. How to Use the Model

• Analysts and Researchers: Utilize the model to dissect statements about the deep state, focusing on the role of unelected actors.
• Educators: Teach students about the dynamics of power and accountability within government institutions.
• Citizens: Enhance understanding of how perceptions of the deep state arise and their impact on democratic processes.

VI.  Explored Theories

Some theories and concepts that have garnered consensus among academics which explore the dynamics often associated with the idea of a deep state:

1. Elite Theory

• Definition: Elite theory posits that a small minority, consisting of members of the economic elite and policy-planning networks, holds the most power and that this power is independent of democratic elections.
• Explanation: According to this theory, elites derive power from their positions in large organizations, such as corporations, the military, and political institutions. They can shape policy outcomes to serve their interests, often at the expense of the broader public. This is not necessarily a coordinated conspiracy but rather a byproduct of shared interests and social networks.

2. The Military-Industrial Complex

• Definition: A concept popularized by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, referring to the relationship between a country's military, its government, and the industries that supply military equipment and services.
• Explanation: The military-industrial complex suggests that these groups can exert undue influence over national policy, prioritizing defense spending and military actions that benefit their interests. Academics study how this complex can lead to escalated military engagements and inflated defense budgets.

3. Bureaucratic Politics Model

• Definition: A theory that explains policy outcomes as a result of bargaining, compromises, and power struggles among government agencies and officials.
• Explanation: The government is seen as a collection of competing interests rather than a unified entity. Decisions emerge from negotiations among bureaucrats, each with their own agendas and preferences, which can lead to suboptimal policy outcomes not necessarily aligned with elected officials' intentions.

4. Iron Triangles and Issue Networks

• Definition: Iron triangles are the strong, stable relationships among congressional committees, bureaucratic agencies, and interest groups. Issue networks are more fluid alliances among various interest groups and individuals who unite to promote a common cause.
• Explanation: These concepts illustrate how policy can be shaped by tight-knit groups that operate within the government framework but are not directly accountable to the public. They can dominate specific policy areas, making it difficult for outside voices to be heard.

5. The Administrative State

• Definition: Refers to government agencies and regulators that create and enforce rules and regulations, often with significant autonomy.
• Explanation: The administrative state can substantially impact policy implementation. Academics study how bureaucratic discretion and expertise grant these agencies power that can sometimes circumvent or dilute legislative intent.

6. State Capture Theory

• Definition: A form of systemic political corruption where private interests significantly influence a state's decision-making processes to their own advantage.
• Explanation: This theory examines how businesses and oligarchs can shape laws, policies, and regulations through illicit means, undermining democratic institutions and processes.

7. Structuralist Theories of State Power

• Definition: These theories assert that the state's structure inherently serves certain interests over others, particularly those of the capitalist class in a capitalist society.
• Explanation: Scholars argue that the state's organization and functions naturally align with the needs of dominant economic groups, leading to policies that favor these groups without the need for a conspiratorial deep state.

VII. Final Thoughts

The deep state concept spins around the tension between democratic accountability and the actions of unelected officials within government structures. While the idea is often shrouded in secrecy and conspiracy theories, academic discussions highlight its complex role within the political landscape.

By verifying that our model accurately reflects its intended use, we can use it to analyze, predict, and understand statements anywhere (social and traditional media) related to the deep state, thus encouraging more informed discussions and suggesting changes to the framework.

References

1. O'Neil, Patrick H., The Deep State: An Emerging Concept in Comparative Politics (November 20, 2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2313375 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2313375.

2. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deep%20state?t

3. A Research Agenda for Intelligence Studies and Government, edited by Robert Dover, Huw Dylan, and Michael Goodman, published in 2022, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9781800378803.

4. Filkins, D. (2012, March 12).The deep state. The New Yorker. Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/03/12/the-deep-state.

5. Stephen Skowronek, Phantoms of a Beleaguered Republic: The Deep State and The Unitary Executive. https://politicalscience.yale.edu/publications/phantoms-beleaguered-republic-deep-state-and-unitary-executive?

6. Kathryn Olmsted & Simon Willmetts, State Secrecy Explains the Origins of the ‘Deep State’ Conspiracy Theory. Scientific American, February 6, 2024. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/state-secrecy-explains-the-origins-of-the-deep-state-conspiracy-theory/?t

7. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23276665.2023.2249142?t#top-content-scroll

8. https://www.govexec.com/feature/gov-exec-deconstructing-deep-state/?t

Reviewed Theories References

1. Elite Theory

• Book: Mills, C. Wright. The Power Elite. Oxford University Press, 1956.
• Description: A seminal work analyzing the interwoven interests of the leaders of the military, corporate, and political elements of society and how they control power and policy.
• Article: Domhoff, G. William. "Elite Theory and the Formation of Public Policy." Sociological Perspectives, vol. 33, no. 2, 1990, pp. 383–400.
• Description: Discusses how elites influence policy-making processes and the implications for democracy.

2. The Military-Industrial Complex

• Source: Eisenhower, Dwight D. "Farewell Address to the Nation." 17 Jan. 1961.
• Description: The speech where President Eisenhower coined the term "military-industrial complex" and warned of its potential dangers.
• Book: Hartung, William D. Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex. Nation Books, 2010.
• Description: Examines the influence of defense contractors on U.S. military policy.

3. Bureaucratic Politics Model

• Book: Allison, Graham T., and Philip Zelikow. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. 2nd ed., Longman, 1999.
• Description: Introduces the bureaucratic politics model and applies it to the analysis of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
• Article: Allison, Graham T. "Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis." American Political Science Review, vol. 63, no. 3, 1969, pp. 689–718.
• Description: Original presentation of the bureaucratic politics model in academic literature.

4. Iron Triangles and Issue Networks

• Book Chapter: Heclo, Hugh. "Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment." In King, Anthony, ed. The New American Political System. American Enterprise Institute, 1978, pp. 87–124.
• Description: Introduces the concept of issue networks as a more fluid alternative to iron triangles.
• Article: Adams, Gordon. "The Iron Triangle: The Politics of Defense Contracting." Council on Economic Priorities, 1981.
• Description: Analyzes how iron triangles function within the context of defense spending and policy.

5. The Administrative State

• Book: Waldo, Dwight. The Administrative State: A Study of the Political Theory of American Public Administration. Transaction Publishers, 2007 (originally published in 1948).
• Description: Explores the growth and role of administrative agencies in the U.S. government.
• Book: Simon, Herbert A. Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. 4th ed., Free Press, 1997.
• Description: Examines the decision-making processes within bureaucratic organizations.

6. State Capture Theory

• Report: Hellman, Joel S., et al. Seize the State, Seize the Day: State Capture, Corruption, and Influence in Transition. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2444, 2000.
• Description: Explore how private firms influence state officials in transition economies.
• Article: Hellman, Joel S., and Daniel Kaufmann. "Confronting the Challenge of State Capture in Transition Economies." Finance & Development, vol. 38, no. 3, 2001.

7. Structuralist Theories of State Power

• Book: Poulantzas, Nicos. Political Power and Social Classes. Verso, 1973.
• Description: Offers a Marxist analysis of how state structures serve the ruling class's interests.
• Book: Skocpol, Theda. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press, 1979.
• Description: Explores how state structures and international forces shape social revolutions.

Final Remarks

A group of friends from “Organizational DNA Labs” (a private group) compiled references and notes from various of our thesis, authors, and academics for the article and analysis. We also utilized AI platforms such as Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Open-Source ChatGPT, and Grammarly as a research assistant to save time and check for expressions' structural and logical coherence. The reason for using various platforms is to verify information from multiple sources and validate it through academic databases and equity firm analysts with whom we have collaborated. The references and notes in this work provide a comprehensive list of the sources utilized. I, as the editor, have taken great care to ensure all sources are appropriately cited and the authors are duly acknowledged for their contributions. The content is based primarily on our analysis and synthesis of the sources. The compilation, summaries, and inferences are the product of using both our time with the motivation to expand my knowledge and share it. While we have drawn from quality sources to inform our perspective, the conclusion reflects our views and understanding of the topics covered as they continue to develop through constant learning and review of the literature in this business field.