If we label the ideal commercial person as a “business manager” and the ideal military person as a “soldier”, we would label the ideal soft power institution employee as a “hippie” without the negative stereotypical characteristics.
But more importantly, I think he brings up the point that, in today’s world, both hard power and soft power are basically the same culturally, with the structure being the difference between soft and hard power.
Hard power is structure more like a 2×4, while soft power is more like a feather pillow. Most countries would rather get hit with a pillow than a 2×4, but no mater how you look at it, you’re still getting hit.
Seyditz89 says we need to change the culture of soft power, and I would not argue against this. I especially like the part where seyditz89 turns it over to the hippies.
However, power is power and when you start messing with it between countries there is a price to be paid, and the outcome of both forms of power just depends on who has the most energy to pay with.
So perhaps we should develop a different form of power.
Network wise, soft power runs in phases much like 3-phase power running an industrial motor.
The flow of currant that runs the motor not only alternates in direction but is carried on different degrees in waves at the changing of direction.
These “waves” of soft power come into the target country in the form of resources, with the hope of changing the way the motor moves.
Culturally wise, the more powerful country doesn’t want the motor to stop turning inside the less powerful country, it just doesn’t want to give it any more power, and it wants the less powerful country to act more like the more powerful country.
Changing how another nation of power acts is a big problem, especially when the more powerful nation has less energy. That is basically where the U.S.A. is at. The U.S.A. is a nation of little energy, but is able to, because of its culture, express that energy very quickly.
So the third form of power, which I shall call here and now hippie power, would run parallel to the nation less powerful and only connect perpendicular to the less powerful nation, much like our connection with Yemen today.
I am not sure this less love and more sex approach would be hippie approved, but yeah, sex, drugs and rock and roll.
1 out of 3 is probably better than what our soft power is doing today.
via MilPub: Soft Power, A Strategic Theory Perspective.