With the development of psychohistory, a new realm of competition between members of the human species opens up. It would be foolish to think that we can carry out our meming (deliberate spreading of ideas for a specific future goal) and influence on society without others attempting the same. There will be inevitable interference due to differing goals among those doing said meming. This interference may nullify any attempts to have a significant impact, canceling out the effects. One possible solution might be all for those meming to join forces rather than competing. This may actually be easier than it sounds because psychohistory, in addition to being a great prediction tool, can also tell us what goals we should be working toward – to a limited extent. Because the meming individuals all have psychohistory in common, their goals will begin to converge as they learn more and more. The way it works is this: any set of goals for the form of society has a certain level of stability that can be proven from the psychohistorical calculations. The amount of effort needed to maintain an unstable configuration can be known and contrasted to the amount of benefit derived from said configuration. The people doing the meming will begin to come to the same conclusion about what goals are worth pursuing. Also, because psychohistory deals with how the habits, customs, and even beliefs of others can be manipulated, it offers guidance to how those meming may manipulate themselves. For the sake of joining forces, it is easier to change one’s goals to match those of a former opponent than it is to compromise one’s goals.

Unfortunately, as the number of people with psychohistorical knowledge grows, there will always be some on the fringe that either won’t join or simply haven’t joined yet. Since the idea of joining psychohistorical forces is dependent on the idea of psychohistory to spread (An individual can learn of psychohistory without learning of joining psychohistorical forces, but not vice versa.), what we have are three sets of people: those who know nothing, those who know psychohistory but haven’t joined, and those who know psychohistory and have joined. It is imperative that the middle group be kept as small as possible to avoid feedback. One way of doing this is to spread the idea of joining with the idea of psychohistory at all times. Then, since the idea of psychohistory is already out there now today, the new combination idea must be a faster spreader to catch up. This is easier said than done. As any marketer will tell you, advertising is expensive; the most efficient way to spread your ideas is to make it worthwhile for the general population to spread them for you by word-of-mouth. But if this is done, it must be such that one idea is not spread without the other. So there is a trade-off between advertising cost and control of the information dissemination.

A possible way of keeping the number of competitors small is to lay traps for those who fit the psychological profile of a potential competitor. For example, seminars could be advertised that would appeal to people like them. Then, when they arrive, carefully present the material in such a way as to discourage them from continuing (or beginning) in their meming. Alternatively, one may use a seminar to turn potential competitors into partners, employees, or allies. At the very least, the attendees can be tagged and observed. Another way to find potential competitors is to acquire mailing lists from certain types of magazines. In fact, one may start a psychohistory magazine just to see who subscribes.

However, it may not be enough to find people by their psychological profiles to keep them from the middle group of non-joiners. Because of what they are, and what they do, they are likely to be suspicious and careful. The most careful ones are the ones that are most dangerous. One should also look for the type of person who is most likely to be in a position to receive the first idea (about psychohistory) without the second (about joining). For example, barbers that specialize in women’s cuts are more likely to receive an idea discussed mostly by women than an idea discussed mostly by men. If one barber is heavy and is more likely to join a weight loss program, she is more likely to receive both an idea discussed by women and an idea pertaining to the demographic group of heavy people. She will most likely receive the combination of the two ideas, but a thin barber, even one that specializes in women’s cuts, may not. This is how people may be tagged as potential competitors and how one will know which demographic group to focus their meming on. It may be that a combination of many tactics will work best to keep the number of competitors small.

Unfortunately, it is virtually certain that a few competitors will arise. Some of them, fearing too many other competitors themselves, will allow and even aid the tactics used to keep their numbers small. Others, fearing too much centralized power, will attempt the creation of as many other competitors as possible. They will develop countermeasures against profile seeking and linking the ideas of joining and psychohistory. Of course, these individuals will have to deal with counter-countermeasures from the rest of us.

An important part of memetic warfare is making decisions of what ideas to spread and how to spread them. To do this effectively, one needs accurate data and must have the right ideas in his mind first. This can be very difficult when the competition is spreading around ideas for the purpose of misleading those that would plot against their interests. One’s effectiveness is somewhat diminished when the methods they use to spread their ideas were sent out by the enemy. One countermeasure to this is to track down where one’s ideas came from. This is hard for many of us. We have so many thoughts and beliefs that we don’t remember from where we acquired all of them, and some of us will be better at remembering than others.

Another countermeasure against deception is to use logic. Even if something seems to make sense, check all assumptions on which it is based. If those assumptions check out, check the assumptions on which they are based. Use theorems whenever possible. If it is proven that the cost of deceiving you in idea X must be greater than any possible benefit to your enemy, then X is most likely not from the enemy. However, idea X may still be false, and it may still be from the enemy if they did not realize how much it would cost them or how little it would benefit them. Finally, it may be useful to randomize one’s behavior in many circumstances so that it cannot be predicted by competitors.

I know that many people will be a bit wary of the advent of memetic warfare and wish it would not materialize. Unfortunately, it is inevitable. It is merely another stage in the culture war. If good people don’t begin preparing their “weapons” now, bad people will soon bring the war to us against our wishes. Right now, this blog is bringing it to you against your wishes! The author wishes only to warn his readers to be prepared.

In the early years of psychohistory development, there will be much short-term abuse and misuse, but that eventually these problems will diminish. Because the activity of memetic warfare encourages the use of formal logic (for protecting oneself from deception), it is a force for good. People will soon gain the notion to use formal logic in other areas of life as well. Because being involved in memetic warfare forces one to realize how the mind can be manipulated, they are more likely to think that they may have been manipulated and won’t be so stuck on their ideas. Disagreements should gradually become more civil. Finally, because some scenarios are psychohistorically unstable and meming competitors do better to work together, humanity’s goals will begin to converge. At least they will to some extent, which is better than to no extent. In conclusion, there is no reason not to embrace the arrival of psychohistory and memetic warfare. Be prepared.