Introduction
It seems you can’t read a paper, watch the news, or scroll online without seeing comments and reactions to the efforts of Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency to cut government spending. I take no issue with the existence of DOGE. I suspect it is something that was long overdue.
I am under no illusion that fraud, waste, and mismanagement exist within various government programs. I have no problem looking into this in a very detailed and comprehensive manner. I’m not sure Elon Musk and his team are the ones who are best qualified to be doing these audits and the investigating, but I support the idea of eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse within the federal budget.
However, rather than exploring those concerns, I want to focus on a possible unintended consequence of efforts being undertaken by Musk and DOGE. I am concerned that such efforts may have the unintended consequence of undermining the “soft power” of the United States. And in a move that observers and readers will undoubtedly question, I will try to use a long-running computer game to illustrate the validity of this concern.
Soft Power: Hard Power’s Subtle Sibling
In international relations, soft power refers to a country’s ability to influence others through appeal and attraction rather than coercion and force. Coined by Joseph Nye, the concept of soft power emphasizes cultural influence, diplomacy, and economic partnerships as tools to achieve national and international goals. While military might and hard power often dominate discussions about global influence, soft power may offer a more sustainable and ethical approach to fostering alliances and achieving long-term goals.
Soft power operates through a nation’s culture, political ideals, and economic strength. Countries like the United States, Japan, and South Korea have extended their global influence significantly through cultural exports such as Hollywood movies, anime, and K-pop, respectively. Similarly, organizations like the United Nations and the European Union promote democracy, human rights, and international cooperation, making their values appealing to other nations. Soft power fosters goodwill and cooperation, creating long-lasting alliances and relationships that might not be achievable through force alone.
Other examples of soft power include things like Italian cuisine, Qatar’s sports diplomacy, French luxury brands, Swiss neutrality, Silicon Valley’s technological innovation, long-standing educational institutions like Oxford University, and China’s new emerging DeepSeek AI program.
In contrast to hard power—where nations use military or economic pressure to assert dominance, soft power often leads to more sustainable influence. Where military interventions can create resentment and instability, soft power can build trust and voluntary cooperation. The ability to win the hearts and minds of people in other countries makes it possible to influence their governments, policies, and even long-term geopolitical alignment.
Soft Power in Sid Meier’s Civilization
One of the more compelling examples of the power of soft power I have encountered is the long-running computer strategy game “Civilization” by Sid Meier. The seventh edition of the Civilization series was just released this week. Among its fans is Mark Zuckerberg, who says he has been playing the game since middle school and credits the game as one of the reasons he got into engineering.
The Civilization game lets you choose from a variety of historical civilizations and attempt to outlast and become the top civilization. You and competing civilizations progress through historical eras starting at the dawn of time and ending in the far future in space. The game is infinitely repayable as there are multiple civilizations to play (each with its own strengths and weaknesses), multiple ways to play, and multiple paths to victory.
The Civilization series integrates the concept of soft power into its gameplay mechanics. While military conquest is a path to victory, there are alternative strategies that reflect real-world social, diplomatic, and cultural influences and dynamics. Players can achieve victory by pursuing diplomatic, cultural, scientific, religious, and economic dominance, all of which emphasize soft power over brute military force.
Cultural Influence: Winning Hearts and Minds
A core pillar of soft power in Civilization is the “Cultural Victory,” achieved by amassing tourism and cultural influence until rival civilizations adopt the player’s way of life. Constructing wonders like the Eiffel Tower or Broadway, curating great works of art, and hosting international festivals generate “tourists” from other societies, gradually eroding the cultural identity of other civilizations.
This mirrors real-world strategies where nations export cultural values to foster global affinity. For instance, during the Cold War, American jazz, Hollywood films, and consumer culture subtly countered Soviet ideology by painting the U.S. as a beacon of freedom and innovation. Similarly, South Korea’s Hallyu wave—epitomized by K-pop and TV dramas—has boosted its geopolitical standing, transforming the nation into a cultural heavyweight that shapes trends and consumer behavior worldwide.
Diplomacy: Building Alliances, Not Empires
Civilization also allows for diplomatic victories, where players earn favor by aiding city-states, leading global initiatives, and mediating crises. Sending envoys to bolster allies, providing disaster relief, or spearheading climate accords in the game’s World Congress earns “diplomatic favor,” which can be leveraged to pass resolutions benefiting one’s civilization.
This reflects the real-world impact of humanitarian aid and multinational cooperation. Post-World War II, the U.S. Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe’s economy, cementing transatlantic alliances that endure today. Likewise, China’s Belt and Road Initiative invests in infrastructure across Asia and Africa, fostering dependency and goodwill. In both the Civilization game and reality, consistent diplomacy builds networks of trust that can deter aggression and create shared stakes in stability.
Economic and Technological Collaboration: Prosperity as Power
Trade routes in Civilization do more than generate gold—they spread religion, transmit technologies, and strengthen political ties. Players who prioritize research agreements and open borders accelerate collective progress, making their civilization indispensable. For example, forming a “Research Alliance” with a rival in civilization doubles technological collaboration, echoing real partnerships like the International Space Station, where multiple nations have pooled their resources and expertise.
Economically, nations like Germany and Japan have leveraged their industrial and technological prowess to become global leaders without militaristic ambitions. By embedding themselves in supply chains and innovation networks, they exercise influence through economic interdependence, a tactic mirrored in the game’s emphasis on synergies between civilizations.
Ideological and Religious Appeal: Reaching the Masses
Religion in Civilization acts as a soft power tool: missionaries spread beliefs that reshape foreign cities’ loyalty, akin to how ideologies like democracy or socialism gain adherents. A civilization adopting “Religious Unity” negates war weariness, reflecting how shared values stabilize alliances.
Historically, the global embrace of American democracy during the Cold War or the spread of Islam by nations like Saudi Arabia funding mosques, Islamic schools, and scholarship programs worldwide, shows how ideological and religious exports can spread global influence. Like Civilization players competing for religious dominance, nations use education exchanges, religious missionaries, and think tanks to subtly shape global narratives.
Real-World Civilization Gaming
The game Civilization simplifies complex geopolitics, but its victory conditions underscore a timeless truth: lasting dominance stems from the ability to inspire rather than intimidate. Military conquest in the game often sparks coalitions against the aggressor, while cultural and diplomatic victories create enduring legacies.
Similarly, real-world history shows that empires built on force—from Rome to the Soviet Union – can fracture under internal and external pressures, whereas societies that invest in soft power tools cultivate resilience and admiration. As the game teaches, the path to global leadership need not ring with the clash of swords; it can hum with the value of soft power of empire-building through cultural expansion, diplomatic finesse, and ideological appeal.
Yet the rise of initiatives like Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency,” which aims to eliminate “wasteful spending,” raises critical questions: Will austerity policies undermine the very programs that sustain a nation’s soft power? By examining the role of soft power in Civilization and linking it to Musk’s real-world efficiency drive, we may uncover how seemingly nonessential investments in culture, science, and diplomacy are, in fact, vital tools of influence.
Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), as a proxy for real-world austerity advocates, prioritizes “streamlining” budgets by slashing programs deemed nonessential. However, many targeted projects – arts funding, academic grants, cultural exchanges, etc. – may actually be linchpins of soft power:
DOGE’s Potential Impacts on Soft Power
1. Reduction in Cultural and Educational Initiatives
One of DOGE’s primary goals is to slash federal spending significantly, with a target of cutting $500 billion in annual federal expenditures. This aggressive cost-cutting approach could lead to substantial reductions in funding for cultural and educational programs, which are essential components of soft power. Cultural exports, such as music, films, and sports, are powerful tools for projecting a country’s culture and values globally.
Similarly, educational exchanges foster mutual understanding and respect between nations. If DOGE’s budget cuts affect these areas, it could diminish the United States’ ability to engage in cultural diplomacy and educational exchanges, thereby weakening this aspect of soft power.
2. Undermining Political Values
DOGE’s focus on efficiency and cost-cutting may lead to policies that prioritize short-term financial gains over long-term strategic interests. This approach could potentially undermine the political values that contribute to the United States soft power. For instance, DOGE has been involved in canceling contracts and programs related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
While this may align with the administration’s cost-cutting goals and philosophy toward DEI initiatives, it could be perceived negatively by the international community, potentially damaging the U.S.’s image as a champion of inclusivity and equal opportunity. This perception could weaken the country’s political values component of soft power, as these values may no longer be seen as legitimate or morally authoritative on the global stage
3. Impact on Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
DOGE’s streamlining efforts, which include reducing the federal workforce and scaling back regulations, could have unintended consequences on the United States’ foreign policy and diplomatic capabilities. A reduced workforce in key departments such as the State Department could limit the country’s ability to engage in effective public diplomacy, a crucial channel for exerting soft power.
Moreover, if DOGE’s cost-cutting measures lead to a reduction in international aid or participation in global initiatives, it could be perceived as a retreat from global leadership. This perception could significantly impact the United States’ ability to build alliances, foster cooperation, and enhance its global influence through non-coercive means – all key aspects of soft power.
4. Potential for Technological Overreach
While DOGE aims to modernize federal technology and software systems, there are concerns about data security and potential conflicts of interest, given Musk’s private business interests. If these concerns materialize into actual breaches or scandals, they could severely damage the United States’ reputation and credibility on the global stage, further eroding its soft power.
5. Shift in Global Perception
The aggressive cost-cutting and efficiency-driven approach of DOGE could also be perceived by other nations as a shift towards a more inward-looking, isolationist stance. This perception could diminish the United States’ appeal as a global leader and partner, potentially creating a vacuum that other nations might seek to fill, thereby reducing America’s soft power influence.
Conclusion
Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) aims to streamline operations and reduce federal spending, but its approach could inadvertently undermine U.S. soft power. Much like a common pitfall in the game Civilization, prioritizing short-term savings over long-term gains may lead to cuts in cultural and educational programs, a weakening of political values, reduced diplomatic efforts, technological overreach, and a shift in global perception of the United States on the global stage. To mitigate these risks, DOGE should balance cost-saving measures with strategic investments in soft power, carefully considering the long-term impact of budget cuts and policy changes on America’s global leadership.
certifiable 
Leave a comment