A metaphor for the likelihood of voter fraud, for people who insist that it's a conspiracy theory, or there's no evidence of it.
(1/7)
Suppose Amazon wanted to know how many packages it had. Packages were kept in warehouses all over the country. The system was different in every warehouse.
(2/7)
Some people need to move packages around, and there's a list of who is allowed to do that in each warehouse. But if you go in and say you're that person, nobody checks. If someone else has already done that for you when you arrive, you just get another package.
(3/7)
Some packages get driven around by people in their own cars, some get moved around by the post office, some by volunteers or low paid government employees, and in each case they're largely unmonitored - there's no clear record of which ones left or arrived.
(4/7)
Packages are, by common consent, valuable for people to take. But nobody investigates closely what happens in each place, and very rarely are package thieves caught.
(5/7)
For what package system other than "votes" would this be considered a reliable and acceptable system?
For what important corporate outcome, if you proposed this setup as a manager, would you not be fired?
(6/7)
If someone told you there was no evidence of package fraud, how plausible would that claim be?
(7/7)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One of the worst acts of the Biden administration, crying out for punishment, was to openly defy the law by flying millions of illegals into America. They deliberately flouted the rule of law when it served them, knowing it would be hard to deport them all through the courts.
1/
The entropy of immigration means that it is asymmetrically much easier to add known illegal immigrants to a population than to figure out afterwards who is whom. This is precisely the point. So now you have two choices, both bad.
2/
You either stick to the precise rule of law, due process, every case a extensive fact finding mission, and low false positives on deportation... but with very little deportation overall.
3/
I remember once seeing an Impressionist collection that, unusually, was paired with photos from Paris from the same time. It was amazing how drab and ordinary Paris actually looked next to the paintings. It made me appreciate the art style more, and Paris less.
1/
The Studio Ghibli art is the same, but now everyone gets to see the comparison. But this actually just shows how good it is. It shows the world as you'd like it to be, where the contrast is high, the faces are pretty, the scenes like out of a dream.
2/
It shows how much most high art has abandoned this project entirely - depicting a more beautiful vision of the world, and inspiring people with what could be, from the raw materials in front of them. It also shows how much unfulfilled desire there is for this form.
3/
I suspect that a lot of the reason for bad parenting guidelines is our unwillingness to give conditional advice for fear of offending people. So instead of saying "don't co-sleep with your baby if you're a morbidly obese drug addict", doctors say "nobody should co-sleep".
1/
But the irony is that the women likely to take this advice seriously and worry about it are the high IQ, high attention, high neuroticism mothers who were at lowest risk in the first place.
2/
If you formalize this intuition, it conflates two wildly different ideas, depending on context.
One is "Costs are zero, or at least very small, or at least you should act like they're very small even if they're not."
Orwell is still undefeated as describing the best model of the psychology of charity:
""A man receiving charity practically always hates his benefactor—it is a fixed characteristic of human nature; and, when he has fifty or a hundred others to back him, he will show it."
1/
It is amazing how many social problems in life are utterly perplexing without this as your default understanding. One normally expects world leaders to hide it better, but the reaction itself is not a surprise at all.
2/
Whether you take this to mean you should stop providing charity, or you should do it but expect ingratitude, or only do it in such circumstances as you would be happy with the outcome even if the response were ingratitude, is up to you.
3/
Every day for the past month, I've been reminded that for my entire life up to 2024, I was assured that it was impossible to fire civil servants in any meaningful quantity, that government departments couldn't ever be closed down.
And this is not a case of me just believing the New York Times. All my based friends agreed! I agreed. It was one of the most bipartisan beliefs I can think of. It was almost as rock solid outside the Overton Window as inside.
2/
I feel lots of people, myself included, have not fully adjusted to the implications of this belief being wrong, crazily and demonstrably wrong. How many other structures of government might turn out to be equally fragile in the right setting?
3/
Sooner or later, America is going to have to grapple with the difficult philosophical question of whether "an illegal court order" is a contradiction in terms or not.
1/
You may be surprised to find out that the current regime does not actually have a clean answer to this question. Instead, it studiously avoids needing to have the question brought up. All systems with explicit or implicit judicial supremacy seem to have this trait.
2/
The reason is that both answers are deeply confronting.
3/