"Understand the science" at least in the key things as opposed to "rational ignorance" which relies on authority to explain things beyond our supposed ken.
It would seem that as the 21st century advances there should be less reliance on rational ignorance rather than more. Why? Because with the growth of complex systems authority knows comparatively less.
We lose more to centralization and to the corresponding increase in risk than we gain from efficiencies of scale.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
For some reason it's important to do useless things in an organized way.
In terms of Narrative it's almost like the public is being psychologically conditioned to expect nothing in return for the gigantic economic burden they will carry to "stop" Global Warming, which as it turns out won't be stopped.
One of the ways election theft is analogous to blockchain based cryptocurrency theft is that the transaction is irreversible. Once legitimacy is transferred it can't revoked. It is part of the chain.
If elections are to have even the approximate level of security of commercial security it should require a hardware security module plus PIN to cast a vote (unit of legitimacy transfer) like the familiar bank smartcard in your wallet.
It often takes a crisis to reveal a problem. Whoever one voted for it's plain to see that the current election architecture leaves a lot to be desired. That at least we can learn from 2020.
Leaving aside the question of cheating what do the elections say about our reliance on the networks? There's a saying in the cryptocurrency that attackers will spend millions to steal billions. But elections are more lucrative. Anyone who can spend millions can control trillions.
Forget the Middle Ages; we live in the new age of faith secure in our safety. But some idea of the actual danger can be gleaned from the fact that truly secure information is air-gapped, giving away no bits, not even a clue to its physical location.
It's hard to accept the degree that our daily lives depend on the flow of invisible information. Yet if the Internet were down your debit card couldn't buy a coffee . We don't have paper cash any more, nor even paper ballots. If we lose the network we lose it all.
The American scene remains unsettled because it is so evenly divided like a coin that landed on its edge or a pencil standing on its tip. This unstable symmetry can "break" from the vibrations from a passing truck, a microbreeze -- anything.
Under these split conditions it is dangerous for politicians to act as if they had a "mandate" and start preparing enemies' lists or crafting titanic spending initiatives. Yet that is precisely what they have been doing.
The Cold War experience suggests catastrophe can only be avoided if both sides limit their aims and avoid overreaching. And yet the emotional momentum is all the other way. The mood is to fight, on both sides.
Adaptation is actually a good thing for the human brain is built to rewire. Marshal Kutuzov, the man who beat Napoleon, was shot through the head twice, once through both temples. Kutuzov V3 beat Boney.
Kutuzov's big strategic insight was that it was more important to preserve the army than defend fixed places against Napoleon. Part of the reason the cheating allegations are being pursued is they keep the army of Deplorables together rather than scattering into the night.
The reason people "don't want to go there" or are reluctant to open a can of worms is because they fear the consequences of knowing.
There's lots of things we don't want to know because it's easier that way.
The consequences of discovering that the election was rigged are so terrifying that if it was not absolutely staring you in the face you would prefer to avoid it. For "the sake of the country" you would not go there.