Conversation

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
It falls into the same trap as many "galaxy-brain" intellectuals, whose conceit does not allow them to understand that the global billionaire elite run circles of malev-gnorance around them while barely possessing a command of how to use email.
1
1
We who inhabit the mini-Moloch of the "intellectual elite" are only one small part of the global Moloch of hard power and dark finance. There isn't some dark overlord, some secret handshakes. It's very much just a higher evolved bunch of Medicis (who started as cloth traders!).
1
There is intellectual dishonesty in insisting that "there is a network of corruption!" and then focusing on the behaviors of *individuals*. If our world is collapsing b/c of networked evil, then first&foremost we must recognize it as *complex* in nature, not merely complicated.
1
Disagree. There is no zero sum relationship between individual responsibility and systemic effects. That is collectivist thinking; that the only way individuals come together in networked ways is by losing their individuality and therefore culpability.
1
2
You are inappropriately extrapolating system failures without a moral agency dimension, BUT with strong incentives to localize blame (example “normal accidents” in nuclear reactors, see Perrow) with social systems of aggregate agency. They’re not the same thing.
1
1
Blaming individuals for either knowing complicity or gross negligence of due diligence in who to trust is NOT the same as blaming (say) a nuclear technician for a failure caused by unanticipated systemic reactions.
1
1
The arguments that might exonerate people are things like being conned, being blackmailed, things they value being held hostage with compliance as a ransom, simple youthful naïveté, over-trusting based on appearances, and stupidity. When those don’t apply, yeah you’re fair game.