3 ms·
It could be much simpler than that. People as a collective massively over-react to spectacle of terrorism in similar ways to how they over-react to the spectac
by corysama 11y ago
It could be much simpler than that. People as a collective massively over-react to spectacle of terrorism in similar ways to how they over-react to the spectacle of airplane crashes (you are far more likely to die each time you drive to the grocery store than from a flight around the world).
Politicians have adopted a "Under my watch: zero tolerance for any risk at any cost! ANY. COST." approach because no one wants to be held responsible for anything slipping through at all. It's not about saving a few hundred lives (vs tens of thousands/year in car crashes). It's about denying responsibility by spending other people's money. It's a redux of "No one ever got fired for buying I.B.M.". This way, when something bad does happen, they can point to the massive over-spending they already did and say "Don't blame me. I did far, far more than was reasonable. What more do you want from me?"
You 5 points are valid, but IMHO they are the grease that gets the rest of the machine to cooperate. I think a 5-why's approach would lead back to the politician's fear of reactionary voters.
- tajen 11y agoWe should fund an insurance policy for politicians who aren't reelected because they underestimated a risk. Then they'd feel confident doing much less. It might seem unfair that citizen have to pay for that, but we're the ones paying for the war.
- Retra 11y agoSo what... they get a sizeable payout for underestimating a risk? I don't see how that could backfire.
- jessaustin 11y agoYou might want to think more about what insurance actually is.
- Retra 11y agoI know what insurance is. I just don't know how you can insure against political failure unless you've already got a stash of "political success" to apply when things go wrong.
- nmrm2 11y agoMost politicians aren't interested in money as much as they are in power. The money is nice, but for most there are easier ways to get it.
- argumentum 11y agoYou say "over-react", but in many ways the reaction is quite rational. When an airplane crashes, hundreds of people die. We are reacting not just to our fear of dying in a crash, but out of sorry of the lives lost and empathy for their families. Humans also tend to react much more strongly to the malicious actions of others than to the arbitrariness of nature (including human error, as humans are part of nature). Even compared to your ordinary murder, terrorism takes it to the next level, since it indicates that there are others who share the ideology or membership in the terrorist group who intend to cause harm to your society, and they're still out there. In short, it's not all about "risk". It's about justice. There's little irrational about the desire to live in a just world, and the willingness to pay for it.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]