3 ms·

I generally agree. It's impossible to have a knowledgable position on every single issue, and a full-time job to have a position on whatever is popular in a giv

I generally agree. It's impossible to have a knowledgable position on every single issue, and a full-time job to have a position on whatever is popular in a given week. The end result is that on most issues, most of us default to the status quo, because, well, that's how the status quo works. It's literally the default until enough people care to change it. In other words, "you don’t have time or inclination to obsess about the political origins and implications of every atomic micro-decision in your day because doing so is a tremendously tedious and unproductive burden that frequently yields no meaningful insight or behavior change" is a lot of words to say that you support the status quo. I think everybody does, on issues that aren't important to them.

drewcon 6y ago
Semantics, but I view “support” as an active measure. There are loads of issues folks are just not engaged with enough to have a qualified opinion (their perspective not mine), which is fine. I view that as living in the status quo but not necessarily evidence of endorsing the status quo. For instance, do we really expect your average citizen (American in this case) to have a thought out POV on qualified immunity? Policing tactics? Effective tactics to address diversity in the workplace? Herd immunity? Actuarial risk assessment of economic activity during the pandemic? If not are they supporting the status quo? I think most people just shrug and I don’t blame them. Processing information in the era of the death of expertise has made even having an opinion right now an absolute hellscape.