This is like the negative opposite of the happy coincidences that need to happen for a startup or new idealistic organisation to take off: The founder(s) have

This is like the negative opposite of the happy coincidences that need to happen for a startup or new idealistic organisation to take off: The founder(s) have a crazy, innovative, idea to improve the world, and while they're perceived as mad by the masses initially, it's the first followers who give credence and legitimacy to this idea. So the first employees, initial customers, initial investors, and even just random supporters who independently believe in the value what the originators are doing, and that helps propel acceptance within the larger community and eventually the masses. This is the authoritarian opposite - really terrible decisions and mechanisms have been implemented and are being repeated on a daily basis by powerful companies or organisations, and while the masses find it worrying initially, there are apparently no shortage of apologists online and offline who are falling over themselves to helpfully explain to the rest of us why this crap is ok: "It's an AI algorithm" "They're a private company" "You don't have to use them" "Well, they're standing against bigotry" etc And then suddenly we find ourselves in an environment not unlike the Kafka-esque scenarios referenced. Be wary of "explainers" - often just they're consensus building, but it's not clear whether they're building in the right direction or the wrong one.