I've been having this weird thought since Saturday. Is this entire thing scripted? I don't mean all of it, but the response and slow Revelations feel a bit awkward.
We knew the virus came from a lab in China. But only recently this is revealed to be true. The entire discussion seemed like someone was stretching it out and padding for a long amount of time.
I thought about this with prince Andrew. The slow drama of whether or not he was at an island and if he participated with the activities in it. The only person being convicted and all of the press seems to be aimed at him, for some reason. This looks way to hackneyed and set up to not be some weird event prepared by a bad script writer and producer.
Imagine a TV show drama/soap opera style show. The Revelations and twists are what everyone is watching it for. They make characters that everyone is divided about. Then they slowly tell stories over years of episodes, and no real expectation that everyone walks away happy. Then imagine a bunch of networks who make those shows are also in charge of the news, and they know this style of storytelling works best. Especially since those who watch soap operas are the same as those who watch the news. It's something to do while waiting for life to be interesting. They want drama because they have none in their own lives.
When you become a historian, you find out most of the big drama was actually pretty dull. Yet, here we are caught up in the quagmire of which honks are more important? No reference to previous drama, just the now, and who is what, and especially no resolution.
This just feels more like reality is happening, and the news and politicians are trying to make the drama last longer for better ratings.
That's my other fear.
Why would that scare you?
The only reason they're in charge is because only somebody that stupid would want to be in charge. We only get competent leaders when the stupid fuck things up so badly that intelligent people decide that the downsides of being in charge are outweighed by the downsides of letting the stupid remain in charge.
Which is what is starting to happen now. We'll get a couple good decades and then it'll go to pieces again.
It comes down to Hobbes vs Rousseau.
Your question comes from a Rousseau frame that people are basically good until proven otherwise and you're saying their failure to act shows them to be not good.
I operate from the Hobbesian frame that people are essentially bad. The intelligent know that everyone is bad (or at the very least, know that they themselves are bad) and that being a public figure is risky. The stupid lead because they're too stupid to anticipate the risks of being a public figure.
Because they only think of the fame, money, sex and/or power (well, the power to command all these things and more. What is money but a physical representation of power?) They might start out with good intentions, but then the Defiler creeps in eventually, or they get that one taste of power and go nuts with it.