[QuadmasterXLII]

Selection pressure can work like a conspiracy without anyone actively conspiring.

Lots of people are just incompentent, not malicious. This made Hanlon's razor, "assume incompentence not malice," memetically fit in many walks of life, so it spread till millions of Americans followed it when processing news.

As a result, incompetent politicians got more leeway to do malicious things. It turned out that in electoral politics, if you are already an a-hole, leeway to be evil without being called on it is more useful than compentence. Incompetence is hard to fake, so our electoral system now demands that you be both incompetent and an asshole to get elected. The only fix is to change the incentives, which means calling out malice in our politicians when it looks like malice, even if we can't prove that it's malice and not just incompetence, and ESPECIALLY even if the person is incompetent too.

[jacquesm]

I've come to the conclusion that it is a distinction without a difference. It doesn't matter whether someone is incompetent or malicious, the outcomes are what matter so we may as well treat both the same: as malice. That solves a lot of problems and it will hopefully dissuade the incompetents from seeking office. Anybody who still behaves malicious then deserves what they've got coming to them.

All of this pussyfooting is only making matters (much) worse.