In quantum physics, there’s something called the uncertainty principle. One can refer to the link for a summary, but to go a step further in simplicity as was explained to me in a long-ago high school class: ‘Simply observing the quantum movements of a molecule changes its state so that even the observation is fundamentally unreliable’. Oddly, this one snippet of arcane knowledge has stuck with me more so than many other bits of my education. In the decades since, I’ve found many analogs to the uncertainty principle. Today, as the election approaches, I see yet another comparison in political posturing, at least using my ultra-simple explanation for the concept.
One minute you see it, and it is changed into something else. It was here, and yet mystically, it’s all a sudden over there. Joe or Kamala said something, but no they didn’t? What they said never really existed before? The state of the election hinges on this one issue, and before you know it, a different phantom matter is what it’s all about, against all expectation. It’s about Covid, but it’s not. Joe is here, but no, he is not. Can Joe do it? The election is Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Will it be a fair election? It isn’t even about the election; never was intended that way to begin with. The election is a mirage to disguise what comes next. Democrats want to win. Democrats will countenance mass civil unrest, upfront, against elections. Democrats will wonder why they didn’t win. Lose the election, then riot. Riot to win an election? But then lose…to riot. Joe is a slam dunk, no real campaigning needed. No campaign needed to enact a coup. A deadlocked court to overcome an election? Riot to lose an election but win a coup?
Get the picture?