The Iowa Caucus Disaster Is Planned Chaos
Excerpt: The core issue is akin to spotting icebergs; indeed, many fields include that analogy in their basic canon. The world abounds with apparently simple processes that quickly spiral out of control owing to vast, hidden complexities. The task of aggregating information is, or seems, simple; that is the low, smooth profile of the iceberg peeking out from the water. Even with extremely simple information – in this case, a handful of candidates and the number of votes they receive, plus two other data points (those latter points in response to questions about the 2016 caucus process) – the organizational, technological, and even social contexts within which the process of assessing and disseminating it take place comprise the disproportionately large, jagged, and most of all unseen influences which quickly come into play. What seems like the straightforward tabulation and reporting of an almost entirely mechanical process suddenly gives rise to feedback loops, and a handful of simple (probably too simple) contingency plans compounds the errors and confusion. (...) In the first-ever Presidential election where two openly, indeed avowedly socialist candidates are polling strongly, watching the first Democratic caucus descend into utter chaos is as timely and succinct a dissertation illustrating what people “imagine they can design” as could be hoped for. Or as Ludwig von Mises would have said, this is a classic case of “planned chaos.” [As of this writing–a bit after noon on Wednesday–the most recent figures from Monday’s Iowa election appear about 71% complete. I can’t help wondering if paper ballots marked in pen or pencil couldn’t have been tabulated by hand with the results transmitted to the State office by Pony Express, wouldn’t have been faster. And, remember these guys want to run the world. Ron P.]
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment