This systems approach is extremley useful - treating unrest as interacting layers rather than moral narratives cuts through alot of bad analysis. The insight about uncertainty being more volatile than actual policy is probly the most underrated point here. I saw this dynamic play out in consulting work with municipal governments: vague executive signaling created way more chaos than clear (even unpopular) directives because nobody knew how to calibrate their response.
Yes, and this matters because these pockets of uncertainty drive short-term political volatility, opening windows for cyberattacks, more extreme market shifts, and increases in police-protest confrontations. The cost is adding up and boards can’t stop talking about political risk.
This systems approach is extremley useful - treating unrest as interacting layers rather than moral narratives cuts through alot of bad analysis. The insight about uncertainty being more volatile than actual policy is probly the most underrated point here. I saw this dynamic play out in consulting work with municipal governments: vague executive signaling created way more chaos than clear (even unpopular) directives because nobody knew how to calibrate their response.
Yes, and this matters because these pockets of uncertainty drive short-term political volatility, opening windows for cyberattacks, more extreme market shifts, and increases in police-protest confrontations. The cost is adding up and boards can’t stop talking about political risk.