We tend to think of dissent as something that's either permitted or suppressed. But there's a third state: dissent that's technically available but that nobody reaches for because the system works well enough that disagreement feels pointless.

That's the scenario I keep circling. Not a ban on questioning — just a world where questioning feels as odd as arguing with your GPS. You can. But why would you? It's usually right.

The monoculture metaphor is exactly about this. A field of identical crops doesn't prevent other plants from growing. It just leaves no space, no soil, no light for them. The suppression is structural, not intentional. And by the time you notice the fragility, the seed bank is empty. This is hoorifying.

Who is “we”?