Real expert failures and corruption give democratic skepticism legitimate motivation

Evidence

We are aware that the processes that generate knowledge are such that what we think we know can be wrong. The processes sometimes produce failures. Think of security agencies’ intelligence about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or the deregulation of financial institutions in the 1980s and 1990s. Our best “intelligence” may be wrong; the best economists may be wrong. Beyond error, there is the possibility of corruption. Officials and sometimes entire agencies of government can turn against the people they are meant to serve, like the federal and state agencies whose bad science and cover-ups hid the egregious political decisions that allowed the public water supply in Flint, Michigan, to be contaminated with high levels of lead. The result was large-scale environmental injustice, and this violation of the public trust is not an isolated one. — Russell Muirhead and Nancy L. Rosenblum, A Lot of People Are Saying, 268

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Conspiracism undermines rather than expresses democratic skepticism about experts — Russell Muirhead and Nancy L. Rosenblum, A Lot of People Are Saying: The New…, 269; Real democratic vulnerabilities gave fertile ground to conspiratorial theories — Anna Merlan, Republic of Lies, 900; Distrust of government is easier to ground rationally than trust (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Real democratic vulnerabilities gave fertile ground to conspiratorial theories #corroborates (0.82) — Anna Merlan, Republic of Lies, 900
• Corruption is both a cause and symptom of democratic failure. #exemplifies (0.78) — David E Pozen; Michael Schudson, Troubling Transparency- The History and…, 1523
• Distrust of government is easier to ground rationally than trust #expands (0.75)