In conversation I caught myself talking about my earlier dilemma in picking a thesis topic this way.

My interest in both education and politics are at its core about fighting apathy. Apathy is complex, but rooted in a perception of helplessness. People don’t see a way towards change, or don’t understand how change can be possible.

- in conversation with my sister

That caught me off guard. It’s actually a much better encapsulation of my core motivation than “explaining to people how the world’s systems work.” It also explains much of my interest in psychology, economics, among other things. I want to fight apathy.

I spent this week trying to understanding the goal of my thesis project. What do I want to happen? I keep returning to this crazy idea that I want people to feel less apathetic and less cynical about politics. I want to shift a few of the apathetic (and the cynical, if possible) into being engaged, and perhaps even sincere participants in politics. I am aware this is insanely ambitious, I would do best to take just a small slice out of it.

So, which small slice? If apathy is rooted in not believing in one’s role in making change happen, then the remedy has two parts: one, to demonstrate how change is possible, and two, scripting the moves to get there.

This is where ideas tie back into reality. I am beginning to think about how to visualize the legislative process so that people can clearly see how it works. If we identify the critical points in the process, perhaps we can use a platform’s network effects to focus attention upon them.

That was effectively what the movement that resisted SOPA/PIPA did. For a moment, the internet transformed into a focused death-ray of attention, aimed at SOPA/PIPA, effectively destroying it.

Perhaps my thesis is about building a death-ray of political attention? Who would be apathetic if they had a death-ray?

Update: via @tofias “a death ray indeed http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/01/30/sopa-lobbyin/” - Thanks Michael!