This paper extends the Conscious Cost theory developed in the first paper of this research program from the interpersonal to the institutional level. The central analytical difference from the first paper is this: while the first paper asked why Cs fails to arise — why Cq is invested without being recognized as Cs — this paper identifies a deeper problem. At the institutional level, Cs often exists; the circuit starts. But the Cs circulation circuit is distorted, severed, or blocked. Cs is a necessary but not sufficient condition for sustainable institutional relations: the accurate orientation of the Cs circulation circuit toward the intended beneficiary constitutes the second necessary condition. Well-intentioned institutions fail not because of malice, but because the reference point for 'whom we serve' is displaced from intended beneficiaries to internal metrics — a structural failure that is invisible to those undergoing it, and that well-intentioned actors systematically reproduce. This paper identifies three mechanisms by which this failure occurs. Natural short-circuit: the beneficiary is gradually displaced by internal metrics without any actor intending the substitution. Involuntary co-optation: a well-intentioned leader adopts an external metric, ceding effective institutional direction to networks capable of manipulating it. Intentional disruption: the deliberate destruction of institutional tacitness (T), collapsing V. Of these three, natural short-circuit is the primary mechanism — the one that operates most pervasively, without malice, and in full view of otherwise well-intentioned actors. Intentional disruption is the least common and most visible; it is analyzed here as a structural complement, not as the dominant form. This paper introduces institutional tacitness (T) as a new conceptual tool: the structural property by which a circuit retains V because its meaning is not articulated as an ideological position requiring endorsement. T is not irrational obedience or blind conformity. It preserves participation optionality, prevents identity hardening, and maintains low-entry reciprocity. Its destruction — whether by entryist infiltration or by algorithmic amplification of conflict — forces participants to ask 'why am I here?' in conditions designed to make no satisfactory answer available. SNS platform algorithms function as a structural accelerant for all three mechanisms. Drawing on recent empirical evidence — including Piccardi et al. (2025, Science) and a 2025 TikTok audit study (Nature) — this paper shows that algorithms systematically amplify affective over structural content, manufacture false consensus around specific actors, and erode T at platform scale. As a prescriptive response, this paper proposes three design principles — visibility, proximity, and openness — derived from the matsuri model, the teikei movement, and the tradition of osusowake. An autoethnographic case study of the author's participation in and withdrawal from a civic movement provides empirical illustration of all three failure mechanisms from the inside. AI Disclosure: The author used Claude (Anthropic) as a writing and research assistance tool. All theoretical concepts, original insights, and intellectual contributions are the author's own. Keywords: Conscious Cost; institutional Gap; beneficiary displacement; Cs circuit displacement; institutional tacitness; natural short-circuit; involuntary co-optation; civil society; algorithm; municipal renewal
Chikako Goto (Fri,) studied this question.