3 ms·

This is great. But I sometimes wonder if the people who advocate for "x worked for y, so it is best practice and every should do it" appreciate situation comple

This is great. But I sometimes wonder if the people who advocate for "x worked for y, so it is best practice and every should do it" appreciate situation complexities and cultural differences?

Jedd 9y ago
> But I sometimes wonder if the people who advocate for "x worked for y, so it is best practice and every should do it" appreciate situation complexities and cultural differences? TFA touches on this, and I'd suggest that any in-depth, thoughtfully written piece on this subject would necessarily consider the complexities and cultural differences from one place to another -- especially if they're considering the question 'Why isn't this happening / why doesn't this work elsewhere?'. But often the answer to that question is well understood (the HN comments now - half an hour in - are somewhere on the cynical to pragmatic part of the spectrum) and also understood is why the problem is difficult, if not intractable. Apropos, from TFA: "But if conservative, isolationist, Catholic Portugal could transform into a country where same-sex marriage and abortion are legal, and where drug use is decriminalised, a broader shift in attitudes seems possible elsewhere." This is an optimistic sentiment from a social attitudes POV, but misses the financial incentives within the USA (for example) of retaining the current arrangement.
stretchwithme 9y ago
Which is why I'd prefer it if such decisions can be made very locally. It's easier to see the effect of a change if five counties in New Jersey make it and infant mortality soars compared to the rest of the state than if the entire country makes the change at once. And those counties can also revert to the old policy in less time than it takes to convince an entire country to repeal bad policy. We've made big changes in the past that turned out to be the wrong thing and it takes many years to correct. Prohibition, for example. Or deciding the entire country is going to allow leaded gasoline, instead of allowing cities like Philadelphia to ban it. It took another SEVENTY TWO YEARS to finally get it banned.
alkonaut 9y ago
> appreciate situation complexities and cultural differences? Laws come from culture but culture and attitudes also comes from laws. I agree these complexities can't be ignored, but when I argue (perhaps less bluntly) that e.g. "The US should just ban handguns and implement single payer healthcare because it obviously works everywhere else" Then what I mean is that with stricter gun laws, perhaps the culture and attitudes surrounding guns can be slowly changed. I'm not saying "if you change gun laws you'll see a positive effect on gun deaths within 5 years". I'm arguing that if the US changes gun laws perhaps there will be significant improvement in (just!) a couple of generations.

This is great. But I sometimes wonder if the people who advocate for "x worked for y, so it is best practice and every should do it" appreciate situation complexities and cultural differences?

Jedd 9y ago

> But I sometimes wonder if the people who advocate for "x worked for y, so it is best practice and every should do it" appreciate situation complexities and cultural differences? TFA touches on this, and I'd suggest that any in-depth, thoughtfully written piece on this subject would necessarily consider the complexities and cultural differences from one place to another -- especially if they're considering the question 'Why isn't this happening / why doesn't this work elsewhere?'. But often the answer to that question is well understood (the HN comments now - half an hour in - are somewhere on the cynical to pragmatic part of the spectrum) and also understood is why the problem is difficult, if not intractable. Apropos, from TFA: "But if conservative, isolationist, Catholic Portugal could transform into a country where same-sex marriage and abortion are legal, and where drug use is decriminalised, a broader shift in attitudes seems possible elsewhere." This is an optimistic sentiment from a social attitudes POV, but misses the financial incentives within the USA (for example) of retaining the current arrangement.

stretchwithme 9y ago

Which is why I'd prefer it if such decisions can be made very locally. It's easier to see the effect of a change if five counties in New Jersey make it and infant mortality soars compared to the rest of the state than if the entire country makes the change at once. And those counties can also revert to the old policy in less time than it takes to convince an entire country to repeal bad policy. We've made big changes in the past that turned out to be the wrong thing and it takes many years to correct. Prohibition, for example. Or deciding the entire country is going to allow leaded gasoline, instead of allowing cities like Philadelphia to ban it. It took another SEVENTY TWO YEARS to finally get it banned.

alkonaut 9y ago

> appreciate situation complexities and cultural differences? Laws come from culture but culture and attitudes also comes from laws. I agree these complexities can't be ignored, but when I argue (perhaps less bluntly) that e.g. "The US should just ban handguns and implement single payer healthcare because it obviously works everywhere else" Then what I mean is that with stricter gun laws, perhaps the culture and attitudes surrounding guns can be slowly changed. I'm not saying "if you change gun laws you'll see a positive effect on gun deaths within 5 years". I'm arguing that if the US changes gun laws perhaps there will be significant improvement in (just!) a couple of generations.