3 ms·

It looks to me like the same argument for trying to change groups from within: you need to be part of the machine to raise to a position where you can make it m

It looks to me like the same argument for trying to change groups from within: you need to be part of the machine to raise to a position where you can make it move the way you want. There is surely a lot of possible shades of that, but clearly there are domains where it's not a viable approach. We've seen for instance that changing the police culture from within seems like a dead end. Arguably I wouldn't be sure defense is more open to change. Sometimes external pressure has a better chance to bring change, and working from the outside to have an impact on that could be as effective depending on the field.

ganafagol 5y ago
One needs to keep that approach in mind when judging people who are within a system that one as an outsider critizises. There may be people in there who try to change it for the better. A historical example is the French Revolution. Many people who tried to reform from within still got their heads chopped off. In fact, everybody but the most radical did, and even those ended up paranoid about one another. Other examples are former socialist eastern countries. Just because somebody was state employed with decision making authority does not mean they were pro-dictatorship. Many realized that to improve things they'd need to work within the system instead of openly opposing and ending up in jail.