3 ms·

This is such a defeatist attitude. Make it transparent. Redesign the public machinery so that it rewards reporting on corruption and nepotism. Make it a caree

This is such a defeatist attitude. Make it transparent. Redesign the public machinery so that it rewards reporting on corruption and nepotism. Make it a career move to oust bad apples. He who reports his bosses corruption, gets his job. Same for monopolistic practices. Report them, become CEO of the busted off Company part. We can engineer processes for anything, we can design them to produce lean, mean state-machines grinding the bad actors inside to dust.

nomorewords 5y ago
In a lot of parts of the world, trying to fight it can put you in some bad people's crosshairs. At the very least, nothing gets done because "at least X was improved"
debdut 5y ago
eventually no public machinery works. It's not about design but incentives
- OneTimePetes 5y ago
  TRIZ states, if your machinery starts to cease functioning, you design it to self destruct and be replaced with functioning machinery. A ablative material. This whole "cant-do-nothing" John-Galt mental laziness is a scourge on the political climate and debate. I rather hang around with a bunch of stoners who get stuff done and be constructive, then this bards singing praise of corporate mini-kingdoms deriding the lands outside falling apart because the king does not pay taxes to the emperor.
joeman1000 5y ago
You’re expecting an audience with a lot of power if you’re asking such things. I don’t think the majority of the readers of this comment can afford to take such risks, and if they do it’s unlikely to get them anywhere. Power corrupts. What do you mean you can engineer processes? How will you get anybody to follow your rules? Your comment ranges from naïve to unhinged.
- OneTimePetes 5y ago
  Its correct, that moving "within" the system, changes are not possible. You could create a one-purpose-party, which has a updated "constitution" as proposal with a feature freeze on the proposal, that fixes the flaws. Then gather the votes and fix it. The eldest democracy we have right now is 300 years old, changes are possible - and patch is welcome.

nomorewords 5y ago

In a lot of parts of the world, trying to fight it can put you in some bad people's crosshairs. At the very least, nothing gets done because "at least X was improved"

debdut 5y ago

eventually no public machinery works. It's not about design but incentives

OneTimePetes 5y ago
TRIZ states, if your machinery starts to cease functioning, you design it to self destruct and be replaced with functioning machinery. A ablative material. This whole "cant-do-nothing" John-Galt mental laziness is a scourge on the political climate and debate. I rather hang around with a bunch of stoners who get stuff done and be constructive, then this bards singing praise of corporate mini-kingdoms deriding the lands outside falling apart because the king does not pay taxes to the emperor.

joeman1000 5y ago

You’re expecting an audience with a lot of power if you’re asking such things. I don’t think the majority of the readers of this comment can afford to take such risks, and if they do it’s unlikely to get them anywhere. Power corrupts. What do you mean you can engineer processes? How will you get anybody to follow your rules? Your comment ranges from naïve to unhinged.

OneTimePetes 5y ago
Its correct, that moving "within" the system, changes are not possible. You could create a one-purpose-party, which has a updated "constitution" as proposal with a feature freeze on the proposal, that fixes the flaws. Then gather the votes and fix it. The eldest democracy we have right now is 300 years old, changes are possible - and patch is welcome.