4 ms·
One judgment error that people often make is to assume it's about "cops" or "doctors" or "politicians" or whatever. Like, take any large group of people - some
by virgilp 5y ago
One judgment error that people often make is to assume it's about "cops" or "doctors" or "politicians" or whatever. Like, take any large group of people - some of them will be good, some will be bad, some will be weasely, some will be cowards, some will be heroes, some will be psychos.
If your reaction to group X is "it needs to be disbanded because <incident>"... I suggest that this is not a wise reaction. In this sense, all "establishment" is corrupt, to some degree, by definition. To try to create brand new "uncorrupted" replacement is often a recipe for disaster (especially if you only rely on "new people", not on actual new systematic ways of weeding out said corruption).
- watwut 5y agoWith this theory, you are making it impossible to talk about institutional failure and about culture within institutions. It also makes it impossible to reform those. Because whenever caught, bad stuff will be always framed as individual failure, despite those individual being encouraged to act that way by their bosses and peers.
- virgilp 5y agoNo. I'm saying that institutional failure should be addressed/solved "in place", rather than blindly hoping that disbanding said institution would solve anything. - There's a high likelihood that the institution was created because it's useful. Before arguing for its complete removal, the onus is on you to prove that you understand why it was originally needed, and why/how the circumstances changed in a way that makes it non-useful/not needed anymore. - There's a high likelihood that if it's needed, just disbanding it and creating a new one will not solve stuff in the long run. Before replacing the institution one needs to show that they understand what are the challenges of reforming it (why reforming will be impossible/more difficult than recreation; and why the new institution will avoid having the same fate). It's in a way similar to software: many engineers will jump at the opportunity to declare that "old code is garbage and should be rewritten from scratch"; but that is seldom a good choice, and once you start on that path, if you're simply trying to replicate the same functionality you are more likely than not to end up with new code that is still garbage.
- vineyardmike 5y agoHow do you decide when something has enough incidents that it should be disbanded?
- amelius 5y agoUser reviews.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]