7 ms·

I recommend reading "The Collapse of Complex Societies" by Joseph Tainter [0]. Complex societies tend to address problems by adding more and more rules and reg

• agalunar 4y ago
  I'd second the recommendation. I personally enjoyed reading it, and from my limited exposure to the topic, my impression was that although some anthropologists disagree and theory has advanced since, The Collapse of Complex Societies was a landmark work and its ideas are still taken seriously.
• paulluuk 4y ago
  Interesting idea! Seeing as my "should read" list is already hundreds of books long, can you give us a spoiler as to what he suggests (if anything) to fix this? Or is it simply inevitable and therefore not actionable?
  • agalunar 4y ago
    Here's what I can recall: The big idea is diminishing marginal returns – increasing societal complexity pays off enormously at first, but eventually the returns level off while the overhead remains high or even continues to increase. Collapse is then seen as a natural (and not necessarily cataclysmic) response to this. It's a process of simplification. Tainter also points out that collapse may not occur (1) when there are strong, neighboring powers, which simply absorb the foundering society, or (2) when there are strong cultural reasons, such as national identity, for which the members of the society may be willing to put up with the bureaucratic overhead indefinitely (in order to prevent being absorbed); he gives Europe as an example, I believe.
• kwhitefoot 4y ago
  This is not new, merely ignored: "What's the origin of the phrase 'Hard cases make bad law'? ... 'Hard cases make bad law' isn't so much a universal proverb as a legal adage. It came to light in a comment made by Judge Robert Rolf in the case of Winterbottom v Wright in 1842: This is one of those unfortunate cases...in which, it is, no doubt, a hardship upon the plaintiff to be without a remedy but by that consideration we ought not to be influenced. Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad law. The case required a judgment on whether third parties are able to sue for injury. The unusual nature of the case caused the judge to realise that, in the true sense of the expression, exceptions prove the rule and that, unfair as it might have appeared in some circumstances, the law was better drafted under the influence of the average case rather than the exceptional one. The point was made explicitly in 1903 by V. S. Lean, in Collectanea: Hard cases make bad law. that is, lead to legislation for exceptions." https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hard-cases-make-bad-law.html https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/hard-cases-make-bad-law....
  • bombcar 4y ago
    Something like this could (should?) perhaps be handled by governmental "remedy" service, a small insurance/tax against everyone that the judges can use to award remedy without forcing the defendant to pay.
    • mannykannot 4y ago
      We have already moved on, and a case like this would no longer be regarded as unusual, let alone difficult. In the process, something like what you propose arose, in the form of liability insurance. The system works reasonably well, in that there are a lot fewer hard cases without creating a crippling burden in the average case. If anything, this case, together with the way things have changed since then, demonstrates that there is often a good deal of subjectivity in what constitutes a 'hard' case.
      • AnthonyMouse 4y ago
        But that only moves the problem somewhere else, because insurance is a moral hazard. Someone who would otherwise be cautious to prevent harm has less incentive to do it because when the harm comes the insurance pays.
• ramshanker 4y ago
  Meanwhile current Indian government repealed 100s of Laws / Acts. https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/story/narendra-modi-law-ministry-ravi-shankar-prasad-984025-2017-06-21 https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/story/narendra-modi-law...
• jaschasd 4y ago
  Thanks! I'm also adding this to my reading list now.