4 ms·

> then another newer and better system can take its place. That is a strong assumption not borne out by history. Destroying a system leaves chaos, and violent

• MadSudaca 3y ago
  It's funny because I'm basing my statement on history, all sort of human-made institutions become corrupted, endure for longer than they should, collapse when the situation becomes unsustainable, then a new system necessarily takes over. Meanwhile, people who have to go through this process reap the suffering that comes with it. What I'm advocating is an understanding of this process, and ensuring that systems get replaced before they collapse because our unwillingness to let them go. What I'm advocating is the opposite of chaos, it's controlled renewal. Incremental reform is rationally a much better alternative, but in practice it doesn't always work, again, systems want to perpetuate themselves over time, so the only way in which they change is by collapsing. Also, sometimes what you need is not incremental changes but paradigm shifts. Another aspect, is that this assumes that we can always design systems on a top-down fashion, I think sometimes it's better to have an evolutionary trial-and-error process.