The Philosophy of Changing Broken Systems

Post Reply New Topic

Merely a curious topic I just thought on; What are your opinions on changing political systems fraught with problems? Something that has always puzzled me (perhaps moreso as an Aspie) is why I constantly am bombarded in the news with the world's latest issues, but these issues persist and never appear to be fixed.

Just confused, is all.

We cannot change political systems like we change clothes. We fiddle with political systems, we try to fix them while they are still in motion and they tend to persist out of sheer social inertia. It is only occassionally that we have revolutions.

ruveyn

Just a few quick explanations: (there are certainly more)

First, people are apprehensive about change. Believe me when I tell you it is a four letter word.

Second, those who benefit from the current system will not give up their advantages easily.

Third, as long as confusion reigns over any new proposals (and the beneficiaries above insure that) any new idea, plan etc. will slowly die.

My concern is it feels like every issue in America is dragged into national politics where is doesn't really need to be. Especially social issues.

Also consider health care. My feeling is when I look at Canada that isn't all nationally run. It seems to mostly be run provincially with maybe some federal assistance.

While over here it seems like we want every major change done with a massive central planning approach where Washington runs everything. It seems over kill and naturally causes people to dig in and resist it.

Because fixing something tends to involve breaking something else.

Yes and no. It requires moving free energy from a low entropy state to a high entropy state. So changing anything increases the entropy of the universe.

ruveyn

This thread reminds me of the MindWalk movie.

If one makes the assumption that society can be fixed like a machine, yes. If you toss a new predatory fish into a river with the intent of killing one species, you do not end up with the same river plus the predators and minus the victim species. You end up with an entirely new river.

Society needs to be viewed more as an ecosystem where careful alterations can "naturally" lead to more desirable states. Diverse debate coupled with checks & balances also helps prevent chaotic shifts and totalitarianism.

Personally, I doubt I can "change the world" in that poetic sense that we keep hearing about from irritating campaign clips. Change is too fleeting for that. Just ask Heraclitus. I just live by example, enjoy myself and step on other people's toes when they deny me the lifestyle I chose.

Political systems can be improved, although it isn't easy. Australia and New Zealand are good examples of this. They started out with the traditional First Past the Post/Westminster system but were able to change to a form of proportional representation. Revolutions rarely work properly (look at what happened in France and Russia) so I don't think that one can hope for them as a way to improve things.

When you think of "fixing" something, you think of standing over it holding a screwdriver. But who can "stand over" a political system? People are parts in the system, they are not outside the system. The only way to "fix" a political system in that sense is to give absolute power to somebody.

I would not call throwing liberty away a fix, but I think a philosopher mentioned that autocracy was necessary for massive states. Was it Locke? I can't remember.

Because the majority of humans are idiots and don't understand that a system is broken, they will resist the change needed to fix it.

especially when the part that needs fixin is often the people and their perceptions themselves.

Well said.

Do we need massive states or massive state programs? In other words all Federal?

We have local State legislatures and governors can't they pick up some of the legal workload and fix some things? Or deal with these crazy ass social issues?

Like Nevada over prostitution? Or state law over Medical Marijuana?

Or New York trying to address issues like Gay Marriage.

So many problems really shouldn't even have a Federal approach. (sry I know I'm repeating myself)

I'm not sure whether I would describe that as "fixing the system". The system contained within itself the ability to change the voting system via referendum. So the system is just working as intended. If someday we want to change it back, we can have a referendum and change it back.

Shays' Rebellion.