There is a general principle in engineering that complex systems are almost never built successfully from scratch; they are always evolved incrementally from successful simpler systems. Corporations and governments confirm this observation daily with expensive failures. And there is a similar principle in developing new software systems: always budget and schedule to write the system twice; once to learn how it SHOULD have been designed and the second time to incorporate what was learned from the first attempt.
These principles come to mind as I listen to political activists propose one revolutionary idea after another. Historically, revolutions seldom work. Oh, they often accomplish their initial goal of throwing out incumbents and/or destroying the existing system. But the aftermath is often disastrous – think of the “reign of terror” that followed the French revolution, or the rise of Stalin in the aftermath of the Russian revolution as examples. Yes, the American revolution seemed to be successful, though it too had some nasty side effects, mostly ignored in history.
Here is the problem. Most things of consequence in the real world are immensely complex, far more complex than anyone can fully understand. That certainly applies to anything having to do with governing a nation. Any change, even a small change, is almost certain to involve many unanticipated side effects, some minor, some major. There are simply too many agendas, too many conflicting incentives, too many ways to game the system, too many unexpected interrelationships for complex social things to change smoothly.
Successful change comes about by making small incremental steps, and dealing with the unanticipated problems and side effects of each step before taking the next small step. Yes, it is slow, and I can understand why activists get frustrated and chafe at the slow pace, but in fact in social change as in many other domains slow but steady wins the game.
It is probably good for us to have social activists on the fringes challenging us to do better. It keeps us focused on things we as a culture really should change. But we would be unwise to adopt their more revolutionary ideas. Far better to move slowly and incrementally, so we can detect and deal with the unanticipated, and often fairly nasty, side effects of each small step before taking the next small step.
Posts
