This is key! I think one thing that is missed is that the systems that exist at a given point in time tend to be successful (at least in a Darwinian sense of the word) and stable.
>The same way a river meanders towards the sea
This is something to keep in mind when trying to change it. What if the aspect you are trying to change is key to its continued existence as a successful system? It probably will resist this as it probably gravitates towards its own stability.
Of course, some people understand this and yet would like to see it be destroyed. To them the only question I would ask is: Will the system you build in its place be as stable/successful? Then again, many of them in their overconfidence will think so. But let's just say that I would bet a system that developed more or less organically and succeeded will be possibly more adaptable and resistant than one that is centrally imposed.
The river metaphor is appropriate here. Many people adjust systems to fit their needs, not necessarily the needs of others within it.
Often you can just add a 'plugin' or 'extension' to it without modifying the system, to extract more out of it but not change it. Ironically, when too many attempt to simply patch it, that's what causes real changes.
>The same way a river meanders towards the sea
This is something to keep in mind when trying to change it. What if the aspect you are trying to change is key to its continued existence as a successful system? It probably will resist this as it probably gravitates towards its own stability.
Of course, some people understand this and yet would like to see it be destroyed. To them the only question I would ask is: Will the system you build in its place be as stable/successful? Then again, many of them in their overconfidence will think so. But let's just say that I would bet a system that developed more or less organically and succeeded will be possibly more adaptable and resistant than one that is centrally imposed.