Systems, Changing

Thanks to this buddy of mine on twitter I got something for babbling.. quite structurally.
This time lets talk about change. Or more specifically, when it applied into systems.

 
To be deliberate, the ways we decide to try to change systems should reflect the outcomes we're seeking. This is another way of saying the means are determined by the ends. To change is to know thy cause. To change is to know thy goal.
 

To get clearer, my reference on this topic are Conviction starring Hillary Swank, and The Next Three Days starring Russell Crowe. Both are intense movies involving a similar plot: The lead character feels compelled to rescue a convicted murderer from prison, whom they know is innocent. Both are great stories. The interesting difference is this: One tells the story of a woman who decides to become a lawyer so she can investigate then demonstrate that her brother really was innocent of the crime. The other is the story of a husband who decides to plot how to help his wife break out of prison. 
 

In both stories, the lead characters feel frustration with the system. Both believe something must be done to right a wrong. Both of them achieve their goal with solutions that required planning, hard work and risk. Neither had a guarantee of success. You’ll notice a big difference however: One worked within the justice system and the other worked outside of the system.

When looking at the systems in our society that we can change, it's relatively easy to see there is an inside and outside situation, no matter what system. Some systems include healthcare, economy, education, law, religion, food, and governments. These are systems because they have a structure, there is a certain way they behave, and they are interconnected both within and outside themselves. And I believe they're changeable. Not to merely utter nonsense but for this case the reason is we're a market-based democratic society with multiple levels of social transformation. (So the answer for your question is yes. We can change the systems)

Some systems can change within themselves. Ones that change continuously and on purpose (which we called learning organizations). Others require outside motivations, and even learning organizations require that push sometimes.

When we talk about system, we are talking about a structure and a set of entrenched powers. There’s a political system, which favors incumbents and redistricting along party lines. There’s an educational system, which favors conformity and standardized evaluation. There’s an economic system, which tends to focus revitalization efforts on reviving older industries (auto manufacturing, for example) instead of teaching people new skills (creative self-employment of all kinds).
 
Before I continue gibbering, please considerate the system I'm talking about is all system that were human made. Not that I don't want to debate for such godly topic, but this isn't just the time.

All systems are broken. Systems meant to be ruined (Or at least that's why we employ our legislative to eternally revise 'em right?). Systems will always have flaw (all human creation also does).
 

Systems are broken because they exist to sustain themselves, and the people who run the system rely on the system to stay the same. Why should they change it up? It works well for them.

Thus we ask when will the system change?
The answer isn’t that complicated, and it’s not about marching on parliamentary house or fighting the man.
 

The simple answer is that the system will change when people change. As people adapt to something different, as the popular mood shifts, as we move on from old ways of thinking.
 

That’s when change comes about.


Reference:

http://libertydefenseleague.com/Articles/tabid/524/ID/482/The-Lesser-Evil-Principle-A-Choice-Inside-and-Outside-the-Political-System.aspx