I loved the nerve explanation of systems that was explained in Podcast 7 because it illustrated how even slight biases and issues in a system can have massive long term, and sometimes painful effects. Dr. Bezio’s point that systems management should not be done by one leader, or even by a small team, reminded me of what we’re discussing in my Stalin history class right now. (Not to sound like a Stalin apologist because he was horrible and made a lot of terrible and influential decisions in the USSR), but some scholars want to frame history by placing all of the state’s power and decision making on him, when in reality the USSR was essentially a giant bureaucratic state that could only function with lots of collaborative work. In the US, our tendency to idolize our leaders (something I’m guilty of, I have a picture of RBG on my wall) can become problematic because we fall into the trap of oversimplifying situations and missing the nuances of how systems really work.
I also liked her comparison of twisting your ankle while climbing a mountain and being allowed to adapt to new conditions to the unrealistic expectations we put on leaders to stick to their original stance even in new situations. Especially in light of the January 6th riots at the US Capital, the idea of term limits can way to transition systems without breaking them seems very relevant and important. Dr. Bezio points out that it’s hard to stop a system once it’s started running, which is called a homeostatic feedback loop. Updating a system can be difficult and slightly destabilizing, but there are ways to cope with that. The best ways to adapt and create positive system change, which Dr. Bezio says are long term thinking, not oversimplifying issues, and proactivity, all seem at odds with natural human instincts of reactivity. However, I’m interested in further exploring how we can encourage people to push back on our reactive instincts to solve larger problems like climate change. Understanding how systems really work means that we actually know what are the most effective areas to target for change, and that might not always be the most visible leader. In terms of social justice organizing, understanding that distinction can be vital for success.
Although it is best to think and act with the long-term in mind, it can be frustrating when you don’t see any results in the short term. I think this holds a lot of people back from acting and creating change, especially corporations. For proactivity, I think people are also hesitant to act before things happen.
I think what you said about Stalin and the fact that he was not the only one making decisions is really important. When I think of the US in this framework, I think it is important that we recognize the people behind our leaders. Obviously it is easier said than done, but during the presidential election, there was so much focus on Biden and Trump, when really if we had just looked deeper we would see that (no matter what side you fall on) the problems don’t really come from the individual leader themselves but from the people underneath that leader.
I love how you point out the connection between oversimplifying systems and idolizing leaders. These definitely go hand in hand, and both reveal the problems with focusing on just one leader who “commands” an incredibly complex system.