“ 99. Think of history as being the sum of two components:
an erratic component that consists of unpredictable events that follow no
discernible pattern, and a regular component that consists of long-term
historical trends. Here we are concerned with the long-term trends.
100. FIRST PRINCIPLE.
If a SMALL change is made that affects a long-term historical trend, then the
effect of that change will almost always be transitory—the trend will soon
revert to its original state. (Example: A reform movement designed to clean up
political corruption in a society rarely has more than a short-term effect;
sooner or later the reformers relax and corruption creeps back in. The level of
political corruption in a given society tends to remain constant, or to change
only slowly with the evolution of the society. Normally, a political cleanup
will be permanent only if accompanied by widespread social changes; a SMALL
change in the society won’t be enough.) If a small change in a long-term
historical trend appears to be permanent, it is only because the change acts in
the direction in which the trend is already moving, so that the trend is not
altered by only pushed a step ahead.
101. The first
principle is almost a tautology. If a trend were not stable with respect to
small changes, it would wander at random rather than following a definite
direction; in other words it would not be a long- term trend at all.
102. SECOND
PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is sufficiently large to alter permanently
a long-term historical trend, then it will alter the society as a whole. In
other words, a society is a system in which all parts are interrelated, and you
can’t permanently change any important part without changing all other parts as
well. “
The close relationship
between single parts of society shouldn’t necessarily be given as granted in
ages different from our own. I believe their interdependence is a result of how
our society evolved rather than a consequence of radical changes altering
ALWAYS EVERY single part of society. The economical sphere in Mayan
pre-hispanic societies was for example unrelated to the political/religious one
and its evolution followed a course of its own often unrelated to the political
changes. One may object that this is because of politics and religion being an
overstructure (in its marxist meaning) compared to the economical sphere though.
As a matter of fact, climatic/ecological problems caused politcal/religious power
to crumble and fall at a certain point in Mayan history.
"103. THIRD PRINCIPLE.
If a change is made that is large enough to alter permanently a long-term
trend, then the consequences for the society as a whole cannot be predicted in
advance. (Unless various other societies have passed through the same change
and have all experienced the same consequences, in which case one can predict
on empirical grounds that another society that passes through the same change
will be like to experience similar consequences.)
104. FOURTH
PRINCIPLE. A new kind of society cannot be designed on paper. That is, you cannot
plan out a new form of society in advance, then set it up and expect it to
function as it was designed to do."
The difficulties in
dealing with the financial crisis of our own days seem to prove this last point
pretty well. Societies are too complicated for our understanding and tend to go
beyond our range of prediction and planning.
