I read the Salantar quote as ... largely defeatist, despite the twist at the end.
There are people who've left their mark who haven't followed that specific track, and the implied suggestion that it is the only and/or best method ... wants for evidence.
If you consider that you are one of the tools that you're applying to change, then it makes sense to keep that tool functional. Look out for yourself, first, that you may aid others and larger efforts.
A useful example to me comes from the field of ag engineering, and a story I was told at Uni. The practice often makes use of minimal capital and equipment to accomplish major changes. One example is riverbed engineering.
One approach is the US Army Corps method of bulldozers, earth-moving equipment, dredges, concrete, and explosives.
The preferred method of the ag engineer in remote and low-income regions is the gabbion --- a cage made of wire holding stones. Placed in the streamflow, these use the power of the water itself to reshape the streambed in the desired manner --- directing water to or away from a bank, speeding or slowing flow, enhancing or slowing erosion. It's an application of an intervention to maximum effect with minimum effort.
(That's not to say there aren't problems which bulldozers, diesel, dynamite, and portland cement can't solve far more quickly. But where you're bootstrapping from a minimal position, the gabbion method has merits.)
And that's the essence of what I'm suggesting. Study the problem area, see where behaviour is most strongly influenced, and modify that point. Let the energies within the system do the rest. Judo and ju-jitsu work similarly. I've heard RMS's creation of the GNU GPL described as an example of "ju-jitsu law" --- it takes copyright and uses precisely the law's own strengths to work against it. A certain amount of change was accomplished.
Another great concept comes from the field of navigation by Charles H. Cotter: "The Art of ship handling involves the effective use of forces under control to overcome the effect of forces not under control."
Ship's captains don't recede within themselves to control their ships. They master the craft, learn the practice, read conditions, and act to maximum benefit. There's the natural "ship of state" metaphor, and ... it's not entirely applicable (countries are far more complex than ships, and tend not to have a unitary chain of authority). But the notion of working on the possible remains.
There are people who've left their mark who haven't followed that specific track, and the implied suggestion that it is the only and/or best method ... wants for evidence.
If you consider that you are one of the tools that you're applying to change, then it makes sense to keep that tool functional. Look out for yourself, first, that you may aid others and larger efforts.
A useful example to me comes from the field of ag engineering, and a story I was told at Uni. The practice often makes use of minimal capital and equipment to accomplish major changes. One example is riverbed engineering.
One approach is the US Army Corps method of bulldozers, earth-moving equipment, dredges, concrete, and explosives.
The preferred method of the ag engineer in remote and low-income regions is the gabbion --- a cage made of wire holding stones. Placed in the streamflow, these use the power of the water itself to reshape the streambed in the desired manner --- directing water to or away from a bank, speeding or slowing flow, enhancing or slowing erosion. It's an application of an intervention to maximum effect with minimum effort.
(That's not to say there aren't problems which bulldozers, diesel, dynamite, and portland cement can't solve far more quickly. But where you're bootstrapping from a minimal position, the gabbion method has merits.)
And that's the essence of what I'm suggesting. Study the problem area, see where behaviour is most strongly influenced, and modify that point. Let the energies within the system do the rest. Judo and ju-jitsu work similarly. I've heard RMS's creation of the GNU GPL described as an example of "ju-jitsu law" --- it takes copyright and uses precisely the law's own strengths to work against it. A certain amount of change was accomplished.
Another great concept comes from the field of navigation by Charles H. Cotter: "The Art of ship handling involves the effective use of forces under control to overcome the effect of forces not under control."
Ship's captains don't recede within themselves to control their ships. They master the craft, learn the practice, read conditions, and act to maximum benefit. There's the natural "ship of state" metaphor, and ... it's not entirely applicable (countries are far more complex than ships, and tend not to have a unitary chain of authority). But the notion of working on the possible remains.