One thing I wonder about is why there seems to be close to even balance between folks who think the way to solve problems is from the top down and those who think bottom up problem solving is better.
For a deeper source on these two visions, I recommend Thomas Sowell’s book, “A Conflict of Visions.”
Those with the top down vision will tend to think that the way to solve global warming is with governments enforcing standards on us, which is top down.
Those with the bottom up vision will tend to think that innovative solutions from people tinkering in their garage might be a better way to attack the problem.
Or education, those with the top down vision will support having one standard for education ‘that works’ and just implementing that.
Those with the bottom up vision think that one standard is elusive and impractical, because few things are ‘one size fits all’ and will tend to support more local approaches to education.
Or, even in soccer. Those with the top down vision think that improving soccer in a country is a matter of the country’s soccer federation doing the right things.
Those with bottom up vision believe the answer is more in the grassroots and incentives to encourage folks other than the federation to solve soccer’s problems.
I have not seen a good explanation for why there’s close a 50/50 split in this thinking. Is there a good explanation?