Revolution and Reform
*Before I post this, please understand that I do not agree with the need to abolish technology that Ted Kaczynski advocated. I have a very technocratic ideology. Still, it is impossible to read his analysis on revolution and liberalism and not notice its brilliance. It is impossible to read his analysis on some of the problems technology causes and not know he was right on a few points. The irrelevant fact that he bombed people does not make his analysis irrelevant.
People tend to assume that because a revolution involves a much greater change than reform does, it is more difficult to bring about than reform is. Actually, under certain circumstances revolution is much easier than reform. The reason is that a revolutionary movement can inspire an intensity of commitment that a reform movement cannot inspire. A reform movement merely offers to solve a particular social problem A revolutionary movement offers to solve all problems at one stroke and create a whole new world; it provides the kind of ideal for which people will take great risks and make great sacrifices.
Reform is always restrained by the fear of painful consequences if changes go too far. But once a revolutionary fever has taken hold of a society, people are willing to undergo unlimited hardships for the sake of their revolution. This was clearly shown in the French and Russian Revolutions. It may be that in such cases only a minority of the population is really committed to the revolution, but this minority is sufficiently large and active so that it becomes the dominant force in society.