My pet theory/explanation is that, the more people see things go wrong in society (or, rather, believe them to), the more they tend to become contrarians. They look for views and beliefs that are opposite to what people in authority say. It seems to be built into us, like a tribe of stone age people will question their leaders’ methods and decisions after a row of bad hunts and then desire to hunt in a new place, at a different time, using different techniques.
Modern information warfare appears to use that idea centrally. The far right has been indoctrinated to believe that the “establishment” they rebel against is left wing and that a hard turn towards right wing politics is needed. After Trump won in 2016 and they were officially in power, they splintered a bit until they found a new lore: “actually, we’re still being ruled by the left, they’re the deep state, the cabal, etc.” to rekindle the contrarian / siege mentality and come together again.
I see all that in tankies, too. Society feels like it’s going wrong, so they sponge up any reason they see to hate the “establishment,” which is where the already running information warfare provides them ample facts to blame liberals and hate western powers, etc.
Also, on the hostility… yeah. These echo chambers seem to almost intentionally breed a nastiness that shuts down any useful discussion. Try to defuse anger and you’re “whiteknighting,” try to point out that something decent is good and you’re “virtue signaling.” When these communities erupt into other spaces, they quickly drive out anyone discussing in good faith. Survival of the nastiest.
I liked agile as it was practiced in the “Extreme Programming” days.
Rather than attempt to design the perfect system from the get-go, you accept that software architecture is a living, moving target that needs to evolve as your understanding of the problem evolves.
Rather than stare down a mountain of ill-defined work, you have neat little user stories that can be completed in a few days at most and you just move around some Kanban cards instead of feeding a soul-sucking bureaucratic ticketing, time tracking and monitoring system.
Rather than sweat and enter crunch mode for deadlines, the project owners see how many user stories (or story points or perfect hours) the team completes per week and can use a velocity graph / burndown chart to estimate when all work will be completed.
.
But it’s just a corporate buzzword now. “We’re agile” often enough means “we have no plan, take no responsibility and expect the team to wing it somehow” or “we cargo cult a few agile ideas that feel good to management, like endless meetings with infinite course changes where everyone gives feel-good responses to the managers.”
Having a goal, a specification, a release plan, a vision and someone who is responsible and approachable (the “project owner”) are all part of the agile manifesto, not something it tries to do away with. I would be sad if agile faces the same fate as the waterfall model back in its time and even sadder if we return to the time-tracking-ticket-system-with-Gantt-chart hell as the default.
Maybe we need a new term or an “agility index” to separate the cases of “incompetent manager uses buzzword to cover up messy planning” from the cases of “project owner with a clearly defined goal creates a low-bureaucracy work environment for his team.” :)