Ah, social change theories. I fully agree with the idea that organizations that have outlived their usefulness and exist primarily for institutional self-perpetuation ought to just go. I think, however, that part of the problem lies in the idea that some people have from the getgo that you need to create “an organization” rather than a space/community/etc or support an existing group.

If people would just work on a series of principles that go beyond “checks and balances” to actual structural accountability to their constituents, a culture that’s process oriented as well as results oriented, etc., you’d have less problems.

Yes, the picture I’m laying out is something of an ideal (although perhaps less so than asking organizations to disband when their purpose has been served on the basis of a preexisting formal commitment from God knows how long ago), but there’s so much room for improvement right now that there’s ample room to work towards it.

It’s endemic to religion and politics – others can always die for your beliefs.

Playing Cassandra is difficult, but at a bare minimum, ‘when the mission has been accomplished’ or ‘when the need has passed’ should suffice.

That would be true if the organization had been formed to solve a problem. What do you do about political organizations that are formed to take advantage of the opportunity presented by a problem?