I believe ethics is relative across regions and time. Things change, and it doesn't have to change gradually. I also think that finding an optimal solution for a complex system like government is always the goal but never fully achieved. It's not just because people disagree. There may be more than one good compromise solution but is impossible to land on any one of them exactly or find a global maximum solution with a general iteration approach, especially on a moving target. An analogy of reformism is an iterative algorithm. What limits an unsupervised optimization ML algorithm from finding the optimal global solution? Not allowing it to take big enough leaps, limiting change too early, or pruning poor solutions too early. Reformism is the opposite of each. The problem with the real-world solution to government is that the goalposts keep moving. I say again, it completely depends.
Be the first to reply to this answer.