And its enemy is inertia. Inertia's greatest weapon is bureaucracy, which inherently resists change while ostensibly existing to facilitate it. Like every powerful force, inertia is neither good nor bad. It can slow down a bad idea until a better idea comes along just as it can slow down a good idea until it loses its energy to move forward. As with all forces of nature, it acts equally on all. As Newton first articulated, effort is required to overcome inertia. Effort can be the physical effort to move dirt and lift steel, but also the effort to overcome cultural and legal hurdles, secure financing, and coordinate complex systems and processes. Effort can be measured in tons and yards to move dirt, or in time and dollars to overcome cultural and financial obstacles.
However frustrating it might feel at times, inertia in reasonable doses is essential in a democratic society to insure that time is available for a deliberative process that considers multiple views. Without sufficient deliberation, the citizens' voices cannot be heard and they will feel – and sometimes be – steamrolled by a given project and the government that permitted it. In a non-democratic society without open deliberation, inertia is often just lethargy, but even lethargy can serve the people by slowing dictated projects that are much less likely to be in their interest.
Associated with Newton's first law of inertia is Mao's dictum that without destruction, there is no construction. The very act of building something destroys or displaces something else, and usually many something else's. This displacement naturally meets with resistance from defenders of that item or issue who don't wish to see it displaced. Sometimes the displaced things are simply dirt, grass, trees, and older structures. Sometimes they are less tangible such as money “displaced” from a savings account as it moves to a construction loan and is no longer available for other projects. Sometimes the displaced thing is intangible and abstract such as when a client's multiple dreams for a new house are displaced by the one consolidated vision that will become the new house. The reality of building a structure with its need for financing and decisions, “displaces” all of the potential projects for which those funds and those decisions could have been applied.
Architects must understand and overcome the inevitable obstacles and resistance to even the most obvious and well-intentioned projects. The best approach is usually not a direct assault to destroy resistance that is often an institutionalized and faceless force such as a building department, bank, or neighborhood group. Moreover, the resistance itself is probably well-intentioned and trying to preserve something, such as money, neighborhood, or trees that, in another context, the architect or client would also value.
Nevertheless, building is like war, a project is like a campaign, and architects are neither like monarchs nor soldiers. Most often, architects play generals in service of the Monarch/Client. Architects have to think strategically from the outset of the building campaign about the potential obstacles – many of which compete with each other – and plan a process of removing the obstacles from the project's path or setting alternative paths that avoids them.
