Quotes About Influence

SRP: The Single Responsibility Principle An active corollary to Conway's law: The best structure for a software system is heavily influenced by the social structure of the organization that uses it so that each software module has one, and only one, reason to change.

When we think of a software architect, we think of someone who has power, and who commands respect.

If component A should be protected from changes in component B, then component B should depend on component A.

The diagram in Figure 14.5 shows X, which is a stable component. Three components depend on X, so it has three good reasons not to change. We say that X is responsible to those three components. Conversely, X depends on nothing, so it has no external influence to make it change. We say it is independent.

I'm a programmer. I like programming. And the best way I've found to have a positive impact on code is to write it.

W]hat we also see in sex is a kind of submissiveness. But not a kind of submissiveness which is simply 'do what you like, I'm just here for you', but it...is, or can be, very manipulative. It is a way of getting the other person to exercise all his or her efforts towards pleasing you, and in that way controlling what they're thinking, and in particular what they're thinking of you.

Lenin, albeit tardily, realized that Stalin's personality very much mattered.

This was Lenin's doing. How did he come to regard Stalin as suitable for membership in the inner circle of Bolshevik leaders?

His followers, who are also typically his disciples, freely accept his leadership because they perceive him to be the possessor of extraordinary qualities or powers; and this "recognition" of his special qualification is seen by Weber as decisive for the validity of charisma.[

The duty of Social Democracy was to influence the will of nations to arrange their affairs in the manner best corresponding to the interests of the proletariat.

Since Lenin wrote as he spoke, his political writings had something of the compelling quality of his political speeches.

The point is that the powers on which he chiefly relied in exercising this forceful individual leadership were his powers of persuasion.

Does the mass give the leaders the program and its argumentation, or do the leaders give it to the mass?[163]

Hence the abolitionist-minded intelligentsia, along with liberal elements in Russian society and within the bureaucracy, inclined not toward a constitutionalist program, realization of which would only strengthen the political influence of the landowners, but to the idea of a progressive autocracy.

Djugashvili had a way of leaving places under a cloud after some ugly incident, brought on in part by his own tendency to become embroiled with others.

In these early writings, as it turned out, Plekhanov was laying the theoretical foundations not of the Russian Marxist political movement as a whole but of its Menshevik wing. The opposing, Bolshevik, wing, of which Lenin became leader, showed the influence of some of the very ideas Plekhanov was attacking. But not until much later did all this become clear.

seminary influence was also visible in his dogmatic style of exposition, the way in which he would invoke the classical Marxist texts to establish points of philosophical doctrine. Anarchism or Socialism? was the product of a religiously formed mind that had found in dialectical materialism an irrevocable and enormously satisfying intellectual commitment.

This novel furnished inspiration for several generations of Russian radicals. That it furnished inspiration also for Vladimir Ulyanov is well attested to by, among other things, the fact that he entitled his own revolutionary treatise of 1902—the most important of all his works in historical influence—What Is to Be Done?

He angrily rejected a disparaging remark about the literary quality of Chernyshevsky's work, and confessed that it had influenced him profoundly, particularly when he reread it after his brother's execution: "It captivated my brother, and it captivated me. It made me over completely. . . .

whereas Lenin had envisaged the new Central Committee members as workers, for the most part, Stalin wanted to enlarge the Central Committee with well-disposed apparatchiki so as to increase his own influence within it.

the Central Committee expanded from a size of twenty-seven members and nineteen candidates in 1922 to sixty-three members and forty-three candidates in 1925, and many of the newcomers were Stalin supporters.

During 1922 events moved swiftly toward a crisis in Lenin's relations with Stalin, who by this time felt sufficiently secure in his power base to assert views and persist in them even if they occasionally ran counter to Lenin's.

Private enterprise flourished in much of the economy. Intellectual life was far from completely regimented.[491] The secret police, albeit an object of fear for many, was not operating as the terror machine that it was later to become and was not yet one man's political instrument. Neither the population at large nor the tens of thousands composing the politically influential class could be described (in the language of the theory of totalitarianism) as an "atomized mass.

Before long, however, Djugashvili was organizing one or more new study circles of which he himself was the mentor.[129] Again, a quality by which he was distinguished in later years—the urge for personal power—was finding expression in the seminary period.