I think the better answer is not “whom” but “what process”.

People will always be fallible. Processes, however, can layer checks and balances in a way that people often can’t. Processes are also easier to change than people in my experience.

Processes certainly aren’t perfect but considering your examples are past tense, they can tend to arc towards “more perfect.”

I like this idea. Perhaps I'm committing the same fallacy that the Romans did around the fall of the Republic. The prevailing idea was that their problems were caused by a "failure of Roman morals", rather than by a failure of their system, even as they realized the inevitability of their situation and tried to enact changes.

> Processes certainly aren’t perfect but considering your examples are past tense, they can tend to arc towards “more perfect.”

Agreed. My use of the past was to illustrate a basic truth: given the big (colossal) failures of the past, is it more likely we have largely found the truth, or that we are still very far away from it? It's impossible to know of course. That said, the amount of people who will claim their truth is ultimate and all of who do not see it their way must be idiots is staggering. It's human nature though, I literally did that one comment above.