The second paragraph reads:
Closely related to fallibilism is the rejection of any sort of utopianism or revolutionary strategy. Not only do we expect to be unable to design the perfect society or the perfect curriculum, we expect even our piecemeal attempts to improve society or to improve a particular child’s life and prospects, to be riddled with errors. We expect errors to be possible even, or perhaps especially, when we are most sure that we are right and that our critics (such as the child himself) are wrong. We understand, therefore, that our principal objective in setting up institutions must not be to identify the right policies and ensure that they will take precedence over all rival policies; it must be to ensure that bad policies, once implemented, can be abandoned as easily as possible. Choosing the right policies is a matter for persuasion and consent, under institutions that promote those things but do not pre-judge either what the answer is or whose idea it will be.
This paragraph states that utopianism and revolutionary strategies are a bad idea, but it doesn’t explain why and doesn’t refer to any explanation. The rest of the article doesn’t explain the problems either, which means it doesn’t explain how TCS avoids these problems.
Karl Popper explains utopianism in “The Open Society and Its Enemies” Chapter 9:
The Utopian approach may be described as follows. Any rational action must have a certain aim. It is rational in the same degree as it pursues its aim consciously and consistently, and as it determines its means according to this end. To choose the end is therefore the first thing we have to do if we wish to act rationally; and we must be careful to determine our real or ultimate ends, from which we must distinguish clearly those intermediate or partial ends which actually are only means, or steps on the way, to the ultimate end. If we neglect this distinction, then we must also neglect to ask whether these partial ends are likely to promote the ultimate end, and accordingly, we must fail to act rationally. These principles, if applied to the realm of political activity, demand that we must determine our ultimate political aim, or the Ideal State, before taking any practical action. Only when this ultimate aim is determined, in rough outline at least, only when we are in possession of something like a blueprint of the society at which we aim, only then can we begin to consider the best ways and means for its realization, and to draw up a plan for practical action. These are the necessary preliminaries of any practical political move that can be called rational, and especially of social engineering.
Popper pointed out some problems with utopianism. Having a particular aim for society requires centralised rule of a few people who will force others to go along with some plan to reach that aim. Criticism of the plan will get in the way of achieving it. Some of that criticism may be wrong and some of it may be right, and there is no way to tell the difference in advance of having a critical discussion. And the leaders won’t necessarily be correct in their judgement of the criticisms. The leaders might allow some people to deviate from the plan, but that may prevent the plan from being enacted. Or they might suppress criticisms they think are wrong through force, in which case they will suppress some correct criticisms. Also enforcing a particular aim prevents criticism of the aim itself. The founders of TCS treated Elliot Temple badly. They may have done this because he was pointing out problems with their ideas, which got in the way of promoting those ideas.
Another problem is that if you’re going to make a large change then you will have to get rid of currently existing institutions that got you to your current position. And since those institutions will have influenced your plans, then the plans themselves include references to the ideas you want to eliminate. For example, schools are coercive but lots of parents work 40 hour weeks and don’t have time to look after their children. So trying to get rid of all coercive education would cause a lot of economic problems. So changes away from coercive education would have to take those problems into account.
The actual implementation of any plan will expose mistakes in the plan whether anyone points them out or not. These mistakes will then require making small adjustments to see what will work. So all you have done is replace the current set of problems with a new set of problems that we don’t know much about. For example, Sarah Fitz-Claridge got into the position of having debates about age of consent laws. If you want to get rid of all laws that discriminate on the basis of age, that includes age of consent laws and so you have to come up with a replacement.
TCS as it was originally advocated provides illustrations of many of the problems of utopianism.