Cav's Place

Despite the fact that it appears to be an impossible task, there are several proven methods of creating large scale social change. None are easy and most can be considered evil, but they work and that’s what matters.
I’m most likely missing some of them, but I’ll try to go through the ones I know of, briefly explaining each. I’ll start from the most desirable ones and then move on through the list, because they are all just means and their value is defined by the ends for which they are used.

Education. It can have some success on adults, but the chances of that happening diminish as the subject’s age increases. The most effective use of education is on children, which can be taught that certain behaviors are right and desirable and then also used to spread these concepts among their older relatives.
It’s the mildest and most desirable method, because it involves the least amount of pressure and violence. However, it requires the longest amount of time, a huge amount of resources and, perhaps most importantly, can only be employed by those who are already in well-established positions of authority.

Persuasion. If education fails or is impossible to attempt, it can be assumed that people are unlikely to believe that the expected behavior is truly the best one, but persuasion can be used in order to at least make them think that it is necessary. Unlike education, this method is probably most effective when used on middle-aged individuals, because the young tend to rebel more often and the old are notoriously hard to persuade to change their ways. It also works best on those of moderate intelligence, because persuasion relies on facts and arguments, which the less intelligent ones will likely be unable to understand and the highly intelligent ones will probably be able to seriously challenge.
Either way, it still requires a long amount of time and quite a significant amount of resources, but it can be attempted even if you are not in a position of authority. In fact, a highly successful campaign of persuasion tends to raise one to a position of authority, therefore making it easier to subsequently use other methods.

Propaganda. It is also a means of persuasion, but the facts and arguments used don’t need to actually be true anymore, but only to appear as such. Propaganda also implies some amount of pressure, making some people even less likely to analyze the information they are given and find the flaws within it. Its effects on the elderly and the highly intelligent are still rather weak, but it’s far more effective than plain persuasion when it comes to the young and the unintelligent. It tends to appeal to the young because propaganda makes the things it requests appear to be a form of rebellion and a call to action, while the unintelligent are swayed partly because of the added pressure and partly because the arguments used, especially the false ones, are specifically tailored in such a way as to be easily understood by these individuals.
It can be attempted by anyone and, being more effective, it also requires less time, but usually it can only be made to work truly well by those who are already in a position of authority and have a huge amount of resources at their disposal. Still, people can be raised to positions of authority thanks to successful propaganda campaigns, so the few who manage something like this without already being in such a position tend to be greatly rewarded.

Pressure. This involves making it harder and harder to behave in any other way than the one desired by those who use this method. Some form of propaganda is usually also involved. It doesn’t exactly involve punishments, but it involves a lot of bureaucracy and some harassment. Only very determined individuals resist this method, which is the first one that tends to also work on the elderly.
This method can yield results in a fair amount of time and can even be made to work using limited resources. However, there is no way to use this method on a large scale unless you are already in a well-established position of authority. This method is widely used by democratic governments and other authority figures which try to avoid being labeled as tyrants. Actually, it’s widely used by everyone, some using it without even realizing it. We all know of “peer pressure”, right?

Partial coercion. This means taking pressure to the next level on a small scale. You actually force some people to do what you want them to do and then expect the others to follow suit. The initial targets are those least likely to rebel, or at least those least likely to rebel successfully, because a failed coercion attempt will greatly diminish your authority in the eyes of the next potential targets, making everything more difficult. Once a sufficient number of people end up behaving as desired, propaganda tends to be used in order to persuade the others either that this behavior is truly beneficial or simply that they will fail if they try to resist. This kind of propaganda can be more effective than the regular kind, because it tends to involve images with and statements from those who either match the expected behavior patterns and appear to be living wonderful lives, which can make plenty of people end up believing in that false utopia and desiring to be a part of it, or have refused to bow down and ended up completely broken as a result, which demoralizes some of those who would have otherwise been willing to fight.
It’s a method which can be used on a lot of levels, so there is no significant authority requirement and the necessary resources vary greatly, but the large scale effectiveness relies almost entirely on the success of the propaganda campaign, which will be very limited if it doesn’t have a solid enough backing. On the other hand, a highly successful partial coercion campaign can create a snowball effect, significantly raising the authority of those who employed it.

Complete coercion. Quite simply, this means forcing everyone to behave as desired by whatever means necessary. Unlike the partial coercion, it no longer relies on persuasion or propaganda, no longer trying to convince people that a certain behavior is right or desirable. This is a method used when it’s obvious that popular support is unattainable, or at least unattainable within the required time frame.
Being in a well-established position of authority is mandatory and the required amount of resources is tremendous, but this method can offer results more or less immediately. It carries a high cost, however, those who use it becoming targets and usually being recorded into the pages of history as tyrants.

Killing. I don’t think there’s much to say about this. When even coercion fails and you really need to get rid of the opposition, this is the final method available. It can be counterproductive if you actually need the people to do something and don’t just want to get them out of your way, so a small number of killings tends to be used as an example, hoping to demoralize the others and to make them accept to be coerced in order to avoid even more killing.
Anyone can kill, it can be done immediately and even with bare hands, so there are basically no requirements, but the method in itself is certainly counterproductive if you mean to make people do something, seeing as they can’t do anything if they’re dead. The propaganda associated with it can be highly effective, though that adds the requirements of propaganda into the mix, but it can also generate the opposite effect, turning those you kill into martyrs and strengthening the resistance. Killing is the last resort, to be done only when everything else fails.

These are all methods which have been used ever since humans first evolved, and they’re used by other species as well. They’re tried and true, proven to work. Once you get past the first two it could be said that they’re increasingly evil, but that’s not really the case. They could be undesirable, but the end result should be judged far more than the means used to achieve it. So education or persuasion can be evil if they’re used to convince people to do things that are ultimately harmful, while coercion and even killing can be fully justified if the end result will ultimately be beneficial.
The problem is that people who desire to do good things are almost never willing to go past persuasion, leaving only those who only care about their own interests or simply wish to harm to use the other, more effective, methods. And the results of that attitude can easily be seen throughout history and in the world today. Those who have good intentions are kicked aside and the others rule, most changes being for the worse.
What we need is a “whatever works” approach, with the understanding that truly noble ends really do justify the means. If we want to get something done, we need to beat the others at their own game, and to do that we need to use their methods, no matter how harsh they might seem. We can’t afford to do anything else anymore. There’s no more time to be nice about it and those who truly desire to do good are hardly ever allowed to have a position of great authority in a society ruled by greed and selfishness, such as the one we live in. Our options are limited as it is, let’s not limit them even further ourselves!