There is intrinsic irreducible complexity that comes with many problems and there's no way to fix that. Software solutions also cannot scale linearly with the complexity of the problem.
In fact, it's provably outright impossible to even calculate the complexity of a problem in general, let alone find the optimal (as in least complex) solution (see Komolgorov complexity).
We are resigned to the feeling that ‘it’s never gonna get fixed’. It’s not a good way to be, and to see this worldview permeate into objective areas of life is even more depressing.
Misanthropy kind of absolves humanity of it’s nature. What I don’t like to see in software is that type of absolution for code we know is obviously not pragmatic. It’s a tough debate because often the perpetrators of complex abstraction layers don’t believe it’s bad (any number of us could have been the guilty party at some point or another):
I think we should still try to be optimistic about openly debating complexity, or else we risk allowing misanthropic perceptions to enter this realm too - ‘people just suck at programming, so be it’.
But one can hold both of the opposing views of what the upscussion is talking about in human nature and misanthropy. Good architecture encourages the right decisions. So we can both accept that human nature will "come out" and also strive to help our fellow humans make the best possible decisions in light of that.
Anything else is not being true to ourselves and the situation.