Why CSS Breaks at Scale

CSS Isn’t the Problem

CSS is powerful.

It can:

• express layout
• define visual systems
• adapt responsively
• animate interfaces

The issue isn’t capability.

The issue is scale.

---

Small Projects Hide the Cracks

On small projects:

• one developer writes most of the CSS
• styles live in a few files
• naming feels manageable
• everything is still fresh in memory

This creates a false sense of safety.

---

Entropy Sets In

As projects grow:

• styles accumulate
• patterns drift
• rules overlap
• intent becomes unclear

CSS doesn’t rot —
systems rot.

---

Naming Becomes a Burden

Traditional CSS relies heavily on naming:

• class names
• component names
• modifier names
• utility names you invent yourself

Over time, teams ask:

• “Is there already a class for this?”
• “Can I reuse this safely?”
• “What will this break?”

Progress slows.

---

Specificity Creeps Up

When styles conflict, developers respond by:

• adding more selectors
• increasing specificity
• reaching for !important

Each fix works locally.

Each fix makes the system harder to reason about globally.

---

Global Scope, Global Risk

CSS is global by default.

That means:

• small changes can have wide effects
• refactors feel dangerous
• teams become hesitant to clean things up

Fear replaces confidence.

---

The Core Issue

Traditional CSS assumes:

• developers remember existing styles
• naming stays consistent
• everyone follows the same mental model

That assumption doesn’t hold at scale.

---

The Question Teams Started Asking

Not:

“How do we write more CSS?”

But:

“How do we stop fighting our own styles?”

That question leads directly to atomic approaches.

---

⏭ From Symptoms to Strategy

Before introducing new tools, we need a different way of thinking about UI.

Next up: Atomic Thinking