I would have thought MCAS, as a concept, was an eloquent answer to a tedious flight-test finding, given that you allowed any automated system to control the H Stabilizer. The prime issue with MCAS was its uncensored authority over that ultimately powerful surface.
There shouldn't have been a multiple shot action but a smooth adjustment of stick load. A stick nudger is totally different and not at all what was required to solve the aerodynamic problem.
The two vane failures were seemingly a bizarre coincidence since there seems little doubt they were quite disparate mechanical issues. Re the ET failure, I note on the diagram the shaft from the vane has quite a small diameter and it seems likely that if it failed, the vane would be free to extract itself and fly/flutter/tumble chaotically to the left side of the centreline. I wouldn't be surprised to find it 50 metres from that line.