I think the op is not saying that peer review as a concept is broken, more that the current peer review system is broken.
I think we could start fixing things by incentivizing good peer review. There’s a lot of ways to do this and I’d be interested in a discussion of different schemes. It will by no means be easy but I think that’s what needs to happen.
For reference, good peer review is incentivized in some places. A journal I read gives awards every year for the best reviewers, and good reviewers end up as Associate Editors.
I think we could start fixing things by incentivizing good peer review. There’s a lot of ways to do this and I’d be interested in a discussion of different schemes. It will by no means be easy but I think that’s what needs to happen.