For 50 years, almost no one complained about bureaucrats (& bureacracy) more than I did (just ask my former coworkers about me and the B-word). Then the MAGA cult came along, and I grudgingly saw bureaucrats as the "lesser of 2 evils." The many bureaucrats I had to deal with (directly & indirectly, many even in the private sector) knew t…
For 50 years, almost no one complained about bureaucrats (& bureacracy) more than I did (just ask my former coworkers about me and the B-word). Then the MAGA cult came along, and I grudgingly saw bureaucrats as the "lesser of 2 evils." The many bureaucrats I had to deal with (directly & indirectly, many even in the private sector) knew that giving people the runaround meant job security. As long as they pleased "mangement" the people they are supposed to serve be damned. But techically we are their "bosses," and until that gets rubbed in everywhere, there will always be a problem. With bureacuacy, though, there's usually a workaround. The job gets done, though at unnecessarily high cost and/or low efficiency. If the MAGA cult completes its hijacking of the Republic, there may not be workarounds.
I am a bureaucrat, and I feel the need to correct you on one thing; you, the person sitting in front of me, are not my boss. My boss is the the people of the State for whom I work, and I work for the interests of all of them. This includes you, but it's not limited to you. I don't like sending people away unhappy, believe me. It's often soul-crushing, especially in the job I work. But I dislike treating people unequally far more, and that's what a lot of the requests to disregard the rules I get amount to. It never ceases to amaze me how many of the people who complain about inflexible bureaucrats are also the same ones who complain about corruption when someone greases the wheels for a customer who's not them. Can't have it both ways.
In an era with people like Trump and Bannon wanting to turn the government into patronage factories, it's more important than ever that the rules be maintained, even if it means people figure I'm a lazy parasite. If that makes you angry, I recommend calling your state legislature. I just do what they tell me to do, after all.
There are some reasonable criticisms of legislation by bureaucracy -- which is often done because elected lawmakers want to evade responsibility -- and of the power of executive agencies both to write and enforce rules and then, in effect, to adjudicate the interpretation of laws. The people who call this criticism itself an attack on "democracy" are basically saying that democracy has little if anything to do with the people's voice in their own governance. They don't object to policymaking by people insulated from the voters as long as those people share their own perspective. And because the permanent bureaucracy leans left, Democrats tend to equate it with "democracy" itself.
The Trump cult totally corrupted the argument by aligning it with Trump's sociopathic understanding of right and wrong, his disregard for rules, and his envy of despots. Trump and his loyalists cultivated the belief that the government is supposed to be obedient to him personally and always serve his wishes and interests. And because Trump has no respect for law, the rule of law itself has been painted as sinister and antidemocratic.
When "democratic accountability" is equated with unconditional deference to a sociopath, it rather destroys the case against the "administrative state."
I mostly agree. But the villains are not the "unaccountable" bureaucrats who are just workers trying to do their jobs amidst the shitshow the politicians created.
The villains are the legislators who fail to do their jobs and hold them accountable.
For 50 years, almost no one complained about bureaucrats (& bureacracy) more than I did (just ask my former coworkers about me and the B-word). Then the MAGA cult came along, and I grudgingly saw bureaucrats as the "lesser of 2 evils." The many bureaucrats I had to deal with (directly & indirectly, many even in the private sector) knew that giving people the runaround meant job security. As long as they pleased "mangement" the people they are supposed to serve be damned. But techically we are their "bosses," and until that gets rubbed in everywhere, there will always be a problem. With bureacuacy, though, there's usually a workaround. The job gets done, though at unnecessarily high cost and/or low efficiency. If the MAGA cult completes its hijacking of the Republic, there may not be workarounds.
I am a bureaucrat, and I feel the need to correct you on one thing; you, the person sitting in front of me, are not my boss. My boss is the the people of the State for whom I work, and I work for the interests of all of them. This includes you, but it's not limited to you. I don't like sending people away unhappy, believe me. It's often soul-crushing, especially in the job I work. But I dislike treating people unequally far more, and that's what a lot of the requests to disregard the rules I get amount to. It never ceases to amaze me how many of the people who complain about inflexible bureaucrats are also the same ones who complain about corruption when someone greases the wheels for a customer who's not them. Can't have it both ways.
In an era with people like Trump and Bannon wanting to turn the government into patronage factories, it's more important than ever that the rules be maintained, even if it means people figure I'm a lazy parasite. If that makes you angry, I recommend calling your state legislature. I just do what they tell me to do, after all.
There are some reasonable criticisms of legislation by bureaucracy -- which is often done because elected lawmakers want to evade responsibility -- and of the power of executive agencies both to write and enforce rules and then, in effect, to adjudicate the interpretation of laws. The people who call this criticism itself an attack on "democracy" are basically saying that democracy has little if anything to do with the people's voice in their own governance. They don't object to policymaking by people insulated from the voters as long as those people share their own perspective. And because the permanent bureaucracy leans left, Democrats tend to equate it with "democracy" itself.
The Trump cult totally corrupted the argument by aligning it with Trump's sociopathic understanding of right and wrong, his disregard for rules, and his envy of despots. Trump and his loyalists cultivated the belief that the government is supposed to be obedient to him personally and always serve his wishes and interests. And because Trump has no respect for law, the rule of law itself has been painted as sinister and antidemocratic.
When "democratic accountability" is equated with unconditional deference to a sociopath, it rather destroys the case against the "administrative state."
I mostly agree. But the villains are not the "unaccountable" bureaucrats who are just workers trying to do their jobs amidst the shitshow the politicians created.
The villains are the legislators who fail to do their jobs and hold them accountable.