Stuff happens, but why?
"Stuff"... meaning unexpected, unplanned events that rise up and change life. We all know it does happen, usually at a most inconvenient, vulnerable time, and it seems to "bunch up" too... stuff happening in several places at once.
Of course, a lot of stuff happens because of our own actions, or inactions... one of the uncomfortable facts of life. Perhaps my favorite reading is that which examines history, attempting to discover and explain WHY an important historical event happened the way it did. One of my favorites of that genre is "Secrets", by Daniel Ellsberg, which describes the complex machinations of the upper levels of our government that led to a long, long series of incredibly stupid decisions in the conduct of the Vietnam War. The stupid decisions were, for the most part, not caused by evil intentions, nor stupidity, but primarily a bad system. The "system" in the upper levels of government is fraught with intense loyalty to superiors, desire to be a team player, desire to be promoted, and deathly fear of failing in any of those areas. The result is much guessing about what ones superiors want, reluctance to be decisive, and fear of saying something that will meet with disapproval.
Those attitudes are not limited to government; I've seen them operate in the very same way in a corporation with a powerful CEO. Underlings afraid to give the boss bad news or even modest news, so the boss really has no idea what is going on, and thus makes bad decisions that nobody has the courage to dispute.
In a top-down organization, information is supposed to flow upward freely, so that proper strategies can be laid and the whole effort coordinated. For that to work properly, all members need to believe that they can openly speak the truth without fear of termination. That's the ideal that is seldom met, but in a private corporation, most members are relatively sure that if this job doesn't work out well, they can find another. They can choose to take a risk by speaking out openly, knowing that worst case is a temporary setback.
It isn't quite that simple in government. If one is drummed out of a high government position, the alternative is often leaving government service completely, with no other government organization to turn to. So, the stakes in speaking out are very high within government.
Of course, in government, the decisions are more far-reaching and potentially destructive than in a corporation, and government doesn't have the final profit/loss marker that can eventually force mistakes and misunderstandings out into the open. So... the Vietnam War went on, and on, and on, through President after President. We are watching the same thing happen again in Iraq. Bush is already laying resolution of the mess on future leaders.
The new book I'm reading that explains another historical situation in terms of WHY some particular stuff hit the fan is "Shattered Sword" The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway, by Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully. Since spending a year with the U.S. Navy at Midway Island in the 60's, it has been a favorite historical episode of mine. There has never been any doubt that the battle of Midway was a turning point in the Pacific War. Crippled by the attack at Pearl Harbor, the American fleet could easily have been completely crushed at Midway, leading to an invasion of Hawaii, establishment of Japanese bases there, making attack and invasion of the U.S. itself far more practical. I'm oversimplifying an extremely complex time, but the results of that battle shaped the future, and an American defeat there could have changed our futures forever.
The book "Shattered Sword", by means of intense research, unveils what really happened, and WHY, demolishing many myths that have been accepted as truth in the 60 years since. Yes, there was a lot of incredible heroism involved... on both sides, and there WAS a lot of luck involved in the eventual outcome. I was pleased to find that, contrary to what I had been taught, that the American forces from the tiny atoll of Midway played a much more important role in the battle that is usually presented as a contest between aircraft carriers that happened to take place near Midway. The location of the Japanese fleet was first discovered by planes from Midway, and the initial attacks of land-based planes from Midway, although complete one-sided losses, were the beginning of placing the Japanese fleet in a defensive, reactive posture and they never managed to take the offensive again.
The book spends a good deal of time on the "doctrine" of the Japanese Navy, and reveals the same "bad system" described by Ellsberg within the upper echelon of the U.S. government... political battling, enforced loyalties, and fear of speaking out. Bad decisions made at the top, or vague decisions, or indecision, caused by poor communication, underlings afraid to speak out, or unwilling to raise the wrath of a superior, and all of that complicated by an systemic willingness to bury individuality in favor of being a faithful servant to the overall plan. The Japanese players, in sharp contrast to the Americans, were handicapped by being part of a doctrinal system that forced almost blind compliance to what had been decided in the past, with little flexibility in dealing with the battle as it actually developed. I should add that the American naval personnel acted with an unusual amount of extemporaneous action, probably because they thought of themselves as desperate, scrambling underdogs, but also because the U.S. forces encouraged more individual initiative.
The result of the doctrinaire Japanese organization was real confusion, mixed with over-confidence, fear of being seen as weak or fearful, and poor communication. Large organizations seldom work efficiently; there is just too much communication that needs to be unaffected by political considerations. In an organization that demands loyalty and compliance, communication is always twisted. It's simply a function of size and the amount of power involved. A military force is such an organization, as is the Executive Branch of our government.
"Shattered Sword", as did "Secrets", easily raises parallels with the ongoing actions in the Middle East. Once again, the issue is thrown in our faces... how can the most powerful (by far) military in the world be thrown into chaos by inferior forces. Japan projected capturing Midway as a cakewalk, just as the U.S. considered "freeing" Iraq to be a brief action. The Japanese presumed a quick, decisive victory, just as the U.S. believed that "Shock and Awe" would quickly destroy resistance in Iraq. The Japanese offensive was upset by a series of annoying attacks that did relatively little damage, just as is occurring in Iraq. Confusion and damaged morale is inevitable.
The lesson to be learned is clear: Concentrated power is not only dangerous, it's difficult to manage. Powerful top-down organizations are at best clumsy and wasteful, at worst they are simply disastrous. Our government proves that on a daily basis. The individual players make little difference; the size and power of the system is the Achilles heel that will, sooner or later, fail. The bigger government gets, the more power it wields, the worse the results will be.
Government grows like an ignored weed. Until we stand up and fight for a reduction in government power, it will continue to grow... until it strangles us. Then we can all utter a final, gasping "Stuff Happens" and turn a blind eye again.
Of course, a lot of stuff happens because of our own actions, or inactions... one of the uncomfortable facts of life. Perhaps my favorite reading is that which examines history, attempting to discover and explain WHY an important historical event happened the way it did. One of my favorites of that genre is "Secrets", by Daniel Ellsberg, which describes the complex machinations of the upper levels of our government that led to a long, long series of incredibly stupid decisions in the conduct of the Vietnam War. The stupid decisions were, for the most part, not caused by evil intentions, nor stupidity, but primarily a bad system. The "system" in the upper levels of government is fraught with intense loyalty to superiors, desire to be a team player, desire to be promoted, and deathly fear of failing in any of those areas. The result is much guessing about what ones superiors want, reluctance to be decisive, and fear of saying something that will meet with disapproval.
Those attitudes are not limited to government; I've seen them operate in the very same way in a corporation with a powerful CEO. Underlings afraid to give the boss bad news or even modest news, so the boss really has no idea what is going on, and thus makes bad decisions that nobody has the courage to dispute.
In a top-down organization, information is supposed to flow upward freely, so that proper strategies can be laid and the whole effort coordinated. For that to work properly, all members need to believe that they can openly speak the truth without fear of termination. That's the ideal that is seldom met, but in a private corporation, most members are relatively sure that if this job doesn't work out well, they can find another. They can choose to take a risk by speaking out openly, knowing that worst case is a temporary setback.
It isn't quite that simple in government. If one is drummed out of a high government position, the alternative is often leaving government service completely, with no other government organization to turn to. So, the stakes in speaking out are very high within government.
Of course, in government, the decisions are more far-reaching and potentially destructive than in a corporation, and government doesn't have the final profit/loss marker that can eventually force mistakes and misunderstandings out into the open. So... the Vietnam War went on, and on, and on, through President after President. We are watching the same thing happen again in Iraq. Bush is already laying resolution of the mess on future leaders.
The new book I'm reading that explains another historical situation in terms of WHY some particular stuff hit the fan is "Shattered Sword" The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway, by Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully. Since spending a year with the U.S. Navy at Midway Island in the 60's, it has been a favorite historical episode of mine. There has never been any doubt that the battle of Midway was a turning point in the Pacific War. Crippled by the attack at Pearl Harbor, the American fleet could easily have been completely crushed at Midway, leading to an invasion of Hawaii, establishment of Japanese bases there, making attack and invasion of the U.S. itself far more practical. I'm oversimplifying an extremely complex time, but the results of that battle shaped the future, and an American defeat there could have changed our futures forever.
The book "Shattered Sword", by means of intense research, unveils what really happened, and WHY, demolishing many myths that have been accepted as truth in the 60 years since. Yes, there was a lot of incredible heroism involved... on both sides, and there WAS a lot of luck involved in the eventual outcome. I was pleased to find that, contrary to what I had been taught, that the American forces from the tiny atoll of Midway played a much more important role in the battle that is usually presented as a contest between aircraft carriers that happened to take place near Midway. The location of the Japanese fleet was first discovered by planes from Midway, and the initial attacks of land-based planes from Midway, although complete one-sided losses, were the beginning of placing the Japanese fleet in a defensive, reactive posture and they never managed to take the offensive again.
The book spends a good deal of time on the "doctrine" of the Japanese Navy, and reveals the same "bad system" described by Ellsberg within the upper echelon of the U.S. government... political battling, enforced loyalties, and fear of speaking out. Bad decisions made at the top, or vague decisions, or indecision, caused by poor communication, underlings afraid to speak out, or unwilling to raise the wrath of a superior, and all of that complicated by an systemic willingness to bury individuality in favor of being a faithful servant to the overall plan. The Japanese players, in sharp contrast to the Americans, were handicapped by being part of a doctrinal system that forced almost blind compliance to what had been decided in the past, with little flexibility in dealing with the battle as it actually developed. I should add that the American naval personnel acted with an unusual amount of extemporaneous action, probably because they thought of themselves as desperate, scrambling underdogs, but also because the U.S. forces encouraged more individual initiative.
The result of the doctrinaire Japanese organization was real confusion, mixed with over-confidence, fear of being seen as weak or fearful, and poor communication. Large organizations seldom work efficiently; there is just too much communication that needs to be unaffected by political considerations. In an organization that demands loyalty and compliance, communication is always twisted. It's simply a function of size and the amount of power involved. A military force is such an organization, as is the Executive Branch of our government.
"Shattered Sword", as did "Secrets", easily raises parallels with the ongoing actions in the Middle East. Once again, the issue is thrown in our faces... how can the most powerful (by far) military in the world be thrown into chaos by inferior forces. Japan projected capturing Midway as a cakewalk, just as the U.S. considered "freeing" Iraq to be a brief action. The Japanese presumed a quick, decisive victory, just as the U.S. believed that "Shock and Awe" would quickly destroy resistance in Iraq. The Japanese offensive was upset by a series of annoying attacks that did relatively little damage, just as is occurring in Iraq. Confusion and damaged morale is inevitable.
The lesson to be learned is clear: Concentrated power is not only dangerous, it's difficult to manage. Powerful top-down organizations are at best clumsy and wasteful, at worst they are simply disastrous. Our government proves that on a daily basis. The individual players make little difference; the size and power of the system is the Achilles heel that will, sooner or later, fail. The bigger government gets, the more power it wields, the worse the results will be.
Government grows like an ignored weed. Until we stand up and fight for a reduction in government power, it will continue to grow... until it strangles us. Then we can all utter a final, gasping "Stuff Happens" and turn a blind eye again.
posted by Robert Ronald Smith at 12:05 AM
Permalink
Post
to freedomSLUT
<< Home