4 ms·

Thank you. This is an important point, and one that I haven't seen nearly enough of on HN lately. It is very difficult to overstate the extent to which "governm

Thank you. This is an important point, and one that I haven't seen nearly enough of on HN lately. It is very difficult to overstate the extent to which "government people" live in a bubble. In many ways, they are working from an entirely different set of first principles than those used by most of the HN-reading world. As such, it is difficult for "us" to understand why "they" do what they do, and very easy for us to come up with our own (usually incorrect, or at the very least, incomplete) explanations for their behavior. Of course, the converse is generally true: the laughably incorrect explanations that "government people" always seem to come up with for "our" behavior often are the result of them interpreting events, statements, etc. through their lens- a lens informed by a completely different set of optical principles than the ones that we are used to using (to abuse the figure of speech a little bit). In other words, when you read or hear about a "government person" doing or saying something head-deskingly stupid, the odds are very good that the statement or action made perfect sense in the context of that government person's world. It's not that they're (necessarily) stupid, or even ignorant- just that they're not living in our world, and so have dramatically different motivations, constraints, first principles, etc. etc. Their actions may be perfectly follow an internal logic- but it's not our logic, and so we have a hard time making sense of it. And all of this goes double or triple when we're talking about military or IC people. The classified nature of their work, with its attendant organizational, cultural, technical, political, and psychological distortions, makes their "bubble" look more like a bathysphere.

spin 13y ago
This is useful for trying to understand other people. You should always try to figure out how/why a person came to their particular worldview. But in a government "of the people, by the people, for the people", it is The People who have final say. (edit: yes, I am aware that this particular incident happened in England, not the U.S....)
w_t_payne 13y ago
I remember having a conversation in a pub with a junior Whitehall civil servant a number of years ago. Only half jokingly, he quipped that "of course the civil service runs the country", noting the relative powerlessness of parliament. Interestingly enough, the more senior (and experienced) civil servants that I have had the opportunity to talk to have been very careful to emphasise that the department answers to the minister. Of course, the relationship between the civil service, ministers and the media is an unnatural, strained and stressful one -- I do not envy any of these parties, although I think that the media has the most (effective) power out of these three, given the proportion of central government activity (60-70%?) that is driven by whatever happened to be in the headlines that week.
- vidarh 13y ago
  Well to a large extent the civil service is meant to "run the country". The political leadership is meant to set the rules and directions, but they don't do the day to day grunt-work, and the civil service provides the continuity between governments and a lot of what they do indeed does span different governments without much interference from the political leadership. So his "joke" might have been a sinister indication that they are sidestepping political control, or just pointing out the realities of who does the actual work.
  - w_t_payne 13y ago
    I suspect that he was just pointing out the realities of who does the actual work, but making a joke from the double meaning of the phrase "run the country".
VladRussian2 13y ago
They wield and apply real force [in the wide sense - from crude violence to making citizens pay taxes, etc..] to the real people outside. The only known practical approach here the human race has so far come up with is to have their application of force be a subject to the strictest formal control possible. Unfortunately, we see erosion of such control, and unfortunately there is no reversal of the trend on the horizon... Watching "Battlestar Galactica", 3rd season beginning. Cylons trying to live peacefully with humans they occupied on New Caprica. "Either we increase control or we lose control" ...

spin 13y ago

This is useful for trying to understand other people. You should always try to figure out how/why a person came to their particular worldview. But in a government "of the people, by the people, for the people", it is The People who have final say. (edit: yes, I am aware that this particular incident happened in England, not the U.S....)

w_t_payne 13y ago

I remember having a conversation in a pub with a junior Whitehall civil servant a number of years ago. Only half jokingly, he quipped that "of course the civil service runs the country", noting the relative powerlessness of parliament. Interestingly enough, the more senior (and experienced) civil servants that I have had the opportunity to talk to have been very careful to emphasise that the department answers to the minister. Of course, the relationship between the civil service, ministers and the media is an unnatural, strained and stressful one -- I do not envy any of these parties, although I think that the media has the most (effective) power out of these three, given the proportion of central government activity (60-70%?) that is driven by whatever happened to be in the headlines that week.

vidarh 13y ago
Well to a large extent the civil service is meant to "run the country". The political leadership is meant to set the rules and directions, but they don't do the day to day grunt-work, and the civil service provides the continuity between governments and a lot of what they do indeed does span different governments without much interference from the political leadership. So his "joke" might have been a sinister indication that they are sidestepping political control, or just pointing out the realities of who does the actual work.
- w_t_payne 13y ago
  I suspect that he was just pointing out the realities of who does the actual work, but making a joke from the double meaning of the phrase "run the country".

VladRussian2 13y ago

They wield and apply real force [in the wide sense - from crude violence to making citizens pay taxes, etc..] to the real people outside. The only known practical approach here the human race has so far come up with is to have their application of force be a subject to the strictest formal control possible. Unfortunately, we see erosion of such control, and unfortunately there is no reversal of the trend on the horizon... Watching "Battlestar Galactica", 3rd season beginning. Cylons trying to live peacefully with humans they occupied on New Caprica. "Either we increase control or we lose control" ...