Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

toonkee

Big or Small, the State has to be Smart

Recommended Posts

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches. 

That’s a pretty cynical way to look at government and it’s abilities. It’s not at all true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Posturedoc said:

That’s a pretty cynical way to look at government and it’s abilities. It’s not at all true. 

It's absolutely true. Think about what the state actually does. How it functions. It simplifies. It does not scale to complexity.

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches.

I agree with the simplification theory, but a smarter simplification is still better than a dumb one.

We need government in some capacity and it needs to be better. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair the state here is the same as any other modern bureaucracy... including a corporation.

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, toonkee said:

I agree with the simplification theory, but a smarter simplification is still better than a dumb one.

We need government in some capacity and it needs to be better. 

 

Fair enough. Putting a nitwit in charge of the state doesn't make it better at dealing with anything. 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, smltwnrckr said:

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches. 

Always seems a little absolute

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, smltwnrckr said:

Hes a smart dude and I always consider his takes. But calling for a smart state misunderstands the nature of the state. The state simplifies things in order to manage and control them. The state always falters when trying to solve complex problems that require complex approaches. 

This is a fine, albeit cynical, theory, but isn’t really a theoretical discussion. He’s arguing that mindlessly cutting bureaucracy for the sake of small government isn’t any better approach than expanding government mindlessly. Just as an example, cutting auditors out of the IRS maybe costs the government more money than it saves.

Obviously, he’s applying this specifically to Covid. I don’t know how one can argue that a government can’t help with that problem when us and Sweden are pretty much alone in the free world in having governments that haven’t really been effective in managing this so far. A public health crisis is literally why we have to have an effective government, and he’s saying we clearly don’t because we’ve hollowed many of the mechanisms that make government work. It’s a compelling argument.

(Also frankly, I’m tired of hearing Americans pretend that somehow we love freedom more, and that’s the difference. There are lots of free countries, and we are lagging all of them. We’re just dumber and more selfish. But that’s another topic.)

Back to your theory, what is a complex problem? is managing a public health crisis complex? Building a space program? Building an atomic bomb? Pushing back fascism? Creating a financial system from nothing that would turn a largely agrarian outpost into the richest civilization in human history?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, happycamper said:

Always seems a little absolute

Which brings us to what Zakaria was saying. That the absolutist ideal of small government has really just given us an ineffective government. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, NVGiant said:

This is a fine, albeit cynical, theory, but isn’t really a theoretical discussion. He’s arguing that mindlessly cutting bureaucracy for the sake of small government isn’t any better approach than expanding government mindlessly. Just as an example, cutting auditors out of the IRS maybe costs the government more money than it saves.

Obviously, he’s applying this specifically to Covid. I don’t know how you can argue that a government can’t help with that problem when us and Sweden are pretty much alone in the free world in having governments that haven’t really been effective in managing this so far. A public health crisis is literally why we have to have an effective government, and he’s saying we clearly don’t because we’ve hollowed many of the mechanisms that make government work. It’s a compelling argument.

(Also frankly, I’m tired of hearing Americans pretend that somehow we love freedom more, and that’s the difference. There are lots of free countries, and we are lagging all of them. We’re just dumber and more selfish. But that’s another topic.)

Back to your theory, what is a complex problem? is managing a public health crisis complex? Building a space program? Building an atomic bomb? Pushing back fascism? Creating a financial system from nothing that would turn a largely agrarian outpost into the richest civilization in human history?

Thank you for making the detailed argument—and a far better one at that—that I was too busy (gardening—Ha!) and lazy to mount. Still, compared to your endless screed, my argument should punch at the same weight in your editorial eye given its pithy brevity. I’m declaring victory here given the far greater cost in time your response required. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll respond in more detail when I have the time, hopefully later today. But I'll say this now- I find it rather impressive to have the chutzpah to spend weeks pounding the refrain that when people say "defund the police" they actually mean "prioritize spending in a way that makes sense," and then to turn around and say that when people say "limit government spending and power" they actually mean "we don't want any pandemic response." 

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, smltwnrckr said:

I'll respond in more detail when I have the time, hopefully later today. But I'll say this now- I find it rather impressive to have the chutzpah to spend weeks pounding the refrain that when people say "defund the police" they actually mean "prioritize spending in a way that makes sense," and then to turn around and say that when people say "limit government spending and power" they actually mean "we don't want any pandemic response." 

Is the defund the police argument at odds with arguing that we need a more effective government? and nobody said wanting to limit government spending and power is the same as we don’t want any pandemic response. He wasn’t even arguing against small government. He’s saying that our shit response is because we go about those things in a haphazard way by confusing small government with efficiency. They are not the same thing. Honestly, I have no idea how you would argue against that. 

Edit:And weeks arguing something? Me? No chance. I usually stop arguing any point one the booze wears off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

China is a big ass state. Isn’t that who we consume ourselves with these days? While Trump is off playing tiddlywinks and talking about coal, China continues to position itself as the world leader in just about everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Posturedoc said:

Thank you for making the detailed argument—and a far better one at that—that I was too busy (gardening—Ha!) and lazy to mount. Still, compared to your endless screed, my argument should punch at the same weight in your editorial eye given its pithy brevity. I’m declaring victory here given the far greater cost in time your response required. 

I think you are right to claim the win. I blame my long-yet-hasty response on the weighty IPAs I enjoyed last evening. I'm ashamed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NevadaFan said:

China is a big ass state. Isn’t that who we consume ourselves with these days? While Trump is off playing tiddlywinks and talking about coal, China continues to position itself as the world leader in just about everything.

Including sending their people to the gulag that disagree with with the leadership. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NVGiant said:

Is the defund the police argument at odds with arguing that we need a more effective government? and nobody said wanting to limit government spending and power is the same as we don’t want any pandemic response. He wasn’t even arguing against small government. He’s saying that our shit response is because we go about those things in a haphazard way by confusing small government with efficiency. They are not the same thing. Honestly, I have no idea how you would argue against that. 

Edit:And weeks arguing something? Me? No chance. I usually stop arguing any point one the booze wears off.

He's arguing that the problem is related to the conservative movement's relationship with government spending and he tracks it back to Reagan. He's explicit about it. So while I agree with his assessment that we bought the government time and the government (definitely federal, but other levels as well) cocked it up, I disagree strongly with his assertion that this is solely the fault of people who give the stink eye to the state. 

Look, I have a longer response (That you're gonna LOOOOVE, btw) that I'm going to try to post tomorrow morning when I have a few moments. Because I think we're closer than you think on this, and I think that you guys are either misunderstanding or misconstruing what I'm saying about the state which is not cynical and is not some right-wing rejection of the gubmint. And it's probably because I didn't take the time and words (the words, oh the words) necessary to explain it properly.

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

He's arguing that the problem is related to the conservative movement's relationship with government spending and he tracks it back to Reagan. He's explicit about it. So while I agree with his assessment that we bought the government time and the government (definitely federal, but other levels as well) cocked it up, I disagree strongly with his assertion that this is solely the fault of people who give the stink eye to the state. 

Look, I have a longer response (That you're gonna LOOOOVE, btw) that I'm going to try to post tomorrow morning when I have a few moments. Because I think we're closer than you think on this, and I think that you guys are either misunderstanding or misconstruing what I'm saying about the state which is not cynical and is not some right-wing rejection of the gubmint. And it's probably because I didn't take the time and words (the words, oh the words) necessary to explain it properly.

Well, I’ve often found we’re not usually that far off. ... I’ll clear my schedule for the reply!

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...