[guappa]

The problem with random cuts is that the same people whose only skill is to play office politics are the only ones who will be left after.

[ACCount37]

That wouldn't be a problem if the cuts were truly random. In practice, they aren't.

[mulmen]

Well if our choice is a hypothetical fire all the political operators or fire randomly then random will leave more political operators.

[ACCount37]

If only such a hypothetical could be implemented.

I don't think it's easy to design a firing process that would outperform random chance there. In any non-random process, office politicians would always be first in line with an excuse for why they specifically should not be fired. No matter what the criteria for not getting fired are - they'll do their damn best to make sure they meet them.

[mulmen]

Agreed. But while I agree political operators corrupt all objective processes I refuse to conclude that we should cause random destruction instead.

[ACCount37]

Why not? It's unclear if a better option even exists.

I do think there's a threshold of organizational dysfunction that justifies unleashing "random destruction" upon it. Or even "total destruction" - and building it all anew.

Perhaps the tree of efficiency needs to be watered with the blood of career bureaucrats.

[mulmen]

I refuse the conclusion because the alternative is hopeless.

Random destruction might be the best kind of destruction but that doesn’t mean destruction leads to efficiency. If politicians are inevitable why would what comes next be any less susceptible to political manipulation than what we already built?

What’s step two in the revolutionary underpants gnome playbook?

1) Burn it all down

2) ???

3) profit?

> Perhaps the tree of efficiency needs to be watered with the blood of career bureaucrats.

I assume this is a bad joke because otherwise it’s extremely dangerous and ignorant. In the current climate it translates to an actual call to violence.

Jefferson’s quote is about the necessity of violent revolution which ultimately led to the systems we have today. He had a specific grievance. He desired self-determination. He won. We have it. Why are you so eager to repeat the sacrifice and hard work of our ancestors to get back to where we already are? What benefit do you see in doing so?

Career bureaucrats aren’t politicians. Those are different things. I have had many positive experiences with “career bureaucrats”. They really only exist to help. It’s why we call them public servants.

It is a lot easier to call my public utility provider and solve a problem than it is to call Facebook, Disney, or Alaska Airlines. I have had nothing but positive experiences with the IRS.

It’s easy to break things. Children can do it. What’s your plan for building and operating something if you can’t even operate what we already have?