[rayiner]

There is expertise, but there is also ideology. To use the plane analogy everyone likes: the pilot should use his expertise to fly the plane, but he doesn’t get to choose where the plane is going! When you “insulate” the civil service from politics, what you end up doing is privileging the ideology and political goals of civil servants over those of voters.

[Steltek]

But to continue your analogy, the pilot is also totally correct in refusing to crash the plane into the ground or jettison passengers out the door because they're brown.

The current state of affairs is not some mere disagreement of ideology.

[rayiner]

No, this is a choice between flying to Boise or flying to San Francisco.

[mdhb]

Never a bad decision that you don’t seem to rush to the comments section to defend.

[rayiner]

I think extending Trump’s tax cuts is a terrible policy, do you want to talk about that?

[freejazz]

>Never a bad decision that you don’t seem to rush to the comments section to defend.

And always with such specious reasoning

[ethbr1]

> When you “insulate” the civil service from politics, what you end up doing is privileging the ideology and political goals of civil servants over those of voters.

No.

You end up balancing the current political desires of voters with institutional expertise.

Or to put it another way, would you say that "competency" is a political ideology or an objective fact?