It would be nice to find the definitive post to which we can point and say – there, there it is, that’s exactly what’s wrong with things.
These posts linked to below might go someway to providing that definitive example.
We could start with the Small Dead Animals blog and the resignation of a man in California for his outrageous proposal that water storage be expanded for California:
Anthony Saracino, a longtime California water resources consultant, resigned from the California Water Commission on Monday after environmental groups raised a furor over his advocacy for considering the expansion of Shasta Dam, one of several major water storage proposals in the running to receive funds from the 2014 ballot-passed water bond.
State officials have identified expanding water storage as one of the long-term methods of improving the state’s ability to weather droughts by increasing the ability to capture floodwaters and other excess runoff.
“It was clear to me, talking to folks, that it was going to become a circus and a distraction from important commission activity, so I decided to step down now rather than waiting till January to avoid the circus,” Saracino said in an interview. “It’s unfortunate that irrational special interests can influence water policy by essentially stifling public discourse and rational discussion.”
So here we are in the UK and we’re getting precisely the same sorts of stories coming out of the States, Australia, South Africa and no doubt from countries not speaking English. There has to be a common thread, no?
Looking at that example, it is uncannily like that of Jodi Farhat and the Missouri Basin flooding some time back:
Essentially, the Missouri has always flooded and shown signs when, even if those signs were that there might be some flash flooding or a huge amount coming. Whatever, there are people in the field who’ve been working at it half their lives and their advice must count for something.
At head office, enter a newly minted “manager”. She’s not a manager appointed successively one step above her former position in a given field until she reaches the top, she is appointed ideologically, because any govt organization must show equality and diversity.
She’s a modern manager. This new breed is ignorant of any specific field – she has no trade qualification, she simply studied “management” in college.
And when parachuted in, how does she “manage”?
Under her direction, the Corps plodded along, conducting business as usual right up until the last moment, when conditions forced a radical shift from an all-is-well status to an ark-building emergency almost overnight. Confronted by the worst flooding in the history of the Missouri River Basin, Farhat attempts to deflect criticism by claiming that the snowpack was “just a bit above normal” until mid-April, when it “skyrocketed.”
You can explore that in more detail but what this ignorant woman, Jodi Farhat, did was pluck some sort of “advice” out of the air, having sidelined her actual professionals in the field and wrongly diagnosed the situation.
A front-line operational manager expressed his concern to Ms. Farhat that the information being passed on to the Corps decision-makers was routinely ignored, worrying that if such a dismissive attitude continued, the managers “will not even bother to call in, or provide input, if they feel like they’re not being heard.”
Why was it ignored? Quite apart from the fact that she could not manage, she had to prove, for her sisters and to the world, that a woman could handle a position like this and needed no advice. Do you begin to see the disaster waiting to happen and which did actually happen?
Coming back to our resigning water resources consultant, of course his solution was not the only one. For example, not selling off water to overseas bodies would help, not trying to save that fish at the cost of millions of litres, that sort of thing, also helps.
But expanding water storage is an obvious part-solution, is it not, even to the layman? At least you’d think so. Comments are quite to the point and underscore the issues we face with theses “people in charge” today. Here’s a selection:
# In economics they have Gresham’s Law: Bad money chases out good. In politics I could christen it Iggy’s Law, “Bad people chase out good”.
People that are productive, moral, and have a sense of duty have something else as well, namely better ways to spend their time than fighting with their opposite numbers that have nowhere else to go and nothing else to do.
So they leave the field to the scumbags. It takes a very special kind of person to fight these weasels. The weasels never sleep. They never give up. And they lie, lie, lie. All the time.
I could not keep up the fight against those morons. Not with so many other ways to make my way in the world beckoning, with better pay and colleagues.
And that’s it. Over here, that would be translated as being pushed out of a field by Common Purpose graduates who leads beyond authority. To be more precise, they lead beyond competence and beyond any knowledge of any particular field.
You’ll notice I still have not employed the political terms left or right until now. Nor shall I.
# California is suffering a drought while Canada has one-fifth of the world’s fresh-water. Someone see a business opportunity there?
Moreover, Canadian bulk water for CA would bring down the price of agricultural produce that we import from them — win, win, win.
Yes but how about also stopping the wastage on ideological projects?
This whole ideological thing about the pretend competence of the pretend boss is illustrated beautifully in this movie trailer below. Not relevant to water, no, but certainly relevant to the type:
Remember, this is the type who is increasingly in charge of your life in some way, e.g. preventing a dam above you bursting and flooding your home.
Hey, let’s not be sexist about this. Here is the male equivalent in charge of your defence:
And let’s not be ag[e]ist either. This from Amfortas:
And here is Bruce Charlton commenting on said management:
Leadership is a rare trait – but it can confidently be identified; not least because we are ‘programmed’ to recognise and respond to leadership.
But, most appointed modern leaders are not leaders; indeed very few indeed are leaders – most are mediocre middle managers over-promoted by committees comprising the same type – and most of the rest are hysterics or psychopaths.
Or narcissists and playactors like Supergirl in the clip.
The ‘safe choice’ nowadays – in a bureaucracy-dominated world – is for mediocre middle managers in committees to over-promote a mediocre middle manager into a leadership position.
This accounts for the majority of the national leaders in the West, including leaders of most major religious denominations, and social systems such as law, education, the police.
These are people who cannot be strategic (but adopt their strategies from others – even paying to have a strategy artificially manufactured by the phony posturings of management consultants, if no other source suggests itself); who cannot decide without a procedure to follow; who cannot take responsibility on themselves.
These are fake leaders who fundamentally can only be led; and who therefore engineer their jobs on the principle of ‘teams’ and ‘teamwork’, and ‘team-building’; so that they are always following advice and seeking endorsement.
Bruce’s article goes into further detail, too long for this post here but worth the read. You see, people of sense are issuing warnings the whole time about this sort of thing and what are people of a different political persuasion doing? Utterly ignoring it because in them is deposited all wisdom concerning how all aspects of society should be run.
And what influence can we have, we who see all this and are reading and weeping?
Absolutely bloody nothing.
[Sincere thanks to Chuckles for material in the post]