I received an email from a highly accomplished, highly qualified mid-level civilian employee of the Dept of the Air Force. He really doesn't like Trump, as can be intuited from the subject of his email: Quote from Trump’s OMB (Office of Management and Budget) director nominee about me and my fellow civil service employees: “We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected,” he said. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. " That's a pretty harsh statement and the question is, "Are bureaucrats and civil service employees the same thing?" Being a retired civil service employee, I think- and hope- the answer is no. Below is my response to his concern.
Left: a cartoon suggesting that Congress has largely ceded its responsibility to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats who make decrees that are viewed as law. Right: many government employees- civil servants- have important functions, and overall they are generously compensated.
Every once in a while some hapless Republican is excoriated for suggesting some version of, “Well, Hitler did some good things,” a statement often quoted without context. With the exception of a handful of neo-Nazi morons and a frighteningly larger number of anti-Jew extreme leftists (who do their anti-Jew things with tacit support from establishment leftists), pretty much nobody thinks Hitler did anything overall “good,” but from a historical perspective, it’s not unreasonable to ask, “Did he do anything that could have been perceived as “good” that rallied millions upon millions of people to support his ascendancy and policies?” This is an important question for this moment in time, as there are worrisome indications the world is once again turning to authoritarianism.
So...how did Hitler obtain absolute power in Germany? Undoubtedly there have been innumerable papers and books on this subject, but ultimately the answer is as old as history and is in play to this very moment. For brief background, Germany was in shambles following its utter defeat in WW1. The victorious allies, acting on understandable emotion but with little wisdom, forced upon Germany a repressive and retributive agreement called the Treaty of Versailles (www.britannica.com/event/Treaty-of-Versailles-1919), designed to prevent Germany from ever again becoming a military power. It demanded huge reparations and allotted heretofore chunks of Germany to other nations. Not surprisingly there were wannabe left wing and right wing revolutionary movements and all the chaos they entailed, so the reasonable solution was some form of democracy that came to be called the Weimar Republic (www.britannica.com/place/Weimar-Republic). Nevertheless, great discontent continued and there were vacuums to be filled, and Hitler had the skill to fill the void, and the patience.
Adolph Hitler in 1924 at the age of 35Before becoming a bloodthirsty dictator, Hitler was an artist
The “Hate Crime and Public Order Act” became effective in Scotland on April 1, 2024. One can intuit the nature of this law, which offers special protections to preferred demographic groups, but the essence of the law can be seen in the March 29th statement of First Minister Humza Yousaf: “I would say to anybody who thinks they are a victim of hatred, we take that seriously, if you felt you are a victim of hatred, then of course reporting that to police is the right thing to do.” In other words, the Act is based on feelings and not objectivity, and is selectively applied.
Prior to law law going into effect, I emailed the Scottish tourist agency, VisitScotland, for reasons explained in the text of the email below. Their response, also below, was prompt and courteous, and can be summarized as, “We don’t know.”
Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf on the left. "Hate," of course, is a largely undefinable and subjective word. This is not a great analogy, but imagine a parent who tells the child not to eat candy before dinner, as compared to "don't do anything that upsets me before dinner." The first in objective and can be obeyed, the latter is nebulous and based upon the whim of the parent.
Greetings (or perhaps Latha math) from the US:
My wife and I are long-retired and spent many years living in other countries, but these were always impoverished places in Africa and Central America where we were either volunteering with other organizations or running our own charity project. For quite a while we’ve discussed the time when our life situation would allow us to be regular tourists, and that time has arrived. For years our number one destination desire has been Scotland. I’ve read pretty much every Ian Rankin and Denise Mina book, and almost feel that the fictional character Hamish MacBeth is a distant relative we could visit in The Highlands!
During much of the Presidential primary season in 2016 I was out of the country in a fairly remote area with little access to news. Upon my return in May, while on a layover at the Atlanta airport and their endless broadcasts of CNN, I learned that Trump has sewn up the Republican nomination. I admit I felt a little queasy the news: I didn’t really know that much about Trump and never watched that show with the tag-line “You’re Fired!,” but I had heard plenty from the establishment news media that he was somehow dangerous and clearly not their guy. In general the other Republican candidates fit the desired mold of being “reasonable,” willing to “cross the aisle” and work with Democrats. I did know Trump was a blowhard.
Donald Trump and Barack Obama post-election Nov. 2016
Over the summer Trump was officially nominated, as was Hillary Clinton (HRC) for the Democrats. The latter, who is a true sociopath, made it easier to vote for Trump despite my severe reservations. Perhaps due to increasing age and cynicism I avoided watching the conventions and speeches, but shortly before the election I was in a cheap motel room in Pensacola, FL, turned on the TV and found Trump at some campaign rally. I girded myself to listen to his shtick, fully expecting him to rant with spittle flying and bark like a seal, this being largely how he was portrayed by the establishment press. What I found instead was a pretty typical political speech with the usual promises of prosperity, jobs, strong military, etc. Part of his rhetoric involved “make America great again (MAGA).
Left: Trump/Clinton debate Fall 2016, Right: Hillary Clinton with spouse in background, concession speech
From 1986 to 2001 I worked for the NY State Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities (OMRDD) as a medical practitioner (PA). This was at one of a number residential institutions scattered throughout NY, located in a fairly rural area as was common for such facilities. We had an in-house population of around 300, with people ranging from profoundly retarded requiring total care and often with severe medical co-morbidities, to mildly retarded, who were generally were able to talk, walk, and take care of their basic needs with supervision. It was a job to feel good about: society taking care of people who truly couldn’t take care of themselves.
With a few exceptions, the employees who interacted daily with our population were caring and competent, this being especially the direct care aides and the nurses; it can be a tough job, both physically and emotionally. Ultimately the facility was controlled by bureaucrats, and with all bureaucracies there were petty people lusting for petty power and involved in petty intrigue, but at the direct care level it wasn’t too hard to remain oblivious to such nonsense, at least for most of my time there.
The epitomic bureaucrat
Bureaucracies typically create their own jargon and euphemisms, which frequently change depending on the whims of rarely seen bureaucrats. When I first started in 1986 the people in our care were not called the historical name of “inmate,” nor were they called patients, but the designated word was “client.” I always thought this was a little silly because it implies a cognizant two-way relationship, but assumedly someone deemed it a humane, non-pejorative title, which was okay. Nevertheless. people with important positions felt compelled to change the wording, so over the years we used “individual we serve,” “service recipient,” “consumer,” and after I was gone I heard “colleague” was in vogue. To me the simple word “resident” would have been both accurate and polite, but it never entered the lexicon.
I have a friend who was raised in relative poverty but, through hard work and smart life decisions, became quite wealthy. A number of years ago his son, at perhaps the age of 13, went through an obnoxious spoiled period- very mouthy and said pretty vile things. If he had to be home by 9, or to bed by 10 on a school night, life was UNFAIR, and one of his refrains was “I HAVE RIGHTS!” Many of us can recall going through similar adolescent phases, and thankfully most of us grew up and out of this “it’s all about me” selfishness,”as did this young man.
"Toby" holds a sign with other demonstrators during a protest regarding evictions going on at the court, 6000 Chimney Rock Rd., Friday, Aug. 21, 2020, in Houston.Privileged Yet Ignorant People Confusing "Rights" With Outcomes
It’s interesting that the term “rights” is so often invoked by privileged kids (in the years I spent do-gooding in impoverished countries I don’t recall ever hearing it). Of course, to them it’s an ill-defined generic word that essentially means, “I should get my way, I deserve whatever I want!” Unfortunately, this understanding and interpretation of “rights” is increasing in the US as we’ve become wealthier, more selfish, greedier, and more shallow: “rights” have become little more than political and cultural weapons and slogans, without regard for what they really are, and it is indeed pernicious to trivialize them. A “right” is not an argument for “I want what I want, and I want it now.”
Imagine yourself living perhaps 400 years ago in a culture controlled by a Puritanical church, where the established powers had a very personal interest in determining the rules, language, behavior, and even thoughts of the citizens. You were that rare person who observed not only contradictions in the church doctrine and hypocrisy in the actions of the leadership, but actually expressed your concerns. You put yourself in a precarious position, subjecting yourself to accusations of blasphemy, heresy, and witchcraft, often leading to social ruin, banishment, and even death. Certainly you were the exception, as most people would conform to the demands of the powerful to avoid being called such things: look straight ahead, mindlessly repeat the catechism, and hope to be left alone.
The Employee Who Thought Management Was Out To Get Him
Centuries later…For many years I was a NY State civil service employee, and for much of that era had the good fortune to be pretty much left alone to do my job, one I felt was truly meaningful. During that time I worked with and came to know a fellow employee who seemed like a decent guy, competent in his job, reliable, caring, mature. Nevertheless, there was always suggestion of taint about him, as if he had done something really bad in the past; the implication that if you want to get ahead, get those promotions, don’t get too friendly with him.
20 plus years ago I was elected the local President of a NY
State public employees union representing professional, scientific, and
technical workers, a somewhat curious occurrence considering I am/was a
conservative and generally anti-union. Nevertheless, I won by a 2:1 vote margin
and was fairly popular, if I may say so; it proved to be a revealing
experience. One of the members was a middle-aged guy with whom I had a friendly
acquaintance. He was always affable and seemed perfectly competent and
dedicated, but there was always a vague stain on his reputation- he was barely
tolerated by management and never seemed to be going anywhere in his career. At
times he suggested there was an ill-defined conspiracy against him, which he
attributed to his declining to be part of the old-boys network from years past,
the kind of claim to which one responds, “Is that right?”
One day, as an office building was being shuffled about, another employee came across a file with his name and, assuming it was his, handed it to him. As he looked through it he came to quite a realization- the folder contained all sorts of management documents and communications ridiculing and demeaning him, going back years. In essence he was accidentally given a “secret” file that proved he was indeed a target of an administrative conspiracy, in violation of numerous contractual and policy rules. Keep in mind we were not a nerve center of NY State government, but a rather remote outpost, so to speak. From the union standpoint we had a field day, with one of the few administrative people with integrity admitting, “We have no excuse or defense.” I learned during my union time his case was not altogether unique, and that there are always plenty of petty people lining up to curry favor with bosses by disparaging others and bosses who bask in their own petty power and who live to have their boots licked.
We’ve had the pleasure and honor of being friends with a remarkable young person, now 41 or 42, for 10 years. She is a very accomplished professional and makes good money but lives frugally in an inner city area. She spends much if not most of her money mentoring and supporting young woman “of color,” both in the US and in poor countries. She is the type of person who would, and in fact has, put everything on hold and travel to the a third word country to help someone in crisis. She seeks no fanfare whatsoever and, it should be noted, is able to do what she does largely because the expensive tastes to which we are so accustomed do not interest her.
A number of years ago she expressed some frustration with one of her girls, perhaps 15 or 16, because she was doing poorly in school and was functionally illiterate. Reading was not important to her because, “Reading is for white people” she said. That is a significant and even tragic statement and mentality, obviously, but not the subject of this article (recall that one goal of slave owners was prohibiting literacy among their chattel). Several years later I asked our friend how this particular girl was doing. She replied she’s doing well and going to college. My response was predictable, an “oh great, so she buckled down and learned to read.” To which she replied her girl never really became literate, but “everyone knows the college she’s attending isn’t a real college.” Exposing my own naiveté at the time, I have to admit I didn’t realize there were colleges that weren’t real.
A bit of historical stipulation first. The post WWll era left the US in an incomparable global position in terms of economics and power, having become an industrial and technological titan out of necessity and unscathed by direct destruction by geography. Enormous wealth and its associated leisure were the natural consequences. The generation labeled “Baby Boomers” enjoyed, if you will, this leisure at an unprecedented level, resulting in the first truly widespread separation of survival requirements from life- no more milking the cows by 5 am before heading off to the one-room school house. Perhaps surprisingly, or perhaps not, this opportunity did not always lead to greatness but often to self-indulgence, as exemplified by 1960’s catch phrases, masquerading as deep philosophy, such as “Do your own thing,” “Don’t lay a guilt trip on me man,” and the like.
While as a rule conservatives are disinclined to a worldview based on racial and gender identities we need to be honest and admit that by “Baby Boomer” we’re really talking about privileged white people. People whom, decades later, are clapping their arthritic hands in attempted rhythm with the ancient Doo-Wop stars on PBS fundraisers and thinking Bernie Sanders is "with it." White people in million dollar homes in the Boston suburbs with Black Lives Matter signs conspicuously posted on their well-coiffed lawns maintained by Mexicans who arrive every week or so in the back of pick-up trucks.
