In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the
bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the
goals the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less
influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely.
Also stated as:
...in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of
people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization,
and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education
would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union
representative who work to protect any teacher including the most
incompetent. The IronLaw
states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain
control of the organization, and will always write the rules under
which the organization functions.
In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely.
Also stated as:
...in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representative who work to protect any teacher including the most incompetent. The IronLaw states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.
Since I actually have a career in a bureaucracy, I have to take issue with these assertions. The notion that a union rep could take control of a bureacracy is ludricous on its face. Unions have far less power in gov’t agencies than in private companies. There is no right to strike and even collective bargaining is severely restricted because the good of the agency always comes first. Remember the air traffic controllers?
That being said, of course there are inefficiencies and abuses of power in bureaucracies, just as there are in any large organization. But, as far as responsiveness to citizens, the citizens have a powerful ally in their Congressional Representatives. The Representatives routinely forward any complaint they get from a constituent to the appropriate agency. Those letters take precedence over almost any other work. That doesn’t mean that it always winds up as a win for the consituent, but it at least ensures that things are being done by the book. If you don’t like the book, elect different Representatives.
You mean worthless mountain of information. The entrie notion of a free market is a fallacy. Markets are not natural and any system that produces wealth disparity will not be "free" even without government (or should I say democratic) intervention. Wealth begets power, which begets control. A caveat, I do not throw out the baby with the bath water…the anti-treasury/central bank movement grows partly out of the Austrian School of Economics along with other interesting issues to debate.
I am not even going to get into some of the specific problematic ideological underpinnings of the Austrian School of Economics (social objectivism, subjective value of commodities, etc.); but I will say that the adherents that formulated the early academic movement of Neoliberalism that was based upon the ASE, were basically fascists. They believed in a governmental system where civic involvement was only for "responsible men." The political outgrowth of the ASE runs counter to every ideal of POLITICAL freedom that this country was founded upon. Free market ideology is for those who are politically lazy and close their eyes and wish for some magical system to take care of all the problems. Hogwash.
BTW, this is by no way an argument that our current governmental apparatus is applaudable or that it has not strayed from its course; nor do I argue the false duality of either free markets or regulation. However, the liberty of the united states has the explicit foundation of a constitutional democracy (don’t give me the red herring that its a republic not a democracy…it is still a democracy no matter the structure). The economy is second to this. Saying that the political/social system should bow down to the economic priciples of the phantom free market absolutely makes the democracy null and void.
Thanks for your thoughts. I was replying in general about the nature of organizations with Dr. Pournelle’s observations on the same, not on unions in specific. As a generalization for tendencies in large organizations, I find Pournelle’s observations to be quite valid.
In my decent amount of work experience in large organizations (23 years across several organizations after several years in small business), both private for profit companies and semi-governmental organizations (universities), this has generally rang true with my experience. I too work in a bureaucracy and, in fact, am one of the (horrors!) policy, standard and procedure makers for a one aspect of the organization! I find that I, and many of my colleagues do have the best intentions of the organization, constituents and customers in mind and, in fact, seek the input of these groups and try to balance these things with the ever increasing burden of federal and state regulations we, as an organization, must legally comply with. Even with this mind set, it is easy for me to see how divergence of people who want to truly do the organization’s mission, and people who set up their own private silos, fiefdoms, you name it, are, at least in effect, at divergent interests. For better or worse, I am constantly challenged to find productive ways for dealing with the obstacles to efficiency and common sense that seem so prevalent. I have found tone from the top combined with genuine leadership behind the tone (walking the walk and setting an example) do wonders to help break down these barriers and do tend to mitigate, somewhat, the observations embodied in Pournelle’s Iron Law.
By the way, I am glad your experience has been different! I look forward to other comments.
ajparrillo
Despite your putting words in my mouth, the insults and the obfuscations I’ll refrain from getting into a pissing contest with you and merely say that I disagree with your harsh opinions on Austrian economics.
Rather than going on a political rant here, I will just ask that folks check out the sites and make up their own mind. Just because one might not agree with everything that Austrian economics has brought forth, doesn’t mean that you should, as ajparrillo says, "throw the baby out with the bathwater". The ideas that the Austrian school discusses such as time preference, resource allocation, the fed and sound money are very interesting and should certainly not be discounted.
I should add that I mean bureaucracies in the common meaning of the administrative overhead of personnel that tend to take root in organizations as they get larger and as the organizations age. I did not mean the more pure and less used sense of the administrative personnel within only a government bureau.
I have to say that finding and learning about the Austrian school is what opened my eyes to the huge Ponzi scheme our Federal government and runs, as well as the financial community. It would be in evreyone’s best interest to learn about Austrian economics. Is it without fault? Nothing is. However, it makes a lot more sense than the crap we are fed on a daiy basis.
Pissing contest…no. Insults…I reread my post and as I thought, did not attack you personally. Putting words in your mouth…again, no…I provided my perspective on the Austrian School just as you did. There is a whole host of people that hold the Austrian School up as some beacon of light for how society would work. It is just a model of human behavior that while has many important and interesting insights (as I attempted to indicate), it is predicated on a fairly specific sociopolitical ideology. That was my point, which I think was clear. I agree that people should go read for themselves, but also need to explore the critiques and counter arguments to much of what is propogated by that ideology. Frankly, everytime I see a post where someone blanketly claims (which you did not) the ASE as some inherent truth or point people in that direction, I will continue to push some type of debate…even if there is valuable insight within the ASE.