the civil service aren't staffed by old etonians who bluffed their way to the top, though. that characterisation is about 75 years out of date. it doesn't really even describe the majority of the foreign office, typically the most blue-blooded and rarefied of departments, excepting the obvious ambassador-class appointments. it doesn't
even describe the last handful of MI5/MI6 bosses.
why do you think a mechanical engineer or a software boss can run a department whose remit is, say, environmental protection or green energy? this idea that a STEM degree grants you some sort of genius insight into all aspects of the world is really just as silly as the idea that people who can quote cicero or elaborate on aristophanes will have an easy grasp of any ministerial portfolio. there's nothing 'technocratic' about giving the reins over to ideologues from silicon valley who are high on their own supply. as i keep reminding you, with a copious number of examples from history, we have tried this 'let's run society like a cybernetic system/engineering problem' thing dozens of times, and they've all fallen into the same trap.
lots of civil and government-adjacent organisations in the UK are chaired by people with absolutely zero background in the subject but who are appointed because they are notable 'business leaders' or 'experienced in running large organisations' or somesuch. it doesn't work. just this month the chair of the criminal cases review commission (CCRC) in the UK had to resign in disgrace after overseeing a review body that was repeatedly failing to deliver on its promises for hearing legal appeals. what was the qualification of the boss, helen pitcher, to oversee extremely important matters of justice? non-executive director of United Biscuits and a realtor in the balkans. bravo. tell me some more about how we need successful businesspeople and people with 'practical expertise' heading up vitally important organs of the state.
Last edited by uziq (2025-01-22 05:21:10)
