I agree. I haven't had a chance to look into the work Chris cited. But my guess is that institutions require churn, up and down the orders, from dying cells in the body to redaction of no-longer-appropriate (living document unconstitutional) laws. I'd expect a surviving bureaucracy to restructure sporadically.
Bureaucracy is an inertial memory, stored procedures. While it's true that sometimes that memory is worthless (or even detrimental, teaching old dogs new tricks), it's also true that memory is sometimes helpful. One could make a decent argument that, like everything else, we're seeing some sort of exponential growth in some core variables. So that, 100 years ago, institutional memory was more useful than it is today. But I'd like to see that whole argument made, not mere sturm and drang about bureaucrats. On 3/29/21 11:14 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Glen writes: > > < And it's important to recognize the Executive branch's role in the > bureaucracy. Was the Obama CDC the same as the Trump CDC? If not, which > bureaucracy failed? And why? > > > Someone like Redfield that has risen to a position of national significance > ought to be employable. And especially employable if they present their > defection just right. > For this reason I am skeptical about the officials that quivered over what > Trump might do to them. People should have been repeatedly leaving. -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
