Monday, February 13, 2017

Dicators Hate Giving Orders

There are a number of good recaps of what happened inside the White House last weekend [January 28 2016] as the Executive Order to bar immigrants from seven Muslim nations exploded, as Homeland Security Secretary Jim Kelly “clarified” the order to defang its worst parts.
The disagreement between Bannon and Kelly pitted a political operator against a military disciplinarian. Two administration officials gave the following account of their exchange: Respectfully but firmly, the retired general told Bannon that despite his high position in the White House and close relationship with President Trump, the former Breitbart chief was not in Kelly’s chain of command. If the president wanted Kelly to back off from issuing the waiver, Kelly would have to hear it from the president directly, he told Bannon. White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Kelly and Bannon spoke on Jan.
Trump didn’t call Kelly to tell him to hold off.
Kelly seems an experienced military officer in the concept of “managing up.” Normally a dictator (or even just a commanding boss) wants everyone to fall in line automatically, without them having to tell them to. That gap is filled by their toadies, who tell the frightened servants “this is what the boss wants”. This gives those toadies a great deal of power.
Actually giving the order from the Bossman himself… requires responsibility. It involves saying you stand behind this thing, that could turn good or bad. Insecure egos hate having to take a stand, when there’s no one to fall back on as an excuse, or to do the stand-taking for them while they nod approvingly.
This calls to mind some of the early chaotic disasters of the transition, where flunkies would call up the EPA demanding the name of everyone working on climate change, and when they exploded in the media, the Trump admin insisted it was just rogue operatives who certainly weren’t speaking for Trump.
This is how it works. The Bossman doesn’t ask for specific things, he just makes it clear that he wants results, and his general leanings, and that he will greatly reward and punish people based on how much they can produce. The flunkies has to guess what he wants. If it succeeds (ie, if it looks good in the media), he praises them and promotes them as people who “really get it” and “take initiative.” If someone tries something (like demanding a list from the EPA) that doesn’t work out, he yells at them for being an idiot and a traitor who was just doing stupid things without any authorization from the top.
This way, every time something goes right, it feeds his ego, and every time something goes wrong, its not his fault. Actually taking a concrete stand would introduce risk into what was previously a very comfortable stasis for the Supreme Leader.
He still says vague, good, bold-sounding things. And he still has to make some decisions; that’s unavoidable. But he avoids laying himself on the line as much as possible, and this leaves a lot of room for people who are willing to a) Do whatever they want until he explicitly stops them or b) Command whatever they want in his name.

This also offers illustration of what to do in the age of an authoritative state. Most of the commands won’t come in the form of direct orders (East Germany showed how incredibly expensive it is to actually monitor and order the entire country.) Instead there will be fear that the dictator wants something but no one knows what, and the person who says they know what the dictator wants gains a lot of power. Ignore them, do the minimum the state forces you to, and otherwise follow your own conscience.
Be less cowardly than the dictator.

No comments:

Post a Comment