One of the first pieces I wrote for TLM was a piece in which I compared the Cabinet Office with East Germany’s Stasi. I thought I was being rather puckish, pointing out that the Cabinet’ Office’s 700-strong HR department must inevitably be packed with narks and control-freaks.
Actually, I don't think I do have a particularly well-developed sense of self-preservation. Rather, my career has been punctuated regularly by running foul of the sometimes very powerful. In one case, I upped sticks from Hong Kong after I was targeted by a laser on my chest shortly after writing something someone didn't like. A senior bod then took me to lunch and suggested my health would benefit from pursuing my career elsewhere. Etc etc. So I absolutely don't mind causing trouble (let's see if I get a tax audit in the near future, courtesy of the CO).
But I don't trust outright anger, no matter how preposterous our leaders are. And I do believe we have a duty to optimism. When change comes, it won't come via the barricades. And I've already sold all my furniture!
True or false: if you abolished the Cabinet Office, and employed a former MI5 or MI6 officer to set up a small team (no larger than 10) to take care of the security matters for which the CO is reponsible, and employed a small (no more than 30) team to take care of Civil Service HR, and then brought all the departmental Permanent Secretaries under the control of the PM, the country would run more efficiently?
Very good and thanks for assembling such coherent thoughts. A lot of us have the gist already if only under the headings of common sense and fairplay.
As with many commenters, myself included, on issues of the day we know and protest the problems but what are the solutions? Rebels need a leader. The only anarchists willing to take to the streets are misguided deluded enthusiasts protesting about the wrong things. e.g. JSO, BLM, XR, eco and vaccines.
To do something we need an angry leader who will have to display the same propaganda techniques you decry. Mass beach 5 a side football across all Kent beaches, mass celebrity talent competitions interrupted by the Border Force at work. The TV cameras would be there. I think a right wing Glastonbury would be a struggle attracting the wrong sort from both ends of the spectrum, doubt they'd get the bands!
There is a duty to have faith and some optimism. I think it helps if you think of democracy not as answering the 'who shall lead' question, but rather as a way of discovering/offering better explanations and so solutions to society. We have come once again to the situation where the explanations/solutions we have inherited, and which are embodied across the entire spectrum of the Establishment, are failing horribly, and if maintained will simply continue to fail ever-more horribly. That's the time we live in, and for people of my generation, it's the second time we've seen it.
I think the job right now is to keep offering better explanations, with the faith that ultimately they will end up being chosen. Post-Enlightenment history suggests this will happen, and probably sooner than you think.
It is absurd to find myself being pitchforked towards a revolt against our establishment. Shades of George Orwell, perhaps: In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. On the other hand, it's also quite possible I'm just a pompous git with an inflated sense of my own smarts.
Anyway, I think, expect, hope and trust we'll get there peacefully enough, and do our part until we end up just as dumb and stupid and deranged as our current overlords.
I'll strike you off my rebel list then. We live in an age of unreason where the majority are reasonable and an unrepresentative minority rule the day. Like me you may have an inflated sense of self preservation, probably a loathing dread of inconvenience. The Kent beaches are too far and the trains don't run on time anymore.
I might ask you for a few sticks of old furniture with which to man the barricades. Amazon and Ocado will deliver by drone by then so no pressure.
Actually, I don't think I do have a particularly well-developed sense of self-preservation. Rather, my career has been punctuated regularly by running foul of the sometimes very powerful. In one case, I upped sticks from Hong Kong after I was targeted by a laser on my chest shortly after writing something someone didn't like. A senior bod then took me to lunch and suggested my health would benefit from pursuing my career elsewhere. Etc etc. So I absolutely don't mind causing trouble (let's see if I get a tax audit in the near future, courtesy of the CO).
But I don't trust outright anger, no matter how preposterous our leaders are. And I do believe we have a duty to optimism. When change comes, it won't come via the barricades. And I've already sold all my furniture!
True or false: if you abolished the Cabinet Office, and employed a former MI5 or MI6 officer to set up a small team (no larger than 10) to take care of the security matters for which the CO is reponsible, and employed a small (no more than 30) team to take care of Civil Service HR, and then brought all the departmental Permanent Secretaries under the control of the PM, the country would run more efficiently?
Very good and thanks for assembling such coherent thoughts. A lot of us have the gist already if only under the headings of common sense and fairplay.
As with many commenters, myself included, on issues of the day we know and protest the problems but what are the solutions? Rebels need a leader. The only anarchists willing to take to the streets are misguided deluded enthusiasts protesting about the wrong things. e.g. JSO, BLM, XR, eco and vaccines.
To do something we need an angry leader who will have to display the same propaganda techniques you decry. Mass beach 5 a side football across all Kent beaches, mass celebrity talent competitions interrupted by the Border Force at work. The TV cameras would be there. I think a right wing Glastonbury would be a struggle attracting the wrong sort from both ends of the spectrum, doubt they'd get the bands!
There is a duty to have faith and some optimism. I think it helps if you think of democracy not as answering the 'who shall lead' question, but rather as a way of discovering/offering better explanations and so solutions to society. We have come once again to the situation where the explanations/solutions we have inherited, and which are embodied across the entire spectrum of the Establishment, are failing horribly, and if maintained will simply continue to fail ever-more horribly. That's the time we live in, and for people of my generation, it's the second time we've seen it.
I think the job right now is to keep offering better explanations, with the faith that ultimately they will end up being chosen. Post-Enlightenment history suggests this will happen, and probably sooner than you think.
It is absurd to find myself being pitchforked towards a revolt against our establishment. Shades of George Orwell, perhaps: In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. On the other hand, it's also quite possible I'm just a pompous git with an inflated sense of my own smarts.
Anyway, I think, expect, hope and trust we'll get there peacefully enough, and do our part until we end up just as dumb and stupid and deranged as our current overlords.
I'll strike you off my rebel list then. We live in an age of unreason where the majority are reasonable and an unrepresentative minority rule the day. Like me you may have an inflated sense of self preservation, probably a loathing dread of inconvenience. The Kent beaches are too far and the trains don't run on time anymore.
I might ask you for a few sticks of old furniture with which to man the barricades. Amazon and Ocado will deliver by drone by then so no pressure.