The Times did a good job of getting Tom Oliver exposed on secret deals with consultants. But the paper remains pretty boring.

Three of the recent letters to the Editors are just filth. One commented that a few bureaucrats are running the country. Does that word  have any of its original meaning left? Not to the far right. And let’s say the far right so we don’t insult any true Conservatives or even Republicans.

Back when Woodrow Wilson was still pup, bureaucrat was a good profession. Wilson even said that  our governing system in “Its motives, its objects, its policy, its standards, must be bureaucratic.” Wilson’s bureaucrat was not always evil or always good. The bureaucrat should be efficient, springing from an  esprit de corps or out of the “soil of a sensitive conscience.”

We go forward just a few years and we find Max Weber saying, “The bureaucrat  must exercise his judgment and his skills, but his duty is to place these at the service of a higher authority. Ultimately he is responsible only for the impartial execution of assigned tasks and must sacrifice his personal judgment if it runs counter to his official duties.”

Also an honorable description.

Even a dictionary doesn’t define bureaucrat as a demon, just as someone working in bureaucracy. In common usage we get bureaucracy as a body of non-elective government officials, an administrative policy-making group, or a government characterized by specialization of functions, adherence to fixed rules, and a hierarchy of authority.

Still not such a bad thing. But in the slang of the far right, ‘bureaucrat’ is a very bad thing. And we have a bunch of them in Washington.

So hatred of what we don’t understand and don’t want to understand rules in the Times. And in a mob.

Advertisements