To Be or Not To Be - On Bureaucracy

Has the traditional Federal Bureaucracy moribund, replaced by a Feudal State? It is a very good possibility, because things do not seem to work the way they used to in Washington, D.C. The theory of the Unitary Executive has been put into place, but it is being played out in a more primitive/feudal way.

The rule of law for the Executive has been replaced by edict. The unpopular son in a long line of feudal family members, is behind the moat with the drawbridge up, and the army is out in the hinterlands. We might hope for the return of our stale and cumbersome federal bureaucracy. By comparison it looks like a good thing.

What is a bureaucracy? by Claude Lefort, at Generation-online.org, gives an explanation of the theory of bureaucracies originated by Max Weber:

The Bureaucracy as a Type of Organisation
. . . the multiplicity of bureaucracies in modern society and draws attention to their common function and similarity. Here Max Weber is the starting point. He lists certain traits he considers typical of modern bureaucracies: (1) The duties of functionaries are officially fixed by laws, rules, or administrative dispositions; (2) The functions are hierarchical and integrated into a system of command such that at all levels lower authorities are controlled by higher authorities; (3) administrative activity is spelled out in written documents; (4) These functions require a professional apprenticeship; (5) The work of functionaries demands complete devotion to the office; (6) Access to the profession is at the same time access to a particular technology, jurisprudence, commercial science, administrative science, etc.

Americans live with an illusion of bureaucracy. And in many ways, much bureaucracy remains. But it does not make the crucial decisions now affecting the health of our democracy. The Republican Executive branch runs the government. The reality is:

1. It has no real power if laws and rules can be subverted, ignored or supplanted by executive order.
2. The system is certainly heirarchical, but command is very weak and centralized.
3. Written documents, supposedly tracing the activities of the executive are often classified or tardy or unavailable. For example, presidental papers of certain former presidents are no longer available).
4. No apprenticeship is required to head an agency, "Brownie" at FEMA, for example, had been in the horse business. And our Commander in Chief never fought with the military.
5. Functionaries may or may not be completely devoted to the office. Some of the good ones, fortunately, became leakers or whistle-blowers.
6. The influence of career bureaucrats, people who new the business has been diminished in the face of political appointees, loyal to the feudal heirarchy of which they have long been a part.

The site, grazian archive, explains political organizations with a section on the

DEGREE OF CENTRALIZATION
A third system classifies governments as federal (or feudal) or unitary according to their degree of centralization. Federal and feudal states divide up the power of making important decisions among local and central authorities. A "confederation" generally refers to a weak federation in which the central authority has few powers. Unitary states, by contrast, give the right of decision on all important political matters to the national government. Such power may or may not be delegated to local authorities. If it is delegated, then the state is called a decentralized rather than a centralized unitary state. In the early nineteenth century, England exemplified the first, France the second.

An empire is harder to classify. Its central government holds sovereignty and power over countries of dissimilar nationality or culture. Generally, since all important decisions tend to be made by the imperial government, the empire has a unitary character; but many important cultural and social events and customs are determined by the colonies, which have, therefore, a considerable amount of decentralized autonomy. Indeed, certain components of the so-called British Empire are quite in a position .to make very important political decisions by themselves; Canada and the other Dominions of the British Commonwealth of Nations are really independent affiliated nations nowadays. But other possessions of the British Empire are ruled directly by the central government in England as colonies, protectorates, or military bases.

Which form of government has been launched by the Bush administration? To me it feels more feudal than imperial. But I do not know for sure. What do you think?

References:

1. Dogpile search phrases: "basic elements of bureaucracy," "elements of stale bureaucracy," and "bureaucracy and feudal state"
2. From C-SPAN - Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire from July 22, 2006 . In "Dark Ages America" author Morris Berman compares what is happening in America today to the fall of the Roman Empire. Mr. Berman argues that the American empire is in decline due to an overextended economy and a self-destructive foreign policy.

Tags: unitary executive Bush administration bureaucracy commentary politics