This is certainly a viewpoint, but I don’t necessarily agree when people state it as if it’s a foregone conclusion.
Starve the beast exists. They purposefully cripple these systems, and if you were to adhere to that statement, then it means that we should do away with the systems altogether because they’re currently broken (read: sabotaged).
Someone responded to me with this a while back. The purpose of a system is what it does. I shot back some shit, but then I thought about it. They’re right. The purpose of a system is what it does. It became clear to me. It literally does not matter in the real world what the creators of a system say it is for. The purpose of the system is what it does.
I mean… no. The purpose of the Department of Education has been very clear. Just because they fire a shitload of people, and make it so they cannot perform their function for the time being, does not mean that the purpose of the Department has changed.
The purpose remains, the Department just needs to be fixed so that it can continue to serve its purpose.
This is how I used to think. But we need to simplify things in order to approach them with appropriate action. The original purpose of USAID, NOAA, Department of Education, those don’t matter at the moment. It’s hard to articulate, but when you get down to it, the purpose of the system is what it does. No, over arching beliefs, vision, or plans from the founders will not work right now. The purpose of a system is what it does.
I don’t want to argue with you anymore comrade. Please give a read to the link. Just a few days ago I would have had the same response as you.
I believe that’s wrong, sorry. At least in the case of government agencies. Maybe it applies to other types of systems, and maybe it even applied to government agencies prior to Trump’s actions, but no. Not anymore at least. I feel like maybe you don’t understand how government agencies are structured and how they function if you believe it’s that simple and lacking in nuance.
These agencies are not monoliths. There are still people working in the Department of Education, career bureaucrats, experts in their specific field, that are still working toward the stated goals of the Department of Education. They will continue to do so until they’re forced to stop. Capitulating and just admitting defeat, just because the fascists that have seized power have made those goals far more difficult to achieve, is exactly what they want you to do. Don’t fall for the trap.
I hear you. What I’m advocating does veer into philosophy when what we need is action. I don’t claim to know every nuance of these bureaucracies, but I have worked within them, as a civilian. I do understand that this pump action shotgun approach to surgery is absurd. Believe me, you and I are on the same team here!
I don’t advocate admitting defeat at all. In fact I think everyone 'resigning in protest ’ right now is just taking the easy way out. I do hope for an end to this madness, but it seems like the train’s just left the station.
What I’m advocating is an approach to systems theory, nothing more. Stay safe in the months ahead.
I have. Sauerkraut was talking about voting reform. Which, I’ll point out, still does not require the complete dissolution of the voting system we have.
This is certainly a viewpoint, but I don’t necessarily agree when people state it as if it’s a foregone conclusion.
Starve the beast exists. They purposefully cripple these systems, and if you were to adhere to that statement, then it means that we should do away with the systems altogether because they’re currently broken (read: sabotaged).
That is a bad take imo
Someone responded to me with this a while back. The purpose of a system is what it does. I shot back some shit, but then I thought about it. They’re right. The purpose of a system is what it does. It became clear to me. It literally does not matter in the real world what the creators of a system say it is for. The purpose of the system is what it does.
I mean… no. The purpose of the Department of Education has been very clear. Just because they fire a shitload of people, and make it so they cannot perform their function for the time being, does not mean that the purpose of the Department has changed.
The purpose remains, the Department just needs to be fixed so that it can continue to serve its purpose.
This is how I used to think. But we need to simplify things in order to approach them with appropriate action. The original purpose of USAID, NOAA, Department of Education, those don’t matter at the moment. It’s hard to articulate, but when you get down to it, the purpose of the system is what it does. No, over arching beliefs, vision, or plans from the founders will not work right now. The purpose of a system is what it does.
I don’t want to argue with you anymore comrade. Please give a read to the link. Just a few days ago I would have had the same response as you.
I believe that’s wrong, sorry. At least in the case of government agencies. Maybe it applies to other types of systems, and maybe it even applied to government agencies prior to Trump’s actions, but no. Not anymore at least. I feel like maybe you don’t understand how government agencies are structured and how they function if you believe it’s that simple and lacking in nuance.
These agencies are not monoliths. There are still people working in the Department of Education, career bureaucrats, experts in their specific field, that are still working toward the stated goals of the Department of Education. They will continue to do so until they’re forced to stop. Capitulating and just admitting defeat, just because the fascists that have seized power have made those goals far more difficult to achieve, is exactly what they want you to do. Don’t fall for the trap.
I hear you. What I’m advocating does veer into philosophy when what we need is action. I don’t claim to know every nuance of these bureaucracies, but I have worked within them, as a civilian. I do understand that this pump action shotgun approach to surgery is absurd. Believe me, you and I are on the same team here!
I don’t advocate admitting defeat at all. In fact I think everyone 'resigning in protest ’ right now is just taking the easy way out. I do hope for an end to this madness, but it seems like the train’s just left the station.
What I’m advocating is an approach to systems theory, nothing more. Stay safe in the months ahead.
cool… still you’re wrong.
All this means is “don’t give up.” You acknowledge it’s not serving its purpose right now, it’s serving some other purpose.
No. It means don’t throw out entire agencies wholesale because of some bullshit misunderstanding.
Yes, of course. Who is talking about throwing the Department of Education out wholesale?
For real? Have you not been paying attention?
I have. Sauerkraut was talking about voting reform. Which, I’ll point out, still does not require the complete dissolution of the voting system we have.