Father Orthoduck quite liked the definition that is found in the last two panels of this comic. Please ignore the rest of the comic. Unless you have been following the story arc, it will make no sense to you. But catch what one of the characters says about bureaucratic power. She defines it as, “the power of stubborn small-mindedness in large groups.” I think she has quite grasped something.
We have all complained about the small-mindedness found in every bureaucracy. But, we often do not reflect on the idea that it may be every bit as much our own fault as that of those in the bureaucracy. You see, Saint Paul said long ago that the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. Now, Father Orthoduck knows that he was not referring to bureaucracies, but there is a side point that can be made. When all is said and done, a bureaucrat is an employee, a person who must make a living in order to cover the basic necessities of life for him or her self, which probably includes a family. S/he cannot take a chance on being fired over a mistaken decision. So, it is safest to always follow the rules.
When Father Orthoduck was in basic training, he remembers a drill instructor giving us some advice. He said that the Army has a rule book. As long as you follow it, you will not get in trouble or be court-martialed. But, if you break the rule book, two things can happen, one bad and one good. If you break the rules and you win a great victory, they will give you a medal and re-write the rule book. If you break the rules and either something goes wrong, or you do no better than if you had followed the rules, then they will throw the rules at you and court-martial you. The lesson was obvious, you had better follow the rules.
Father Orthoduck knows that the approach above has been modified to allow for much more adaptability than was possible when he was in the Army. However, the approach above is still the approach in any government non-battle, non-Armed Forces position. There is nothing to be gained by crossing the rules, and a job to be kept by enforcing the rules. Let those in higher reaches take the responsibility for any exceptions to the rules, that is what they get paid for. Add to that pressure the tendency towards a peaceful life that we all have, and one can end with some significant small-mindedness. Multiply that small-mindedness by tens of thousands of bureaucrats and you get some significant paperwork traffic jams in any type of government.
But, here is Father Orthoduck’s question to you. Can you blame them? Look at your TV screen for a month. Usually, at least once or more a month, there is a story about some person who received amnesty from a governor or some person who did not receive a sentence as strict as some people wished or a story about a politician who bent some rules. What is the normal response? Outrage from the populace and from the news media. You see, WE are the ones who insist that the laws and regulations must be followed. WE are the ones who scream for the blood of those who do not enforce the laws and regulations to the last drop of blood.
A bureaucrat who is in charge of a small office with some rules is quite aware of that. Who will defend him/her if s/he violates the rules? When was the last time that you saw or read an article about a bureaucrat who bent or broke the rules and received high praise for that? No, every bureaucrat knows that just about every story ever printed linking a bureaucrat and the bending or breaking of rules is a negative story asking that the bureaucrat get fired. Under those circumstances, why should a bureaucrat not learn to be small minded and to enforce the rules, even when the rules are causing harm to someone.
Remember the principle that Father Orthoduck was taught in basic training! As long as you follow the rule book, no harm will come to you. The moment you do not follow the rule book, the majority of what can happen to you will be bad. And so, a bureaucrat learns to stifle any tendency to bend or break. Almost every bureaucrat has had a bad experience with what happens if you do not follow that rule. No bureaucrat has had a good experience with bending or breaking the rules. And so, WE teach them small-mindedness, by our insistence that the government must follow the rules to the last drop of blood. Let’s not try to blind ourselves by claiming that somehow small-minded people are drawn toward government bureaucracies or that government, by definition, is the entity that causes small-mindedness.
No, WE are the ones who help cause small-mindedness. That and, as Saint Paul said, “the letter kills …” There is a reason why our Orthodox hierarchs have the right to apply eikonomia to various situations. There is a reason why we insist that our canons must be applied in a medicinal fashion rather than a legalistic fashion. It is because we know that a “legal” application of our canons will lead to small-mindedness and bureaucratic numbness. The same is true in government civil service, except they generally have no person in their hierarchy who is allowed to exercise flexibility. Rather, all the way up the line, the exercise of flexibility is generally punished or used as a political bludgeon.
Oddly, the Founding Fathers did have some concept of eikonomia. That is why Presidents and governors have the right to grant amnesty. That is why judges have flexibility in applying judgments. That is why district attorneys have prosecutorial discretion. That is why certain positions in federal or state government have periodically had the right to be flexible. It was the knowledge that the system needed some flexibility, some possibility of adustment without needing to go through the cumbersome process of law or rule change. Until we recognize the need for flexibility in our system, we will continually run up against bureaucratic inflexibility. And, here is a tip for you. It will not matter whether it is a large bureaucracy or the village clerk. As long as punishment is the reward for human concern and keeping your job is the reward for following the rules as written, and only as written, so long will the rules be applied inflexibly, whether it is the IRS or the village clerk or the judge or the district attorney or the bureaucrat who denies your petition for a zoning variance.
If we want bureaucratic flexibility, then WE must stop insisting that the law must be followed, without exception, to the last bitter jot and tittle. We must allow for flexibility if we want a bureaucracy that is not small-minded.
Part of the challenge in flexibility is to not let inherent bias have too much effect on our decisions. For example, it is common for a district attorney to give a shorter sentence based on color of skin.
However, I still agree with needing bureaucratic flexibility. I believe the whole immigration issue could be solved by granting low level bureaucratics flexibility in dealing with individual cases. The immigration issue needs to be dealt with one family at a time.
The bureaucrat is caught between a rock and a hard place, as is a governor or judge or prosecutor or president. If s/he exercises flexibility then s/he can easily be accused of bias or favoritism, but if s/he enforces the rules as written then s/he is accused of bureaucratic small-mindedness and an unfeeling approach toward human beings.
In the case of politicians, whether they exercise any power of amnesty they might have or whether they do not, it will simply become grist for the next election when the opponent will automatically take the stance that it was handled wrongly. But, they can still win that election. Their employment is not necessarily resting on having some mercy.
But the bureaucrat who flexes the rules in order to have mercy or to adapt to a situation cannot appeal to the people in an election. S/he can be easily fired, with no recourse since they “broke” the law (or regulation) in their mercy. To be accused of inflexible small-mindedness is simply to keep your job, with no danger that you can be fired. So then, the percentages for a bureaucrat roll in favor of keeping the rules at all costs and letting someone else decide to override them or change them.