82,891
edits
Performative governance: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
With — perhaps — a spin. You perform governance, generally, by approximating it: creating crude, two-dimensional stick-figure illustrations of a four-dimensional<ref>Yes: ''four'', and I don’t even need to exceed Euclidean geometry to get there: governance propositions mutate over ''time''.</ref>reality which is genuinely ineffable: with social systems there is never the necessary information, nor boundaries, for any simplistic representation to work. | With — perhaps — a spin. You perform governance, generally, by approximating it: creating crude, two-dimensional stick-figure illustrations of a four-dimensional<ref>Yes: ''four'', and I don’t even need to exceed Euclidean geometry to get there: governance propositions mutate over ''time''.</ref>reality which is genuinely ineffable: with social systems there is never the necessary information, nor boundaries, for any simplistic representation to work. | ||
Modern administration is not performative in the sense of being ''fictional'', but irresponsibly ''lazy'': the [[modernist]] disposition is to see calamity as a function of low-level human foible: as ''operator error''. If the errors, inconstancies and misapprehension of human frailty on the ground can be excised, then orderly good governance will surely follow. Thus; administrators are never to blame: it’s the [[meatware]]. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||