[Note: this is not, in ANY WAY to disregard the human aspect and tragedy of loss in the ongoing fires in California. This is looking at a different component of the root cause.]
In looking at the mess in California at the moment, with all the fires and finger pointing from elected officials, my stance might be considered “unpopular”:
I don’t want anyone fired or allowed to resign.
I want them to stay until reelection.
Too many people screw things up badly and just leave; they are not held accountable, nor are those who support them.
“Oopsies.”
Nah.
I want them to fix it for those who put them there.
If they can’t, that should provide a reference point for the electorate for the next cycle – to vet candidates and their ability better.
If they genuinely screwed up and fix the problem, then it is win-win for all parties… they are better for the lessons learned and successful actions taken; faith in the system should be restored/reinforced.
When running for and supporting a candidate, one fact should be kept in mind:
You made your bed… sleep in it.
Can’t do the job?
Don’t take the position.
Don’t put that person in a position to do said job.
In short: own that shit.
In politics, the consequences of mismanagement goes both ways – to the elected official and to the electorate. Though it could be viewed as a course of action which may compound an existing issue, there is always the potential for an epiphany to occur – a chance to evaluate performance, apply corrective action, and adjust accordingly.
“Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater,” after all, right? Don’t discard an entire concept just because some parts are bad, would be another way of looking at it.
“How,” one might ask, “could any part of the political fiasco going on in California be considered good?”
The Governor was elected, as part of an existing and enduring political process, by the people whom he represents. The same thing goes for the Mayor… and any and every elected official. It is the same for any and all offices where an election is held – regardless of whether or not that election was genuine and within the common understanding of how votes should be cast to select a representative (don’t read that as “should be cast for the right person” – you should know me way better than that by now).
Am I implying that there should not be a recall, if so warranted?
No… that is part of the overall process after all – and if that is warranted, so be it.
What I am pondering is the perpetual “what next” for the people impacted by failed policies after any vengeful retribution of removal is satisfied?
Consider a few individuals over the past few years:
- Ashraf Ghani…
- Gotabaya Rajapaksa…
- Boris Johnson…
- Liz Truss…
- Teresa May…
- Andrew Cuomo…
Do these names sound familiar?
The places and positions they held – was there any improvement upon their replacement?
Were they ever really held accountable for the situations they created?
Where are they now?
Did Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, the United Kingdom, New York improve after their resignations?
Lastly, and more importantly, did their electorates learn and adjust how they evaluated subsequent candidates?
(An aside: holy cow – just looking at the resignations on Wikipedia has me amazed. I lost track of how many Prime Ministers the U.K. has had over the last few years… And yes, I was paying attention to the first two, for professional reasons.)
Call me blindly optimistic, bitterly cynical, skeptical, naïve… whatever. Perhaps I even fall under some facet of Consequentialism – that the value of an action may be judged by the repercussions from that action (though I have a hard time with absolutes when it comes to philosophical classifications). I have to wonder, though – would a resignation/recall actually be a form of reward rather than punitive action?
One thing is for certain: the logic of the character of “The Operative” from Serenity sort of makes sense:
Do you know what your sin is, Doctor? It is pride. […] You know, in certain older civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords.
Perhaps that will continue to be bothersome… or not. “The Operative,” or “Wonko the Sane” from Douglas Adams’ So Long and Thanks for All the Fish… it’s hard to say which makes more sense.
Related:
- Vote Responsibly 12Jul18
- More Thoughts on Afghanistan… 15Aug21
- Humans ≥ Failure 12Nov21
Discover more from milsurpwriter
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
milsurpwriter 
Mike –
Thanks for this. I would suggest that not everyone agrees with this statement:
*The Governor was elected, as part of an existing and enduring political process, by the people whom he represents. The same thing goes for the Mayor… and any and every elected official. *
You are making the assumption that elections are conducted in a balanced, open, and legal manner. It is obvious that many elections in the United States and around the world do not qualify for such a description. One merely has to look at the 2020 national election in the United States as one of the most egregious examples of how elections are conducted these days. And no one has ever been held to account for the fraud and corruption across federal, state, municipal and judicial boundaries. It is clear that special interest groups have hijacked the political agenda for decades in the United States, as well as in other nations.
And this does not even touch the crimes of the CIA against other nations. The most glaring examples are the “color revolutions” and the coup in Ukraine in 2014. In Canada, the 2015 election had ample evidence of interference by groups in the United States, with campaigns which were openly bragged about after the election on websites – until someone pointed out that this was illegal, and the text and videos were removed. No one was ever held to account. The Tides foundation, an American “environmental extremist group”, openly bragged about being responsible for the defeat of 25 members of Canada’s parliament who had belonged to the Conservative Party – a party which was “a bit to the right of the socialists and fascists in the Liberal and New Democratic Parties. There was no explanation for where the funding came from. I’m betting it was CIA.
Happy 2025. Let’s see how the year compares to the Deagel.com forecasts.
Jim
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is an assumption… but an intentional assumption based upon the theory – not necessarily the presumption of what may have happened in 2020.
This goes back to what I wrote about JFK and 9/11: what if the theories were true? Then what?
The problem is that whatever factually happened in many of these instances may not be fully known for many years as there is too much at stake for theory to be proven as reality… and even then, we would have the analogue of what flat earthers and “chocolate milk comes from brown cows” are today.
Do I think that 2014, 2015, 2020… that all those things happen the way that they may have… or actually had?
[shrug]
Even if so, this goes back to the issue of accountability… or lack thereof… or projection of blame… or whatever new distraction comes along.
Happy 2025… it will definitely be interesting.
LikeLike