I recall watching a television series with this line: “They’re bureaucrats, Elizabeth. You’ll have them for breakfast.” Here’s my question: When did bureaucrats stop being a point of fun and become the Western world’s leaders and winners? I guess part of the answer to why they’re no longer funny is that they’re not striving to win anymore. Now, they control the narrative and can’t be sacked.

They deserve to be sacked, though, because they’re doing a bad job. For example, my electricity bill where I live in Australia came in yesterday and is significantly larger than it should be. Left alone, I’d be paying 7c to 11c per kWh. But I’m now paying 45c, mainly because my State has blown up all its coal power stations. Consultants and bureaucrats drove this decision.

And in America, think back to the old Hollywood image of a true “leader.” It used to be the person who took chances that brought success, overcame risks, fought through obstacles, and improved everyone’s lives. He (usually a “he”) did this by shooting the bad guys (usually “he”), putting them in jail, or even just exposing them, or being a manly dynamo in the corporate or political world. Now, “leadership” is a committee of Harvard grads specializing in nothing relevant.

The hero of yore was invincible. The hero of this decade is a mentally ill, manipulated girl or a non-girl upon whom I can’t force myself to look.

Image by AI.

Bureaucrats are procedural; heroes are not. Heroes break the rules, they forge ahead, they don’t take “no” for an answer, and they creatively solve problems. They speak up for the little guy, fight bullies, and make the world better. They have bureaucrats for breakfast.

So, why are we now subservient to the bureaucracy? To get things done, we need to fill in forms and jump through hoops. In America, where “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed,” most people need permission to own a gun, and these are then subject to additional restrictions. Sounds like “infringement” to me.

When did “they” become ascendant and even predominant? When did the people we made fun of a mere generation ago get to be in charge, calling the shots and changing the world?

With Harvard’s Claudine Gay as an example, the least qualified seem to be running the asylum. Would anyone vote for the bureaucracy to run things? I’d like to say no one would put someone in charge of an organization as large and important as Harvard that isn’t the best candidate but, clearly, I would be wrong.

We have a rural council in our Area that consists of normal people (probably too many real estate agents) who’ve been voted in. Despite the people’s support, they are totally beholden to the bureaucrats and consultants. They are told what they must do and why. They have no choice, and they follow the line. We don’t want it—no one wants it—but they do it anyway—and we pay for it.

This old British comedy sketch reminds me why I dislike the officious busy-body bureaucrats as much as I do and why I have so much faith in ordinary people unconstrained by the bureaucracy:

Nodrog Snave is a pseudonym.