A bureaucracy is a fascinating technology. For ordinary citizens, it’s frustrating because it’s almost impossible to talk to anyone who has any actual responsibility when you encounter a problem. It’s a great device for insulating policy makers from the people who experience casual frustration due to the policies. The result is that a bureaus’ purview is generally stable over the long haul because change requires long term tenacity beyond what any given low-grade irritation is worth to a person. A non-corrupt bureaucracy is momentarily irritating for any given individual at any given time, but over all, comfortable (because stable) for the vast majority of people for whom the bureau’s consistent functioning has become background radiation.
An additional aspect is that a bureaucracy is so stable it acts as a hedge against a failure elsewhere in the system. It removes the kind of disruption we can experience when a single-point-of-failure fails.
For instance, even if the President is incapacitated, you can still renew your drivers license, get your build permit, or send your children to school. All those policies and procedures at the DMV allow the clerks to handle all your needs regardless of whether or not the chain of command is present or even sane. This feeds in to the frustration we all feel that authority is everywhere present, but nowhere visible. Abstract policies and procedures are running the show, not fickle human beings. How can you appeal to or be granted mercy by a policy? You can’t unless the chance for a waiver has been built in to the policy itself.
I can think of two ways to destroy a bureaucracy. One is revolution in which all laws are thrown out and those in power start over. Another is through financial starvation and policy reversals from above. For instance, there would be many more unlicensed drivers if the DMV was forced to reduce their offices to one per state. The EPA would not be nearly as frustrating to an industrialist if an Executive Order redefined pollution to allow for the dumping toxic chemicals into the water or the air or our food. This kind of destruction could be quickly achieved, but that draws a lot of attention. Better to engage a long, slow process of chipping away at budgets and purviews until the gutted bureau seems nearly useless and arbitrary.
It’s hard to see how this second kind of destruction wouldn’t eventually lead to the first.
