In his 1864 novella Notes from Underground, Dostoyevsky referred to the "farce in Schleswig-Holstein". The Schleswig-Holstein question concerned the relationships of the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein with the Danish crown and the German confederation. It was not an easy concept to try and understand and few people did. Famously, the British Statesman Lord Palmerston admitted that "only three people have ever really understood the Schleswig-Holstein business - the Prince Consort who is dead - a German Professor who has gone mad - and I who have forgotten all about it".
In Notes from Underground, Dostoyevsky rejects the concept of Utopian Socialism which would ironically come to dominate Russian life throughout much of the twentieth century. The novella portrays humans as they are which caused great upset among his contemporaries. He portrays humans as irrational, uncooperative and uncontrollable. It is perhaps easy to see why such assertions would cause discomfort. He also claims that human needs can never be satisfied. Many critics consider this novella to be the first example of existentialism in literature and no less a judge than Nietzsche called Dostoyevsky "the only philosopher from whom I had anything to learn".
But just how accurate were the assertions of Dostoyevsky? Are we irrational? Are we uncooperative? Are we uncontrollable? I've not yet met anyone who doesn't tick all three boxes. So why did he cause so much upset? Is it because we would rather not face the realities of our shortcomings or do we genuinely believe these claims don't apply to us?
Lord Browne resigned as Chief Executive of BP in 2007. Since his peerage, he has become active in Government and today highlights a culture which exemplifies the observations made in Notes from Underground. Referring to the civil servants in Whitehall, he expresses his exasperation at their culture. His background in the Private Sector meant that any mistake made was identified and dealt with such that chances of its repetition were negligible. I have worked in such a culture and can concur with him. Things get done. This is the culture of progress. Lord Browne highlights a culture in which mistakes are never admitted and where accountability is non-existent. It must be intensely frustrating for him to be faced with such a culture when he has spent his whole life in a proactive environment. He points to a prevailing culture of blame and denial which renders progress nigh on impossible. Several cases have emerged whereby ministers have recently found themselves having to micro manage a project for fear it won't get done if left to the Civil Servants. If this is true, it begs the worth of bureaucracy. This surely confirms what many have suspected for a long time. Bureaucracy stifles people and stifles progress. While it is intended to promote the most efficient way of completing a task, it all too often acts as a barrier. In short, they are complex, inefficient and inflexible - all the things against which Dostoyevsky warned. Trying to find out who is responsible is like trying to understand the Schleswig-Holstein question. Even Lord Palmerston struggled with that one!
No comments:
Post a Comment