The Rightwing View on Bureaucracy Is Wrongheaded

PAF

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
13,559

By Jacob G. Hornberger
The Future of Freedom Foundation
August 8, 2024


Leave it to Donald Trump’s vice-presidential candidate J.D. Vance to enunciate the rightwing view on bureaucracy, a view that is diametrically opposed to the libertarian view. According to an article in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, which criticizes Vance for his “disregard for the constitutional balance of powers and the rule of law,” Vance stated in a 2021 interview: “Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state. Replace them with our people.” It would be difficult to better capture the rightwing view on bureaucracy than that.


The perfect demonstration of this rightwing perspective is with respect to the Covid crisis. Every day throughout the crisis, rightwingers would exclaim, “Fauci! Fauci! Fauci!” in their articles, speeches, podcasts, interviews, and other presentations. They would complain about how Anthony Fauci was implementing destructive and tyrannical polices in his roles as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and as chief medical advisor to the president.


What was the rightwing solution to such policies? Their position was summarized by the words of J.D. Vance — fire Fauci and replace him with a rightwinger, one who would supposedly make better decisions and implement better healthcare policies than Fauci and other leftwing bureaucrats who were in charge of healthcare.


The same phenomenon occurred on the state and local level. Every day throughout the Covid crisis, the Internet was replete with rightwing articles, podcasts, and the like criticizing the lockdowns, the mask mandates, the vaccine requirements, the social-distancing requirements, and other policies and practices that violate the principles of a free society.


What was the rightwing solution to all this Covid tyranny? J.D. Vance sums it up perfectly: Fire the healthcare tyrants and replace them with rightwingers.


The thing to keep in mind about bureaucracy is that it will always, without fail, come with inefficiencies, mistakes, faults, foibles, or, in the classic rightwing phrase, “waste, fraud, and abuse.” Inevitably, it also comes with measures that infringe liberty and even constitute tyranny.


Thus, anyone can spend every day for the rest of his life pointing out the faults and failures, inefficiencies, and anti-freedom measures of both federal and state bureaucrats. That’s what was happening throughout the Covid crisis. It was never difficult for rightwingers or anyone else to come up with bad, inefficient, and tyrannical things that federal and state bureaucrats were doing as part of their anti-Covid crusade.


What mattered was when one reached the end of a rightwing article, speech, or podcast about Covid. That’s where the rightwingers would usually put their solution. That’s how one could tell that it was a rightwing perspective, rather than a libertarian perspective, on Covid. Their solution was always, “The system needs reform.” And by “reform,” they meant simply replacing the people in charge of combatting Covid with rightwingers, as J.D. Vance pointed out.


One big problem with this rightwing approach was that it would inevitably lead toward a different set of infringements on liberty and and a different type of tyranny. The rightwingers wanted to use the government’s powers, both at the federal and state level, to severely punish people who had issued or prescribed the Covid vaccine or who had issued healthcare mandates under the state’s healthcare powers. Some rightwingers even advocated extrajudicial punishment — that is, no trials — because they were personally certain of who was guilty and deserving of punishment. Others favored punishment even if the people they were targeting had not violated any statute on the books. In other words, instead of a leftwing reign of healthcare terror, we’d have a rightwing reign of healthcare terror.


How does the rightwing view on bureaucracy, as enunciated by rightwinger J.D. Vance, compare with the libertarian view on bureaucracy? We libertarians favor the dismantling of the healthcare bureaucracy or, even better, a complete separation of healthcare and the state. In other words, we don’t want to replace Fauci or any other healthcare bureaucrat with someone else. Our goal is to remove government entirely from healthcare, just as our ancestors removed the federal government from religion through the First Amendment. Ideally, this would mean a constitutional amendment modeled after the First and Fourteenth Amendments: “Neither the Congress nor the states shall enact any law respecting the provision, establishment, or regulation of healthcare or abridging the free exercise thereof.”


For rightwingers, that would be anathema because it would mean that they could no longer implement a reign of rightwing healthcare tyranny. What rightwingers fail to comprehend is that freedom is preferable to both leftwing and rightwing tyranny.



Reprinted with permission from The Future of Freedom Foundation.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2024/08...rightwing-view-on-bureaucracy-is-wrongheaded/
 
The executive branch needs to exist, as many employees as it needs to fulfill its legitimate functions should be replaced with MAGA people.
We need to return to the Spoils System like the Founding Fathers.

To assume that Vance, much less all right wingers, want to maintain the present level of bureaucracy as opposed to shrinking it to almost nothing just because he said to hire our people is ludicrous and completely discredits anything else said.
 
To assume that Vance, much less all right wingers, want to maintain the present level of bureaucracy as opposed to shrinking it to almost nothing just because...

... one has looked at Trump's record in office -- including the part where he hexed the Pentagon by creating a Sixth Branch of the military -- and say, oh, that's why he picked Vance over Paul and Massie -- is pretty logical, truthfully.

It's called looking at the evidence right under one's nose.
 
Last edited:
To assume that Vance, much less all right wingers, want to maintain the present level of bureaucracy as opposed to shrinking it to almost nothing just because he said to hire our people is ludicrous and completely discredits anything else said.

If you think either Vance or Trump want to drastically shrink federal bureaucracy, you're delusional.
 
‘Ther are men in all ages, who mean to exercise power usefully; but who mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be masters.” -Daniel Webster (emphasis added)
 
Last edited:
... one has looked at Trump's record in office -- including the part where he hexed the Pentagon by creating a Sixth Branch of the military -- and say, oh, that's why he picked Vance over Paul and Massie -- is pretty logical, truthfully.

It's called looking at the evidence right under one's nose.
Right, that's why he tried to fire many government workers and has a plan all ready to fire even more now.
Right.
 
I've told you about five hundred times that your "He's not corrupt, just too incompetent to achieve anything!" sales pitch is not a selling point.
That spin doesn't work.
Ron would not have been able to do any better, the President is not a dictator and the swamp has consolidated too much power to be taken out in just one term.
 
That spin doesn't work.
Ron would not have been able to do any better, the President is not a dictator and the swamp has consolidated too much power to be taken out in just one term.

If Ron had been president and accomplished nothing at all, that would have been better than the record breaking increase in federal spending that we got with Trump.
 
If Ron had been president and accomplished nothing at all, that would have been better than the record breaking increase in federal spending that we got with Trump.

LOL

Congress would have passed it all right over his vetoes and he would have accomplished less good things.
 
LOL

Congress would have passed it all right over his vetoes and he would have accomplished less good things.

Funny that no other presidents in history have had that problem.

Trump zealously pushed for record breaking spending, and he got what he zealously pushed for.
 
LOL

Congress would have passed it all right over his vetoes and he would have accomplished less good things.

Ron never would have hired Gate's stooges. In fact, he never would have taken money from Pfizer, or given them 4 tickets to sit at the Senate round table. He wouldn't have dismissed RFK Jr. concerning vaccine safety either, nor would he "use the full force of the federal government!".

Instead, Ron would have had a FireSide Chat to explain to the People about many important things.

As far as "Nationalizing" Local LEO, Immunity, and taking Private donations to start a "National" American University, that would be a big fat NO for Ron.

Ron also would never have signed Fix NICS, ban bump stocks, or the revised PREP Act, which Trump of course did.

Oh, there would have been a great many things Ron would have done differently than your communist "nationalist" friend.
 
Funny that no other presidents in history have had that problem.

Trump zealously pushed for record breaking spending, and he got what he zealously pushed for.

That was about the biggest transfer of wealth from the low and middle class up to the 1%. Trump is part of that club. Maybe [MENTION=65299]Swordsmyth[/MENTION] is too. Or maybe he just cuts Trumps lawn lol.
 
Right-wing bureaucrats are the ones that used our tax money to fund boy-rape parties in Afghanistan.
 
Back
Top