How to minimise the growth in pressure for major/systemic change?
If I were a technocratic boss, keen to insulate myself from calls for changes to the ways we do things – changes which would upset my cognitive equilibrium, changes which might upset people who provide me with party donations and a job once the voters finally wise up to me or my own party throws me under the bus- what would I DO?
What would I do if the usual tactics, of ignoring opponents, or smearing them (“fake news”, “myths,” the xxx lobby” were not working any more, were beginning to cost me political capital and credibility?
One thing I would do is HIDE. No, not hide, HIDE.
By this I mean I would point to “Heroic Infrastructure” – particular pieces of infrastructure which seem to hold out the promise for a better world (cleaner air, safer etc), which display some mix of policy, social or technological innovation.
This, I think, would be useful to
a) make it look like I was doing something
b) ‘buy off’ (cognitively) enough people and organisations who were part of any broad but loose coalition calling for change. Some of them would get so transfixed by, to choose an example entire at random – a Cyclops –
or another entirely at random example – pedestrianisation of a busy street, would get so proud of themselves for believing that The System Works that they would basically give up on being part of the pressure on me to get something done quickly.
The heroic infrastructure could be used as a kind of firebreak, preventing the spread of demand for change that would make my life more difficult.
And my life would thus be easier, because the diversion had enabled me to evade the need to actually do open, transparent and bold leadership.
HIDE. It’s the wave of the future, and remarkably cheap.
See also : resource testeria, avivocracy, technophilia