So we (I) recently watched a docu-drama called Recount about the debacle in the 2000 US Federal election.
The film is predictably pro-Gore. For example, Gore staffers are played by the more famous actors and Bush staff are always dressed up in forbidding dark suits. In fact, there would be no story without the premise that a crime was comitted (it’s hardly exciting to tell the story of an election fairly won), so I’m happy the bais is so easily detected – if it weren’t, it could only mean I am manipulated far too easily.
The acting is good and Denins Leary gives a few memorably hilarious rants, but I think that there are also real lesssons to learn from the film:
1) partisanship is such a powerful psychological force it’s scary;
2) competition seems to be the only way to inspire people to try really hard at something;
3) governments are fabulously incompetant, even when given the most simple of tasks to accomplish (like: administer one-question, four-option multiple choice test and publish the result).
Partisanship
There’s a scene in the film where an angry mob comes incredibly close to rioting because ‘their’ side looks like it won the election and they will do anything they can do keep it that way. I can’t believe that so many people actually believed one or the other of the two candidates will have such a profound impact on their lives that traveling from all over the country to harrass intimidated bureaucrats is a worthwhile use of their time.
Instead, I think that partisanship is what whips them into a frenzy. By partisanship I mean people who commit to something and find that defending the decision becomes more important than whether that decision was right or wrong. These people will hang around people who have made the same decision, bond over how good a decision it was and ridicule those who made a different one. Suddenly, this decision becomes one of the cornerstones of a person’s identity. Scary.
Competition as a Motivator and Instructor
There are some bureaucrats in this film which don’t appear to be aligned with either side. Unfortunately for them, they find themselves in unwanted positions of responsibility and desperately look for someone to tell them what to do. They are not confident or motivated. I would argue that this is because the competition they had to win to get their job had nothing to do with the job itself, running elections, which is as safe a monopoly as they come.
Confidence comes from accomplishment, which comes from ambition, which is a mechanism of motivation. All of the political operatives know that their lives will change if they win and use politics, the tool of their competition, to do so.
Incompetence of Governments
Government jobs are “good jobs”. I assume that by this people mean two things: 1. the jobs are difficult to lose; and, 2. the jobs pay well. Now, since governments aren’t competing against anything (domestically), the only incentive they have for excellence is altruism. Hopefully that reads as silly as it sounds in my head.
The problem in the movie is that the voting cards are very poorly designed. Early on a government worker explains why the design of the voting machine cards is so bad (because she chose to use a larger font, she had to arrange the candidates on the card in a confusing manner). A stupid decision was made because the government doesn’t have a culture of competence, which requires reviewing important decisions and punishing INcompetence. The government doesn’t have a culture of competence because creating one is painful – why would you do something painful if you don’t have to?
Read Full Post »
Slingeek 