Had an interesting conversation with a friend the other day, a fellow student of the life of T.E. Lawrence.
We speculated on what Lawrence, a British agent who won lasting fame for his role in the World War I Arab Revolt, would think of the current Arab Revolt. We concluded that Lawrence would be gratified that this Arab Revolt really does belong to the Arabs.
The original Arab Revolt was stoked by the British for their own ends — primarily to defeat the Ottoman Empire in the First World War. The British made many promises to support an Arab nation — promises they never intended to keep. And, in the end, they betrayed the revolt, with consequences that echo to this day.
Till the end of his days, Lawrence carried a profound sense of guilt and self-loathing for his collusion in the deception and betrayal of his Arab allies.
The current wave of revolt and revolution sweeping much of the Arab world has tremendous potential to reshape the region. It could all go horribly wrong, too. History doesn’t give much cause for optimism.
But whatever happens, this Arab Revolt must continue to be their own; the peoples of North Africa and the Arabian peninsula must be left to shape their own destiny. Our meddling, even with the best of intentions, will ultimately blow back.
The rebels made that point when Lawrence’s heirs — an MI6 operative under diplomatic cover and several SAS men who arrived in Libya to offer some covert help — were arrested and told “thanks but no thanks.”
No Lawrence of Arabia in this Arab Revolt.
Jim Cornelius, Editor
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Why is it so hard to get things done?
Watching the Sisters City Council at work is painful. You leave a meeting feeling like you’ve walked a mile through wet concrete. And that’s just watching. I can only imagine how frustrated and tired the councilors themselves must feel.
The council has been high-centered on enacting a water rate increase and new water rate structure for nine months. Around and around and around, no resolution (well, maybe a glimmer of the beginning of a resolution after Thursday’s workshop). This is only the latest in a litany of issues that have bogged the city down over the past couple of years.
Why is it like this? Why is it so hard to get things done?
There are obvious disagreements and personality conflicts on the council, but that kind of thing doesn’t have to create dysfunction — it could make a board more dynamic. There’s something deeper and more fundamental at play here, something that is bigger than Sisters and our particular issues.
I think it’s about trust.
David Asson argued Thursday morning for a five year business plan based on worst-case scenarios — usage (and therefore revenue) declines or stays flat, expenses go up, etc. This approach makes sense — if you trust that if the worst-case scenario doesn’t develop, you won’t spend the money and won’t enact the associated rate increases. That’s where things start falling apart.
Most folks assume that if a government entity has the opportunity to gain revenue through fees or taxes, it will take it, no matter what. Expecting government to refrain from enacting a tax increase or a rate hike is like expecting a lion to refrain from eating a zebra ’cause it had zebra last week and there’s still leftovers in the fridge. And we expect that that government entity will fight tooth and nail to avoid cutting costs, especially personnel costs.
Those assumptions exist regardless of how responsible local government has or has not been in managing its taxpayers’ money. What looks like prudent management to some looks suspicious to many others — because we have become accustomed to thinking that government is an alien, voracious entity that wants to eat our wallet and our groceries.
And we know we’re right to be suspicious, because we’ve seen it happen.
It’s cognitively difficult to separate generalities from specifics when it comes to problems like this. Whenever some reporter gets caught making up a story or a national icon of journalism like Dan Rather lets his agenda make a sucker of him, I cringe. Anything that erodes faith in “the media” affects our work here. None of us are judged solely on our own merits and failings; people’s perceptions are shaped by what they see on the state, national and international level.
Virtually every institution in our society has somewhere at some time given us reason to distrust it — from Wall Street to the White House, from the corridors of the Pentagon to the doors of the church, from the school house to city hall.
But without some level of trust, it’s impossible to get anything done. And we’re seeing the results of that everywhere. I honestly don’t know how we get out of this morass, locally or across the nation.
Jim Cornelius, Editor
The council has been high-centered on enacting a water rate increase and new water rate structure for nine months. Around and around and around, no resolution (well, maybe a glimmer of the beginning of a resolution after Thursday’s workshop). This is only the latest in a litany of issues that have bogged the city down over the past couple of years.
Why is it like this? Why is it so hard to get things done?
There are obvious disagreements and personality conflicts on the council, but that kind of thing doesn’t have to create dysfunction — it could make a board more dynamic. There’s something deeper and more fundamental at play here, something that is bigger than Sisters and our particular issues.
I think it’s about trust.
David Asson argued Thursday morning for a five year business plan based on worst-case scenarios — usage (and therefore revenue) declines or stays flat, expenses go up, etc. This approach makes sense — if you trust that if the worst-case scenario doesn’t develop, you won’t spend the money and won’t enact the associated rate increases. That’s where things start falling apart.
Most folks assume that if a government entity has the opportunity to gain revenue through fees or taxes, it will take it, no matter what. Expecting government to refrain from enacting a tax increase or a rate hike is like expecting a lion to refrain from eating a zebra ’cause it had zebra last week and there’s still leftovers in the fridge. And we expect that that government entity will fight tooth and nail to avoid cutting costs, especially personnel costs.
Those assumptions exist regardless of how responsible local government has or has not been in managing its taxpayers’ money. What looks like prudent management to some looks suspicious to many others — because we have become accustomed to thinking that government is an alien, voracious entity that wants to eat our wallet and our groceries.
And we know we’re right to be suspicious, because we’ve seen it happen.
It’s cognitively difficult to separate generalities from specifics when it comes to problems like this. Whenever some reporter gets caught making up a story or a national icon of journalism like Dan Rather lets his agenda make a sucker of him, I cringe. Anything that erodes faith in “the media” affects our work here. None of us are judged solely on our own merits and failings; people’s perceptions are shaped by what they see on the state, national and international level.
Virtually every institution in our society has somewhere at some time given us reason to distrust it — from Wall Street to the White House, from the corridors of the Pentagon to the doors of the church, from the school house to city hall.
But without some level of trust, it’s impossible to get anything done. And we’re seeing the results of that everywhere. I honestly don’t know how we get out of this morass, locally or across the nation.
Jim Cornelius, Editor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
