The lesson that I see in the whole Jeff Gannon thing is not to run in the aristocracy crowd. Ask yourself this question, if Jeff Gannon was just a regular guy writing articles about the government, why shouldn't he get a press pass? Five days into it or not, that's ok. Right?
Digression: Aristocracy is not quite the right word here. Since that implies breeding. I suppose theocracy might be closer. But in this case it's not quite religious. Though we could call neo-con fascist fervor as a sort of religion.
He was dumped like a hot potato, and dissed by his fellow conservatives because the neo-con movement is an aristocracy. It's about who you are, and not what you have done. Listen to Bush when he makes nominations, he says that these are good people. It's never about what they have done or what qualifications they may have. It's about their perceived worth as individuals. Republicans like the President because he is a good man with a strong heart. Never mind the fact that what he actually does is disastrous.
Rising through the aristocracy cuts both ways. It opens up door for people who are ideologically in-line with the current movement. But it also shuts the doors just as quickly when people, like Gannon, are perceived as not being team players. In this case I think the porn web sites probably did him in. Frankly, I don't have a problem with the porn web sites. It shows some initiative.
What you want is a meritocracy, where you are judged on what you have done and not some perception of who you are. Yes, it's harder to get ahead that way because you actually have to do stuff. But once you are there nobody can take it away. Would they take away Helen Thomas' press pass if she had a porn website? Nope. Because she has earned the right to be there.
If you run with the perception crowd the rise can be meteoric and so can the fall. Best to pay your dues in a system that rewards hard work and achievement.
Posted by jherr at February 16, 2005 08:16 AMwhere does such a system exist?
Posted by: eigga49 at February 16, 2005 12:25 PMThere is no perfect version of a meritocracy. It's a matter of degrees. Certainly the Clinton system was for more of a meritocracy. Candidates actually had qualifications in fields relating to what they would be doing. It's a strange thing, I know, but sometimes real world experience in a job helps you do a job.
Imagine if NASA were run the way Bush runs the White House? All of the astronauts would go to church five times a week but no nothing about science. Oh, wait, maybe that's a good thing from the red state perspective. All that silly science gets in the way of belief in the one true faith.
I mean, come on, Condi Rice? What the hell are her qualifications for Secretary of State? She's friendly? People like her? What is that? Has she ever been a diplomat? No. Can she communicate? No. Have you heard her press conferences. Sheesh. When she does manage to create coherent sentences they are all about how evil Iran is. Too much crayon time with Giblets.
Posted by: jherr at February 16, 2005 03:16 PMThanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)