There’s this passage in Systemantics which talks about “dual bureaucracy” in ancient Egyptian organisations (presumably public office).
It sounds like an excellent idea, but I cannot find any sources.
Does anyone know if it is true, and of any research or articles which explain it in more detail?
@samir I tend to think about this type of problem a lot when I'm idle.
The thing that keeps spinning in my mind is always something-something-sortition. But mostly applied in ways to highten the quality of political process rather than "removing parasitic Systems-people".
@plc Why not both!?
Have you seen this article by @DRMacIver on voting?
https://www.drmaciver.com/2013/09/towards-a-more-perfect-democracy/
Ooh, that is a very nice and clear exposition. I think time had erased the distinction between sortition and random ballot in my mind.
But how would you use e.g. a random ballot to weed out "parasitic systems people"? Oftentimes those are appointed professionally, and their roles exist because "the system" itself perceives a need for them. (not saying it couldn't be a component, just that it needs more structure)
One thing I think could bring much good with it would be to assign a cost to the complexity of laws (somehow). Laws that are too complex to interpret (both for the populace and administrators) are a curse (EU and DK have their fair share for what I know) - they are at of risk selective enforcement and just maladptive. And probably reducing that could reduce the need for some "systems people" too.
samir, a terminally deprecated method
plc