Posted on Dec 10, 2019
The Peter Principle: Why Things Always Go Wrong: Dr. Laurence J Peter, Raymond Hull:...
739
18
9
7
7
0
https://www.amazon.com/Peter-Principle-Things-Always-Wrong/dp/ [login to see] /ref=sr_1_2?keywords=peter+principle&qid= [login to see] &sr=8-2
Is it time to rekindle interest in the Peter Principle? I think so.
Peter Principle
[ˈpēdər ˈprinsəpəl]
NOUN
the principle that members of a hierarchy are promoted until they reach the level at which they are no longer competent.
The level of incompetence in government has reached epic proportions and the bureaucrats are only too willing to pick up the slack which is why we have the Administrative State performing all three functions that the Constitution separated between the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches.
The Peter Principle is at work in our schools and colleges where students are taught what to think rather than how to think.
And let's not forget the military. I think there is no finer example of this than General Mattis who was promoted from general, for which he was eminently competent, to Secretary of Defense, a step too far.
Is it time to rekindle interest in the Peter Principle? I think so.
Peter Principle
[ˈpēdər ˈprinsəpəl]
NOUN
the principle that members of a hierarchy are promoted until they reach the level at which they are no longer competent.
The level of incompetence in government has reached epic proportions and the bureaucrats are only too willing to pick up the slack which is why we have the Administrative State performing all three functions that the Constitution separated between the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches.
The Peter Principle is at work in our schools and colleges where students are taught what to think rather than how to think.
And let's not forget the military. I think there is no finer example of this than General Mattis who was promoted from general, for which he was eminently competent, to Secretary of Defense, a step too far.
The Peter Principle: Why Things Always Go Wrong: Dr. Laurence J Peter, Raymond Hull:...
Posted from amazon.comPosted in these groups: 
Competence
Competence
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
3
3
0
CPT Jack Durish I don't see it changing in the near future, if anything I believe it's continuing to get worse with individuals being place in positions that far above their normal pay grade, if you know what I mean. What is the answer? Total failure of the Government - not going to happen. A thrid World War that will bring back some brain power and unique leaders like we had in the past? Don't know - possible? Your thoughts on where we go from here or where you think the "Peter Principle" will take this country iare welcome?
(3)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
My thoughts? The Peter Principle has been at work since long before it was named the Peter Principle. Monarchs, church prelates, war lords, all succeeded or were summarily disposed of. The advent of civilization (society run by civilians) protected the incompetent. Civilization drove off or killed nature's predators, and the weak were allowed to live. No, I don't want to see an end to civilization. What I think is needed is for civilization to address this issue or it will fall of its own accord
(0)
(0)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
CPT Jack Durish - I don't think it will happen in our lifetime Jack because of the media and the generations of people that don't really understand how to organize a movement (peacefully with hope) that will clean out the incompetence brother. Most of these people that are voting nowadays don't really even know what they're voting for or who! The days of over throwing a government in this time and age would never be organized either - we're a little more civilized than the "dark ages." In addition, we don;t have a society with the "guts" to really organize and make that kind of change! I really don't know what to expect in the next 25 years, but I'm sure my Flag will be Folded well before any of that takes place brother!
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
You're correct as usual CPT Jack Durish And it's gone so far we need a new level or principle
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
Here's my $.02
Back in the day, it wasn't uncommon for "career" officers to remain in a relatively "low" rank for quite some time. One of the relative "luxuries" of a smaller force is that individuals tend to become "indispensable" in their current role...with no real need to "get out of the way" for those coming up behind them, or replace those ahead of them. The whole rank of "lieutenant commander" evolved from "lieutenant commanding" precisely because many 18th and 19th Century naval officers went from "Passed Midshipman" (essentially ensign) to Lieutenant...and stayed there for a LONG time before their next promotion; Captain. My research indicates it was fairly common in the armies of both Great Britain and the USA for the rank of Captain to be a virtual brick wall... from which one only progressed during wartime, or other emergencies. Given that promotions were also "purchased" back then... there's a whole other layer to the question of competency and rank, vs. experience.
Politically, the problem is, in my opinion...more complex than that.
Politicians in the USA are (to my mind) little more than "trained actors". The real power behind them is found in the lobbies, the special interests, and (as you accurately indicate) the administrators who "run" everything. The whole thing is like a highly orchestrated piece of theater where the "audience" (i.e., the American people) are only shown what's happening on this side of the curtain. When any one of these "actors" flubbs their lines... or gets "off script"; the whole machinery starts to be exposed, and often..."they" probably don't want us to get too good a look.
Back in the day, it wasn't uncommon for "career" officers to remain in a relatively "low" rank for quite some time. One of the relative "luxuries" of a smaller force is that individuals tend to become "indispensable" in their current role...with no real need to "get out of the way" for those coming up behind them, or replace those ahead of them. The whole rank of "lieutenant commander" evolved from "lieutenant commanding" precisely because many 18th and 19th Century naval officers went from "Passed Midshipman" (essentially ensign) to Lieutenant...and stayed there for a LONG time before their next promotion; Captain. My research indicates it was fairly common in the armies of both Great Britain and the USA for the rank of Captain to be a virtual brick wall... from which one only progressed during wartime, or other emergencies. Given that promotions were also "purchased" back then... there's a whole other layer to the question of competency and rank, vs. experience.
Politically, the problem is, in my opinion...more complex than that.
Politicians in the USA are (to my mind) little more than "trained actors". The real power behind them is found in the lobbies, the special interests, and (as you accurately indicate) the administrators who "run" everything. The whole thing is like a highly orchestrated piece of theater where the "audience" (i.e., the American people) are only shown what's happening on this side of the curtain. When any one of these "actors" flubbs their lines... or gets "off script"; the whole machinery starts to be exposed, and often..."they" probably don't want us to get too good a look.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google