You are here
The Kingdom of Individuals V: Citizens as Irritants
Monday, September 6th, 2010
Robert Wechsler
In order to develop their identities, and cement the loyalties of their members, organizations tend to contrast themselves with other organizations, and with those they deal with, whether they are clients, customers, or citizens. Bailey wrote, “If contact with outsiders is experienced as painful and involves rejection, organizational solidarity is likely to be enhanced." In other words, in the local government context, seeing citizens as irritants creates solidarity.
This view of the public takes several forms. Locals are a pain to deal with on a daily basis, complaining about services, assessments, and the like, wanting everything right away, treating employees like servants. Local government employees feel underpaid, and can blame locals for not wanting to pay more taxes. Government officials are constantly harassed by opinionated locals, especially those who care only about keeping taxes down or keeping things out of their neighborhood. Working transparently makes everything worse. And then there are elections, where you have to go hat in hand to the very people who make your life miserable.
No wonder so many government officials and employees come to despise the very public whose interest they are supposed to put first. This is a powerful element in a local government's ethical environment.
But unethical conduct doesn't necessarily follow from irritating, ignorant, cheap, or demanding citizens. Every business and profession is plagued by those one has to work for and with. Government is no different . . . except for the nature of our democracy.
And the fact that a lawyer can dump a client, a business can stop selling to a store, but government officials are stuck with the public. Or are they? The logical conclusion of officials' desire to keep the public out of its hair is the founding of cities such as Vernon, California, where there are almost no citizens to hold the government back (see my first blog post on Vernon).
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
This view of the public takes several forms. Locals are a pain to deal with on a daily basis, complaining about services, assessments, and the like, wanting everything right away, treating employees like servants. Local government employees feel underpaid, and can blame locals for not wanting to pay more taxes. Government officials are constantly harassed by opinionated locals, especially those who care only about keeping taxes down or keeping things out of their neighborhood. Working transparently makes everything worse. And then there are elections, where you have to go hat in hand to the very people who make your life miserable.
No wonder so many government officials and employees come to despise the very public whose interest they are supposed to put first. This is a powerful element in a local government's ethical environment.
But unethical conduct doesn't necessarily follow from irritating, ignorant, cheap, or demanding citizens. Every business and profession is plagued by those one has to work for and with. Government is no different . . . except for the nature of our democracy.
And the fact that a lawyer can dump a client, a business can stop selling to a store, but government officials are stuck with the public. Or are they? The logical conclusion of officials' desire to keep the public out of its hair is the founding of cities such as Vernon, California, where there are almost no citizens to hold the government back (see my first blog post on Vernon).
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
