A friend of mine who works in the intelligence community brought this jewel to my attention. In January 1944, the Office of Strategic Services created a secret document entitled “Simple Sabotage Field Manual” (available here as a free audio book) to assist operatives in disrupting the Axis war effort. It contains the expected stuff about starting fires and shorting electrical systems. But the most enlightening stuff comes at pages 28-31, in a section entitled “General Interference with Organizations and Production.” There, we learn that our secret weapon against the Nazi war machine was . . . bureaucracy. Note these ingenious plots:
(a) Organizations and Conferences
(1) Insist on doing everything through “channels.” Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions.
* * *
(3) When possible, refer all matters to committees, for “further study and consideration.” Attempt to make the committees as large as possible–never less than five.
(4) Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible.
(5) Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions.
(6) Refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to re-open the question of the advisability of that decision.
(7) Advocate “caution.” Be “reasonable” and urge your fellow-conferees to be “reasonable” and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on.
(8) Be worried about the propriety of any decision–raise the question of whether such action as is contemplated lies within the jurisdiction of the group or whether it might conflict with the policy of some higher echelon.
More nuggets after the jump.
In other words, the war would have ended a year earlier if we could have just parachuted the Executive Secretariat of some executive agencies behind enemy lines in 1942. But probably the paperwork wasn’t in order.
I don’t want to oversell the point that the Manual basically recommended being bureaucratic; there are parts of the Manual that advocate conduct that bureaucracies do not actually encourage, such as “Work slowly,” “Act stupid,” “Cry and sob hysterically at every occasion,” and my personal favorite, “Be as irritable and quarrelsome as possible without getting yourself into trouble.” But it is at least mildly amusing that such readily identifiable bureaucratic behavior as “insist[ing] on doing everything through ‘channels’” used to be regarded as destructive behavior.
This apparently has been the source of mirth among CIA types for two years. Now you can share the comedy secrets of our intelligence services.
Some other good tidbits:
(b) Managers and Supervisors
(1) Demand written orders.
* * *
(7) Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products; send back for refinishing those which have the least flaw. . . .
* * *
(10) To lower morale and with it, production, be pleasant to inefficient workers; give them undeserved promotions. Discriminate against efficient workers; complain unjustly about their work.
(11) Hold conferences when there is more critical work to be done.
(12) Multiply paper work in plausible ways. Start duplicate files.
(13) Multiply the procedures and clearances involved in issuing instructions, pay checks, and so on. See that three people have to approve everything where one would do.
(14) Apply all regulations to the last letter.
Tom Ault says:
So a plausible alternate character interpretation for Dilbert’s pointy-haired boss is that he’s a deep cover agent for a terrorist organization bent on destroying our way of life rather than an idiotic diddlyboob promoted far beyond his competence.
June 1, 2010, 10:44 amFront Porch Philosopher says:
Actually, I believe that there was a Reich’s Ministry for Production, that was so paper and rule bound, that by 1943, it was impossible to start any new weapons system or change in process in Nazi Germany.
One evening they were hit – as a legitimate target, by the RAF Bomber Command and utterly destroyed. As a result of their destruction, despite both day and night bombing, production of strategic materials continued to climb right up to the end of the war.
June 1, 2010, 10:45 amJKB says:
Another one, not yet ripe in 1943, is to require non-job-related mandatory annual training in such areas as diversity, sexual harassment, ethnic sensibilities, etc. Especially as critical deadlines approach. Use outside consultants to provide training. Put the whole requirement under a cost sink department like HR. Tie HR performance bonuses to 100% compliance goal.
June 1, 2010, 11:27 amValentino Rossi says:
public education in a nutshell
June 1, 2010, 11:32 amBarb says:
There must be a balance between this and the preferred “committee of one.” Accountability ain’t all bad –but bureaucracy is why our gov’t and healthcare are so expensive.
My husband tells about the new way to fine nursing homes –every pain med must have a doc’s signed order –when before, he could call it in. If they don’t have that signed order and they give the meds, the gov’t will fine them. So shouldn’t the doc be able to CHARGE MORE for every signature on hospital and nursing home orders –since he has to make a TRIP and take an hour to get it done? I remember some employee put her sandwich on the lab counter in a doc’s office –(dangerous for her, mostly, I’d think –but in it’s wrapper) and the doc. in a nearby suburb here was fined $20,000 because one of those gov’t inspectors saw the sandwich. Couldn’t just fine $100 and warn them all –no, had to steal the doctor’s earnings for this rule infraction.
For a while, the gov’t said docs had to sign with their whole name –not just initials or their “mark” –every test result before it would be filed. They were afraid the doc might pay someone else to review and initial their tests, separating the abnormal results from the normals. They wanted to make sure the doc saw every test. Gov’t –our protectors! I don’t know how they are doing now with computer system.
June 1, 2010, 11:33 amFub says:
One bit of language trivia buried in the document: the word “quisling” in lower case, indicating a generic term.
Vidkun Quisling had only been Minister-President for a couple years when the manual was published. Perhaps some linguists could shed light on whether the transition from proper name to generic term usually happens so quickly.
June 1, 2010, 11:35 amxx says:
Fub the word was consciously created by the London Times, so it entered the lexicon in lowercase.
June 1, 2010, 11:51 amBarb says:
Speaking of public ed –why is it every school has to have a teacher’s conference in a banquet room with a meal in order to “educate” about STD’s or drugs or other life skills courses –in order to SELL the staff an overpriced, unnecessary curriculum that insults the intelligence of students AND teachers –by putting kids through “decision making activities” and how to give “warm fuzzies” to build self-esteem. We do better in Sunday School with lessons on the importance of obedience, consequences of sin, and The Golden Rule.
I don’t need a curriculum to teach kids the dangers of drugs and pre-marital sex. Some visual aids would be nice or a good film –hard to find. When you hire a health teacher or school counselors, why don’t they know how to teach this stuff without buying “project Charlie.” Why isn’t there enough in the text books?
Our board rejected the latter Minnesota program when we noticed the evaluator they hired said the kids who went through the program were no better prepared to make right decisions/healthy decisions than the ones who didn’t go through the program. The achilles’ tendon: they “sophisticated the ignorant” at all ages about different drugs and had them pretending to drink alcohol (pouring it in the plant or the toilet were the non-directed choices of the students in their brainstorming phase of decision-making) in order to stay popular –since kids are weak in the face of peer pressure. It was abysmal!! Teachers were supposed to be “non-directive” in the brainstorming sessions by students. And our board spent money putting a few teachers through the training –until the women on the board –3–studied the curriculum and said, “this is junk!”
They actually had 3rd or 4th graders whirl around to get dizzy (that’s fun) and said that’s what “uppers” do –make you “high.” And then they rested their heads at their desks to demonstrate “downers.”
June 1, 2010, 11:51 amWas that necessary or helpful? Or did they actually stimulate more curiosity about drug use? And give the kids the idea (stated) that “only you can decide what’s right for you.” Empowering students away from the respect for educated and parental and religious authority. NOT the school’s job! NOT HELPFUL! But they reasoned (if you could call it that) that kids want to rebel against authority naturally so your program should seem very non-authoritative –empowering them to be their own bosses while SEEMING to yield to peer pressure without actually doing it–how to be safe and healthy without taking a stand! or risking offense to the peer group leadership. that idea certainly has its limits! What ever happened to the courage to be and do right –when all else are losing their heads?
mary jane says:
(17a.) Provide employees with minimum performance standards.
(17b.) Tell employees who take initiative or do extra work to stop “rocking the boat” for the others; that the minimum standards are also the maximum.
True story, my experience working for the City of Austin years ago.
June 1, 2010, 11:58 amFub says:
Thanks. I’d not heard that bit of linguistic history.
June 1, 2010, 12:03 pmJohn Burgess says:
Front Porch Philosopher: It must have been some other ministry. The Ministry of Armaments and War Production, under Albert Speer, was incredibly competent. It managed to increase production, as late as 1944, to their highest levels.
Of course he did this by flattening the bureaucracy of that ministry, so your point is still on target.
June 1, 2010, 12:21 pmRandy says:
This, of course, is exactly how most non-profits also operate. Which is why I’ve stopped going to any of these sorts of meeting.
June 1, 2010, 12:29 pmMalvolio says:
No, not the school’s job, but of all the places the school over-reaches, that is the most helpful.
Yes, only you can decide what’s right for you. All the other drug messages — from both sides — are nonsense.
June 1, 2010, 12:41 pmepeeist says:
Also – I don’t know if this is the case here – I have some recollection of having once read about some words like “nazi” deliberately being used in lowercase to show disrespect, so even if “Quisling” were grammatically correct, “quisling” would be preferred?
June 1, 2010, 12:41 pmVlad Konings says:
Front Porch Watcher,
You kind of beat me to it. The Reich administration was already so bureaucratic that anything Allied operatives might have done was lost in the noise.
John Burgess,
Yours is the conventional wisdom, but it views Speer as reported by … Speer. Adam Tooze has done a recent reanalysis of the Reich economy, The Wages of Destruction, that reaches some very different conclusions. Speer did some effective things, but mostly he took credit for stuff that was already in the works when he took over production, plus some masterful spin to inflate the numbers. Tooze’s book is highly recommended.
June 1, 2010, 12:58 pmOur secret weapon for sabotaging the Nazis | Junior Ganymede says:
[...] Bureaucracy. [...]
June 1, 2010, 1:05 pmgeokstr says:
Randy, I’m not certain you can limit this counter-productive bureaucratic behavior to non-profits, or even to government (the ultimate non-profit). I spent 30 years in middle management of major corporations and the larger, more successful they get, the more they look and act like little governments instead of for-profits. Size may get you some economies of scale, but you then give a lot of it back to bureaucracies of scale.
June 1, 2010, 1:05 pmJRL says:
P.10 – Plug the toilets!
June 1, 2010, 2:01 pmDan Weber says:
I’m pretty sure I worked with people who followed these rules. Now I know what they were up to!
June 1, 2010, 2:03 pmEric Rasmusen says:
Very good!
I think I’ve heard it claimed, re the comment that the Ministry was killed and replaced by better, that German war production climbed to a large extent due to one man: Albert Speer. He was Hitler’s architect, but very smart, and got promoted to being production czar, where he did much better than the professionals and the party hacks. We should have aimed to assassinate him. (He claims in his autobio that he himself thought about assassinating Hitler but was too chicken. If so, he was the worst of both worlds— too smart to be a good Nazi, too timid to be a bad Nazi.)
June 1, 2010, 2:42 pmBruce Hayden says:
I know you were being cynical, but the reality, I think, is that this is what happens to bureaucracies, and how bureaucrats get ahead. They don’t advance by taking chances, and change is the enemy of a statist bureaucracy.
June 1, 2010, 2:48 pmjpg says:
geokstr’s right: even for-profits operate this way. After all, Dilbert works for a tech company, not the government.
As for public schools: who’s doing the selling of curricula? Who’s keeping the gates? Clearly not Barb or the school board her neighbors, if not she, voted in.
June 1, 2010, 3:07 pmBill Twist says:
Ha! Unions as sabotage!
June 1, 2010, 3:12 pmrequired says:
I’m thinking of printing part (11) out and using it as a checklist. It is too long for a plaque unfortunately. But what a great gift – use this handy checklist to see if the OSS has infiltrated your company with saboteurs.
I’ve encountered everything from (11) and (12) except (11)(c)(2) prolong correspondence with government bureaus, guess I’ve never encountered any saboteur dedicated enough to do that. I’ve encountered management consultants who have recommended some of these techniques (cough***Just-In-Time ordering parts which are made once every two years***cough), I wonder now if they were engaged in some form of sabotage.
June 1, 2010, 3:27 pmJoseph Slater says:
Reminds me of faculty meetings. . . .
June 1, 2010, 3:55 pmRINO in Name Only says:
You sure about that?
June 1, 2010, 5:06 pmDavid says:
Really, these suggestions are simply the bureaucratic equivalent of what used to be called a “work-to-rule strike,” also colloquially known as a “slowdown.”
June 1, 2010, 6:03 pmDesiderius says:
“what used to be called a “work-to-rule strike,””
How do we get the UAW to call it off already now that we own their company?
June 1, 2010, 6:36 pmDan Weber says:
The sad thing is that the worst place I encountered this was at a very small company. The most destructive forces to the company were co-founders. It was like the viciousness of university politics, precisely because the stakes were so small.
I believe in the free market, but that doesn’t mean that individual companies are necessarily efficient. They all have stupid things they do, and the free market at least filters out the ones whose stupidity outstrips the surplus they create.
June 1, 2010, 6:52 pmDjDiverDan says:
I had a Legal Secretary several years ago who, I’m fairly certain, followed every one of these rules. The good news – she pushed me to becoming self-sufficient, with Voice Recognition Software, and more competent with all the software I now use every day, so I no longer employ any legal secretary. The crying and sobbing was REALLY annoying. I finally broke down & fired her right in the middle of a sobfest – told her to go home & cry about being unemployed.
June 1, 2010, 7:14 pmMalvolio says:
That’s why companies that figure out how to move fast (or at least faster than their competitors) despite being large (Wal*Mart, Microsoft) become juggernauts.
June 1, 2010, 9:16 pmBama 1L says:
Well, it’s either that or “I need to talk to you about your flair.”
June 1, 2010, 10:16 pmSabotage through bureaucracy « Entitled to an Opinion says:
[...] There’s a decent chance you’ve heard about this elsewhere, but I can’t resist linking it. [...]
June 2, 2010, 12:15 amBarb says:
I suppose school counselors were solicited to buy Project Charlie, a life-skills course for middle-schools/jr highs. they brought it to us for our rubber stamp–and we shocked NW Ohio by not giving it. Our board did keep the gates –did look at curricula –and did have a curriculum committee –and knew worthless material when we saw it and voted it out before purchase. But we took the heat for actually doing what responsible parents want a board to do –something besides rubber stamp everything put before us.
The Ohio School Board Administrators send their boards to Ohio School Board Ass’n conventions and seminars. While there we are told what we can and cannot do as board members –and basically we are not to “rock the boat.” It seemed our job was to keep the public calm and prevent any bad publicity. We are told we have no voice as individuals but only speak as a board from board decisions. We had more clout as individual parents than as muzzled board members –however, there were 3 of us moms on the board who retained our obligation to be representatives of parents and taxpayers. We didn’t just let the administration do all the decision making –we thought about policy on sensitive issues –and looked at new curriculum –and heard parental concerns and had influence.
There’s nothing nonsensical about a “just say no” teaching. It’s not nonsense to quite honestly teach the value of a sound and sober mind, the ability to make good judgments, the blessing of being free of addictions. It IS nonsense to suggest to students that only they can decide what is right for them. Most of us parents wanted our kids to see right and wrong as we did. I’m glad my kids didn’t make babies out of wedlock or ever get into drinking or other drugs. I’m glad they knew it was wrong to sleep around. I’m glad none of them have divorced so far –and that they know how to love and forgive and be kind. I’m glad they believed I could teach them right from wrong –that they didn’t have to go out and experiment and make disastrous and costly mistakes in order to finally figure out what the best life skills and life choices are for optimum health and happiness –for responsible citizens.
June 2, 2010, 3:01 amGOP Stall Tactics as an Art Form « Submitted to a Candid World says:
[...] am Filed under: Author – ACG,Politics | Tags: Demagoguery, Republican Party The Volokh Conspiracy recalls a list of tactics promulgated by the OSS for use by allied agents in positions of responsibility [...]
June 2, 2010, 8:31 amRichard Riley says:
Remember it was the postwar Republican Congress that enacted the Administrative Procedure Act to impose bureaucratic regularity and judicial accountability on decisionmaking by the government agencies that so expanded during the New Deal and the war. So I wouldn’t blame “bureaucrats” (read “Democrats”) for administrative delay – it’s really the opponents of government decisionmaking that create the kind of delays and inefficiencies for which the agencies themselves are blamed.
June 2, 2010, 10:16 amDavid Cowhig says:
Very interesting. Reminds me of James Q. Wilson’s book “Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do And Why They Do It” He argued that many of the problems of bureaucracy are caused by contradictory and constantly changing goals imposed by leaders are the main problem and that flexibility and appropriate incentives to achieve goals can improve performance. He argued that many problems of bureaucracy are caused by workers trying to make things work despite rules that would make performance impossible if followed strictly. See the notes about this book on Amazon and elsewhere.
June 2, 2010, 10:21 amInstapundit » Blog Archive » HOW DILBERT won the war. “There, we learn that our secret weapon against the Nazi war machine was …. says:
[...] DILBERT won the war. “There, we learn that our secret weapon against the Nazi war machine was . . . [...]
June 2, 2010, 10:29 amStretch says:
I spent almost 17 years in the “Intel Community.”
June 2, 2010, 10:42 amI saw each and every one of those practices in action.
Yes, even the “Cry and sob hysterically at every occasion,” one.
I’ve been out for 10 years and dam* glad I am.
Joan of Argghh! says:
Russian dissidents used this tactic even while they were in jail in their own country. They insisted on bureaucratic rules being followed, loaded up the system with paperwork and made them cry uncle.
June 2, 2010, 10:54 amajacksonian says:
Are you sure this wasn’t taken from any current employee handbook in the US Government?
I got 11.3 – committees for everything – so many times while working in federal service I lost count. A committee on workplace safety, in each office (office size, typically 30), number of offices in a division about 32, number of divisions in a department about 6 and number of departments per directorate averaged 4. Committee size: 5 per office. Time spent up to 2 hours per week, then having a larger staff meeting once per week in which topics were discussed… this is all part of government ‘overhead’ of non-productive hours on the job. People think I’m joking when I say my agency was very good at only having 35% of our time taken up with non-productive overhead and that there were agencies going up to 65% of their time doing such.
This is not waste, fraud nor abuse, mind you, but doing as told by the bureaucracy as set up and designed by Congress. The office health committee finally got bundled into the safety committee, then those things got downsized in the 90′s, but only to see the various workplace efficiency groups and committees arise…
It was possible to get work done… but you had to learn how to avoid meetings.
June 2, 2010, 11:03 amgeokstr says:
When I was a kid, back in the fifties, I bought a little card with a pithy saying, thinking it was cute but not really understanding it yet. It said:
So it was obvious back then that people understood, even back when a billion here and a billion there still added up to real money, what bureaucracy was and how destructive it could be. And now we’ve got it to the nth degree. If God is a committee, Satan must be HIS boss.
June 2, 2010, 11:20 amLAG says:
I worked at NATO for two years. This is frightening in its accurate reflection of the way business is done there.
June 2, 2010, 11:38 amjld says:
Bureaucracy or not bureaucracy, Speer or not Speer, didn’t the Nazis managed to increase production, as late as 1944 in spite of being actually in the process of being defeated?
June 2, 2010, 11:41 amAnd didn’t Germany recovered quite well after the war?
There might be something to the German way…
Beth Donovan says:
Same thing happened to me at a large Telecommunications company in the 90′s – I was told to act dumb and to not help my co-workers, as my intelligence was making other workers feel inadequate.
June 2, 2010, 11:42 amForrest says:
Are you sure that you don’t have the “Union Approved” Bureaucratic Handbook?
June 2, 2010, 12:11 pmLessons on Bureaucracy « Insomniac memos says:
[...] By Carl Sanders How did we seek to sabotage the German war effort in WW2? The answer is simple: create and grow the bureaucracy. Here’s an example: (3) When possible, refer all matters to committees, for “further study [...]
June 2, 2010, 12:14 pmwuzzagrunt says:
Bureaucracies may not explicitly encourage that behavior but they frequently reward it. I could write a book….
June 2, 2010, 12:14 pmDensityDuck says:
Interesting to learn that the OSS invented concern trolling back in World War II!
June 2, 2010, 12:18 pmSecret proof « Growing with a brown thumb says:
[...] I have proof that they were all malicious in telling me [...]
June 2, 2010, 12:20 pmGideon7 says:
When interviewing job candidates I try to determine if they are process-oriented or results-oriented. A process-oriented person asks “How should it be done?” A results-oriented person asks “What should we be doing?”
A process mindset is okay in certain areas such as HR or safety (indeed it can be very important) but generally I look for results people. Unfortunately finding such people is hard, maybe 1 out of 10 candidates.
June 2, 2010, 12:58 pmSplunge says:
Adam Tooze has done a recent reanalysis of the Reich economy, The Wages of Destruction, that reaches some very different conclusions.
The best possible counter-argument to this is the fact that the Soviets wanted Speer executed at the close of the war. They were very familiar with his efficiency and wanted to be damn sure it was never again at the service of Germany.
June 2, 2010, 1:04 pmLina Inverse says:
Splunge: these would be the same Soviets whose window into Nazi Germany was so good they were surprised by Operation Barbarosa?
They wanted everyone in the Nazi leadership executed; including Speer was “nothing personal”.
June 2, 2010, 1:08 pmRoger the Shrubber says:
I read that in Speer’s book, but I’ve always thought it was complete crap. What do you think? I wonder if any historians have attempted to check out this claim.
June 2, 2010, 1:54 pm6-2-2010 | Drive Time Happy Hour says:
[...] Sabotage! Or How “Dilbert” Won The War [...]
June 2, 2010, 2:13 pmBob Hawkins says:
Germany did not totally mobilize its economy for war until 1943. Hitler was following the old practice of buying the people’s support with victories and spoils, while asking as little sacrifice as possible.
Goebbels was the one always pushing for total mobilization, since the need to convince the people — rather than just bribing them with expropriated wealth — would put his Propaganda Ministry on top. However, the other Ministries opposed it until matters got frightening. For example, after the invasion of Russia started, Goebbels wanted to run a “donate winter clothes to the army” campaign, but was denied. Such a campaign would suggest that the fighting would still be going on in winter…
June 2, 2010, 2:15 pmgasman says:
This little sabotage manual also cites the sugar in the gas tank trick. Was this the start of that myth or just a continuation of one that goes back to the first model T.
June 2, 2010, 2:49 pmBoth Mythbusters and Snopes suggest that the sugar is not an engine killer. Although I’m not about to find out what it does to my fuel pumps and filter.
Kev says:
The only good bureaucrat is an unemployed bureaucrat.
If we really wanted to save public funds, slashing the bureaucracy literally in half would be a good start. Those who were left would simply have to work harder (as should be expected of anyone being paid by tax money).
This would also, of course, require the outlawing of public-sector unions; advancement or retention of one’s job should be based on competence, not length of time on the job.
The unproductive class has had enough time to be in charge of too many things, and they’ve failed miserably. It’s time for the productive class to take over and kick the do-nothings to the curb.
June 2, 2010, 3:03 pmWhitehall says:
Odd, but this sounds like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s intentions for the nuclear power industry.
The newest intiative, pushed by Harry Reid’s former staffer – now chairman of the NRC – is “safety culture.”
What exactly that means is a mystery but I’ll bet it works out to be a lot like the recommendations above for sabotage of productive organizations.
June 2, 2010, 4:52 pmCatface says:
Do you think it’s possible that present-day corporations have bureaucratic saboteurs working in rival companies to disable competition?
I’m going to believe it is, on the principle that it’s too entertaining not to.
June 2, 2010, 5:27 pmNews Roundup June 2, 2010 « 1RedThread says:
[...] Now, this is interesting. Funny, too. …. we learn that our secret weapon against the Nazi war machine was . . . bureaucracy. Note these ingenious plots: [...]
June 2, 2010, 7:57 pmKorey Baudler says:
Electricity can be a rad tool when used properly.
June 3, 2010, 7:37 amstevethepatentguy says:
“Forget to provide paper in the toilets” (p. 10) is nothing out of bounds to these saboteurs?
June 3, 2010, 3:59 pmHow to bring evil down – Read Dilbert! | Save Capitalism says:
[...] Bring on the Dilbert-i-fication! Sabotage – Or how Dilbert won the war [...]
June 4, 2010, 2:14 amChris says:
Aren’t you worried that denizens of the unfit will miss the irony in the work and take it at face value—bringing the entire U.S. economy with them down their lurid gravy-train to Hell?!!!
June 4, 2010, 10:49 amafarrago» Blog Archive » this is war says:
[...] “Attempt to make the committees as large as possible–never less than five.” [...]
June 5, 2010, 6:09 amNeil Kandalgaonkar says:
When are we going to see the first war movie about the brave infiltrators who brought down the Nazis with their lethally verbose memoranda?
June 5, 2010, 8:44 pmPaul from Boston says:
No one here seems to have heard of “The Good Soldier Schweik”, the Czech satiric novel about WWI. From the description at Amazon of one translation
“The book’s central character is a quintessential, working-class citizen-soldier, often abused by the fates and the forces of the Austrian empire. In both civilian and military life, Svejk lives by his wits. His chief ploy is to appear witless to those in authority. In fact, he is fond of pointing out that he has been certified to be an imbecile by an official military medical commission. Consequently, he reasons, he cannot be held responsible for his sometimes questionable actions because he’s a certified nitwit!
Yet, Svejk is not a coward, nor is he indolent. He is drafted back into the army as cannon fodder to die for an Emperor he despises. His method of subverting the Austrian Empire is to carry out his orders to an absurd conclusion. His is an inspired resistance.”
June 6, 2010, 11:17 amI’m gonna throw a bunch of links at you, because I feel like it « OnParkStreet says:
[...] 2. “A friend of mine who works in the intelligence community brought this jewel to my attention. In January 1944, the Office of Strategic Services created a secret document entitled “Simple Sabotage Field Manual” (available here as a free audio book) to assist operatives in disrupting the Axis war effort. It contains the expected stuff about starting fires and shorting electrical systems. But the most enlightening stuff comes at pages 28–31, in a section entitled “General Interference with Organizations and Production.” There, we learn that our secret weapon against the Nazi war machine was . . . bureaucracy.” – The Volokh Conspiracy [...]
June 21, 2010, 6:56 pmAround the Mediverse: June 28, 2010 « The Notwithstanding Blog says:
[...] Hit & Run, on the other hand, shows us what vendors have to do in order to have their brownies approved by the Pentagon. I honestly thought it was a joke… I was wrong. This is the sort of thing that the OSS recommended to those agents infiltrating enemy governments. Seriously. [...]
June 28, 2010, 1:09 am