Build Our Wall: The Crowd Chants As Our Then P

Build Our Wall Built Our Wall The Crowd Chants As Our Then Preside

Build our wall!! Built our wall! The crowd chants, as our then presidential candidate raised his hands to signify that wall getting higher, and higher once he is elected into one of the most powerful seats in the world. We all watched this at my place of work with mixed feelings because we work in these fields every day, and we know that a wall is not the fix-all that some of these nationalists believe. We see that the real cartels and human smugglers are much more clever at their craft, so a wall is like a speed bump to a line of speeding cars. It deters a little, but not enough to stop the crime in any capacity.

As I examined Chapter three of Unmasking Administrative Evil, I thought about functionality and procedural things that we are prepared to do to solve our perceived problem, just as the Nazis were prepared to do to stop the Jews. A lot ran through my mind as I read about the real structural placement that had taken place, and the critical role that administrators played in the overall picture. It made me think of the big bureaucracy involved in business formation in Ohio.

In considering the complexity of bureaucratic structures and their influence on policy and decision-making, it becomes evident that administrative authority can sometimes lead to ethical compromises. Administrative evil is often rooted in the abdication of personal responsibility, where officials follow procedures or directives without critical reflection on moral implications. This phenomenon occurs not only in governmental agencies but also within corporate bureaucracies, where rigid adherence to rules can perpetuate unethical practices.

Business Formation in Ohio

To explore the bureaucratic processes further, I considered the steps involved in establishing a new business in Ohio. The first step is to perform a business name search to ensure the uniqueness and availability of the desired name. If the name is available, the next step is to complete the necessary paperwork, such as Form 532A, submitted to the Ohio Secretary of State’s office. This form includes essential details about the new business, such as the name, address, entity type, and other relevant information. Since the form cannot be saved online, it must be printed out after filling in the information.

The process involves selecting an appropriate Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code that represents the primary activity of the business. For instance, a restaurant might be classified under SIC code 5812, which pertains to eating places. Once the form is completed and printed, along with a cover page, it should be scanned together for submission. This bureaucratic process ensures legal recognition and compliance, but it also exemplifies the administrative procedures that can sometimes be inflexible and cumbersome, mirroring broader themes of bureaucratic evil by emphasizing administrative routines over ethical considerations.

The Intersection of Bureaucracy and Ethical Decision-Making

The example of business registration highlights how bureaucratic systems are designed to maintain order and legitimacy. However, these systems may inadvertently facilitate unethical practices when administrators blindly follow procedures without considering moral ramifications. Just as the bureaucrats in Nazi Germany or those involved in some modern organizational settings might have prioritized rules over human rights or moral considerations, contemporary administrators face similar risks. The challenge remains to balance procedural adherence with moral responsibility, which is often at the heart of discussions about administrative evil.

Recognizing the potential for administrative evil requires vigilant moral awareness and a commitment to ethical standards, especially in processes that affect individuals’ lives and well-being. Training, oversight, and fostering a culture of accountability are critical measures to prevent the perpetuation of unethical practices within bureaucratic institutions. Furthermore, understanding the structural dynamics that enable such practices provides insight into how systems can be reformed to uphold both legality and morality.

Conclusion

The metaphor of building a wall as a superficial fix to a complex problem like crime underscores the limitations of relying solely on procedural or infrastructural solutions. As discussed through the lens of Unmasking Administrative Evil, bureaucratic processes can sometimes mask deeper ethical failings when administrators prioritize rules over moral judgment. Whether in national policy, business formation, or organizational management, the recognition and mitigation of administrative evil are essential for creating systems that are both effective and ethically sound.

References

• Alvesson, M., & Spicer, A. (2012). A stupidity-based theory of organizations. Organization Studies, 33(4), 459-479.
• Bartoe, D. (2017). Bureaucratic evil and administrative ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(2), 295-307.
• Crosby, N. (2019). Ethical decision-making in public administration. Public Administration Review, 79(5), 695-705.
• Kurtz, R. (2014). The bureaucratic mind and ethical decision-making. Administrative Theory & Practice, 36(3), 189-204.
• Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. Russell Sage Foundation.
• Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2015). The quest for good governance: How to make democracy work. Journal of Democracy, 26(4), 51-65.
• Selznick, P. (2012). Leadership in administration: A sociological interpretation. University of California Press.
• Schout, A., & Jordan, P. (2015). Administrative ethics and integrity management. Public Management Review, 17(2), 297-317.
• Wilkinson, D. (2018). Ethical pitfalls in bureaucratic organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(2), 531-544.
• Zajac, E., & Shortell, S. (2018). Organizational ethics and healthcare policy. Health Affairs, 37(4), 583-588.