FollowingChapters: AntiPolicy
This FollowingChapters Story describes what inevitably occurs as a result of inflicting AntiPolicy on any complex system. AntiPolicy reliably produces only one result, the opposite of whatever it might espouse.
"They are their own worst enemies …"
Our incumbent holds no affirmative policy positions. I could insist that he holds no policy positions because those he has, or those he holds in lieu of holding affirmative policy positions, tend to be negative. He seems to be opposed to damned nearly everything, especially anything that even distantly hints at decency. This outlook places him and his anti-administration in a unique position, for they exclusively promote negative space outcomes. Try to envision a result should any of his anti-positions somehow come to fruition, and you will find yourself unable to agree with anybody on how those results will manifest. Each seems to project a strong sense of tangibility until and unless one tries to render them tangible. Asking the innocent question, "And if you achieved that, what would you have?" throws his spokespersons into inescapable disarray.
From a wannabe strong man, negative, AntiPolicy positions tend to sound powerful, like any espoused by any odd Old Testament God. In practice, these proclamations turn out to be 99 and 99/100ths percent bluster, if not a little more, for the practical—dare I say tangible?—result could be anything but, anything but that which defines the position. Taking an apparently firm stand against immigration, for instance, says nothing about how that AntiPolicy position might manifest in practice. It might justify the most heinous responses or the most toothless, anything as long as it’s not in any way immigration, whatever that might mean.
These anti-positions leave nothing but latitude when it comes to implementation. Anything might be identified as necessary to achieve any AntiPolicy position. Curiously, though, whatever tactic might be adopted, it will tend to produce the opposite of its intended result, whatever that might have been. Steps employed to support an AntiPolicy position opposing immigration most often result in increasing immigration numbers. This feature of AntiPolicy positions was well known to the Ancient Greeks, who even coined a nearly unpronounceable term to represent its presence: Enantidromy, the tendency of things, taken to extremes, to become their opposite.
Complex systems tend to be homeostatic, self-regulating. Forceful attempts to disrupt the practiced patterns of such systems tend to produce equally or even more forceful backlashes. The strident reformer produces the same effect as the strident opposer; each encourages their target system to defend itself against their intrusions. So-called progress might seem initially inevitable, as overwhelming force or public support appears to favor success, but the unavoidable excesses ultimately backfire. What sure seemed surefire comes into question over time. The opposed system seems to remember its prior purpose and actions as if held in some muscle memory or DNA. Our ignorant incumbent never pretended to be a systems thinker, so he was always most adept at undermining his stated intentions without ever realizing that he was the one undermining them. His grudges seem exclusively self-inflicted, a perspective that is most certainly lost on him and his hapless lackeys. They actively ensure democracy's continuance with their unreasoning vehemence. They are their own worst enemies, thank heavens, and our unwitting allies!
©2025 by David A. Schmaltz - all rights reserved