Officials have turned into a self-contained system

Today’s civil service acts like a remnant from a time when authority was equated with truthfulness with lifetime and hierarchy. While many states have long since proven that administration works without civil servants, in this country it is adhered to a system that is more reminiscent of feudal structures than modern responsibility. The officialshipHas become a memorial of standstill, a symbol of security without risk, routine without innovation and power without account. What once should ensure stability blocks progress today.

The persistence of the apparatus

Authorities and administrations are criss-crossed by a dense network of regulations, powers and automatisms that systematically prevents change. In this structure, civil servant status is not a guarantee of quality, but bulwark against dynamics. It does not protect the institution, but itself. Anyone who has ever made it into the circle is hardly ever held responsible, no matterwhich wrong decisions are made. There is a caste that is uncancellable, untouchable and often unteachable. This structure is no longer an expression of legal certainty, but of institutionalized inertia.

the excavation of the special status

The paradox is revealed: Civil service status is still justified with the claim of special responsibility, but central tasks have long been outsourced. Private companies take on sensitive activities on behalf of the state, from data analytics to operational secret service work. However, if security interests and sovereign functions are taken over by external actorscivil service loses its right to exist. The state itself has demonstrated that its own structures are no longer sufficient, which brings the myth of indispensable official authority to absurdity.

The erosion of state sovereignty

While the civil service remains untouchable, sensitive data of citizens are processed on foreign servers and fed into cross-border information systems. The state, which in theory should be guardian of privacy, shows dangerous negligence in practice. The administrations that watch over this data hardly react to criticism andpresent themselves as victims of technical necessities. In this way, responsibility becomes an endless passing on of responsibilities until no one is tangible. The state’s duty of care has become a facade, which governs convenience.

The abuse of confidential information

Even more frightening is that individual officials abuse these databases for private purposes. Cases are repeatedly known in which personal curiosity was more important than data protection and official discipline. But instead of sanctioning such violations with full severity, they are treated with forbearance. petty admonitions, internal information, symbolic punishments – these are the means of aApparatus that does not want to endanger its own infallibility. In doing so, he betrays the basic principle of public loyalty: that the state serves the citizen, not himself.

The myth of the impeccable servant

The image of the dutiful, unselfish official has long been a member of the legend. In reality, a culture of waving and shifting has established itself. Responsibility is delegated until it is no longer assigned to anyone. Paper is in demand where initiative is required. Where flexibility is needed, the form triumphs. These structures do not serve order, buttheir simulation. You produce processes to suggest control while the actual control has long been lost.

The self-sufficient state machine

Officials have turned into a self-contained system that no longer exists for, but above all through itself. The administration reproduces its own rules, inspection mechanisms and powers until it acts completely detached from social reality. Any intention to reform is smashed with reference to tradition, legal certainty or labor law. theBureaucracy defends itself against any modernization by creating complexity – a protective shield of paragraphs, responsibilities and file terms. The state as an employer has become a symbol of a structure that only revolves around its own stability.

The double moral of responsibility

While ordinary citizens are held accountable for any administrative mistake, officials enjoy an almost mythical immunity. No system in the world can function in the long run if misconduct has hardly any consequences. But here all responsibility is diluted until it disappears. The mechanism is simple: An official refers to regulations, the supervisor of the procedure, andIn the end, no one remains responsible. It is a bureaucratic nirvana of irresponsibility in which incompetence is not punished but managed.

The illusion of stability

The system’s advocates claim that the officials are guaranteed neutrality and continuity. But in truth, she created a rigid immobility. Stability is confused with immutability. The state freezes in its own form, unable to react to a world that is changing at an ever-increasing rate. While the private sector drives innovation, it remainsThe administration in ritualized control mechanisms arrested. Civil service has long since ceased to be a role model – it has itself become a reform obstacle.

The failure of internal control

Even the control organs, which are supposed to uncover misconduct, are often part of the same apparatus. Supervision supersedes real testing, loyalty replaces independence. Complaints are in the sand because they are processed internally. This way the system remains untouched even if its errors are obvious. The administration controls itself – and that’s exactly where yours liesweakness. Any attempt to make grievances visible is suffocated by the weight of the hierarchy.

The distance to the reality of the citizenry

While society is digitizing, globalizing and making itself more flexible, the civil service world remains static. The citizen experiences them as confrontational, sluggish and unapproachable. He waits, while algorithms could have decided faster, but fail because of outdated regulations. The state uses private companies to look modern while its own civil service shift is still with systemsworks that have their origins in the last century. This discrepancy is not only technical, but mentally in nature: The official is supposed to embody security, but is increasingly acting like a foreign body in the present.

The crumbling foundation of state legitimacy

A state that protects itself above all loses its legitimacy over time. When citizens have the feeling that the apparatus only exists for itself, trust disappears. The administration is then no longer considered a guarantor of justice, but as an obstacle to transparency. Civil service law and privileges were once created to secure integrity – today they workLike protective walls against renewal. The state cannot maintain its credibility if its servants refuse to take responsibility.

The outdated construct

Officials were once a necessary structure in a world that put stability above everything. But now it has been a bureaucratic remnant of a lost epoch. His protective mechanisms have become independent, his legitimacy has faded. The world has turned on, but the official is still in the door of the past century. What remains isA system that sells transparency, practices lack of transparency and is frozen in self-sufficientness. As long as these rigid structures persist, the modern state will never be as flexible, just and responsible as it pretends to be.