Yet, to paint him merely as some ghoul sort of underestimates the complexity there, and it risks to some extent forgetting the lessons of who this man was. Here was the wiz kid, who helped Ford and made important changes to DoD. Here was a man who used statistics and various other scientific methods of analysis.
He was a committed public servant, who served and in public hid his disagreements. I too know of this very strange situation. And if you do come out later, as he did, and repudiate all you did without having done anything public in the past, your credibility is weak.
McNamara sought redemption. He went through a tortured route. He attempted to say sorry without actually saying sorry.
McNamara has been compared to Rumsfeld, the only Sec Def who is likely worse than he was. However, I find it hard to imagine Rumsfeld and Cheney repenting for what they do. Indeed, all accounts stated that even internally (leaks seem to be easier to get these days) they believed in what they did wholesale.
This man represents a focus on statistics devoid of context. In some sense it is the "science" outdoing the "story," the sort of soft characteristics on the ground. It is the hubris of thinking that you can control and know everything. One of the other odd parallels I think of is between this set of best and brightest, exemplified by McNamara, and the best and the brightest that created our economic mess. While nothing is the same, there are parallels.
Finally this man's horrific record frightens me as well. I am a wonk. I love statistics and models. I often try to turn everything into a science. In some sense I am this man. I am sort of following his footsteps in some way. I just hope that I too can learn his lessons.
NB: David Broder's piece on when to quit. It is something for all of us to remember
No comments:
Post a Comment