"It is Basic Management 101 that if you reward failure you are going to get more failure, and if you want success you should reward success. But if you look at the way this administration has approached national security, they have kind of got that principle backwards"
About this Quote
Van Hollen smuggles a national-security indictment inside the blandest possible wrapper: Management 101. That’s the move. By translating war-and-peace stakes into office logic, he implies the administration’s errors aren’t tragic miscalculations or hard calls under pressure; they’re dumb, avoidable, almost bureaucratically incompetent. “Basic” isn’t descriptive so much as shaming. If the principle is entry-level, then getting it “backwards” isn’t a policy disagreement - it’s malpractice.
The quote also weaponizes a very American moral economy: incentives. In security debates, incentives are the closest thing Washington has to a secular scripture. Talk about “rewarding failure” and you instantly conjure a chain reaction - adversaries emboldened, allies demoralized, institutions learning the wrong lessons. The subtext is that the administration isn’t just failing; it’s teaching itself and everyone watching to fail again. That’s a deeper accusation than “you made a mistake.” It’s “you’re building a system that repeats mistakes.”
Notice how he never names the specific “failure” or the “reward.” That vagueness is strategic. It lets listeners map the critique onto whatever controversy is already in their head - a botched operation, a negotiation, a personnel decision, a public message that undercut deterrence. He’s setting a frame, not litigating a case: the administration’s approach is upside down, and the consequences will compound.
It’s opposition rhetoric designed to sound like common sense, so the listener feels less like they’re choosing sides and more like they’re recognizing an obvious rule someone else forgot.
The quote also weaponizes a very American moral economy: incentives. In security debates, incentives are the closest thing Washington has to a secular scripture. Talk about “rewarding failure” and you instantly conjure a chain reaction - adversaries emboldened, allies demoralized, institutions learning the wrong lessons. The subtext is that the administration isn’t just failing; it’s teaching itself and everyone watching to fail again. That’s a deeper accusation than “you made a mistake.” It’s “you’re building a system that repeats mistakes.”
Notice how he never names the specific “failure” or the “reward.” That vagueness is strategic. It lets listeners map the critique onto whatever controversy is already in their head - a botched operation, a negotiation, a personnel decision, a public message that undercut deterrence. He’s setting a frame, not litigating a case: the administration’s approach is upside down, and the consequences will compound.
It’s opposition rhetoric designed to sound like common sense, so the listener feels less like they’re choosing sides and more like they’re recognizing an obvious rule someone else forgot.
Quote Details
| Topic | Management |
|---|
More Quotes by Chris
Add to List
