The Abominable No-Man and the perfect contrarian indicator
The late C Northcote Parkinson, whose name has entered the language in the expression "Parkinson's Law" (which was "Work expands to fill the time available for its' completion") also wrote some very funny articles with titles like "The Abominable No-Man" which was about people who alwasys say no, and how to make sure that a decision where you want a Yes is taken at a level where you find someone who usually says yes instead of such a person.
Most of his humorous observations actually work in the real world but unfortunately some do not.
For example I have been unable to find a single example of one character in his essays, who would be useful in a sense, but whom I am actually rather glad does not exist. This is the perfect contrarian indicator - the person who is always wrong.
C Northcote Parkinson put forward the hypothesis that nobody is always right but some people are always wrong, and therefore the best way to get perfect advice is to find one of these people and then always do the opposite of what they recommend.
The essay in which he wrote this is most entertaining. However, thirty years after I first read it, and after looking out for such a person both at work and in politics for those three decades, I have to report that every person who I initially thought might be suitable as a contrarian indicator has shortly thereafter come out with something I agreed with.
The first person I thought might be suitable as a contrarian indicator was Polly Toynbee. But then in the aftermath of 9/11, when a significant chunk of the left and one or two people on the cynical or defeatist right were ignoring the most cast iron "cassus belli" the West has had since Pearl Harbour, and making excuses for doing nothing about a truly ghastly regime in Afghanistan which had proved it was a threat and treated women worse than any other government on the planet, Polly Toynbee took what I thought was a brave stand that we could not ignore what the Taleban had done.
When I was a St Albans councillor, there were two or three councillors from other parties, particularly certain Lib/Dems, who I thought at first had a gift for always being wrong.
Until one evening at a Plans (Central) meeting. At that planning committee meeting I nearly fell off my chair on hearing sound, evidence-based common sense from someone who I had, up to that point thought would be incapable of recognising logic, evidence, or common sense if they physically materialised in front of her.
Sooner or later something like this happened on at least one issue with every fellow councillor of whose judgement I had formed a very negative opinion.
Gordon Brown was a disaster as Prime Minister and made some awful mistakes, but he made two very big right decisions as chancellor. One was giving the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England control over interest rates, and he also stopped Tony Blair from scrapping the pound and bouncing us into the Euro. (He's since put forward an immensely strong argument for a positive "No" vote in the Scottish independence referendum.)
I did at one stage wonder if Yasmin Alabhai-Brown might be a good contrarian indicator, and without wanting to associate myself with some of the unacceptable insults which were written and tweeted about her following the recent Channel 4 debate with Rod Liddle, that programme showed all three participants including the chairperson in the most unfavourable light.
However, she has also written some very brave things as the interview with Iain Dale to which I referred the other day shows. You can read Iain's interview with YAB here.
I know I'm not the only person who has played the game of trying to find rivals, opponents, or pundits who they think are always wrong. On more than one occasion during discussions which measured forecasting accuracy by comparing what people predicted with what actually happened I have heard fellow economists at BT, or read economic commentators, joke about someone "spoiling their value as a contrarian indicator" by getting a prediction right.
But I don't know of any intelligent and honest person, with good enough judgement not to be one of the partisan hardliners in all political parties for whom the mere fact of not agreeing with them makes their opponents into stupidity or evil incarnate, who has ever claimed to have found a perfect contrarian indicator who they can confidently say is always wrong.
Perhaps this is a good thing. Just as it would in a sense, be terrible if anyone could claim a monopoly on virtue or wisdom, it would be a ghastly thing if any human being were entirely lacking in those qualities.
Most of his humorous observations actually work in the real world but unfortunately some do not.
For example I have been unable to find a single example of one character in his essays, who would be useful in a sense, but whom I am actually rather glad does not exist. This is the perfect contrarian indicator - the person who is always wrong.
C Northcote Parkinson put forward the hypothesis that nobody is always right but some people are always wrong, and therefore the best way to get perfect advice is to find one of these people and then always do the opposite of what they recommend.
The essay in which he wrote this is most entertaining. However, thirty years after I first read it, and after looking out for such a person both at work and in politics for those three decades, I have to report that every person who I initially thought might be suitable as a contrarian indicator has shortly thereafter come out with something I agreed with.
The first person I thought might be suitable as a contrarian indicator was Polly Toynbee. But then in the aftermath of 9/11, when a significant chunk of the left and one or two people on the cynical or defeatist right were ignoring the most cast iron "cassus belli" the West has had since Pearl Harbour, and making excuses for doing nothing about a truly ghastly regime in Afghanistan which had proved it was a threat and treated women worse than any other government on the planet, Polly Toynbee took what I thought was a brave stand that we could not ignore what the Taleban had done.
When I was a St Albans councillor, there were two or three councillors from other parties, particularly certain Lib/Dems, who I thought at first had a gift for always being wrong.
Until one evening at a Plans (Central) meeting. At that planning committee meeting I nearly fell off my chair on hearing sound, evidence-based common sense from someone who I had, up to that point thought would be incapable of recognising logic, evidence, or common sense if they physically materialised in front of her.
Sooner or later something like this happened on at least one issue with every fellow councillor of whose judgement I had formed a very negative opinion.
Gordon Brown was a disaster as Prime Minister and made some awful mistakes, but he made two very big right decisions as chancellor. One was giving the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England control over interest rates, and he also stopped Tony Blair from scrapping the pound and bouncing us into the Euro. (He's since put forward an immensely strong argument for a positive "No" vote in the Scottish independence referendum.)
I did at one stage wonder if Yasmin Alabhai-Brown might be a good contrarian indicator, and without wanting to associate myself with some of the unacceptable insults which were written and tweeted about her following the recent Channel 4 debate with Rod Liddle, that programme showed all three participants including the chairperson in the most unfavourable light.
However, she has also written some very brave things as the interview with Iain Dale to which I referred the other day shows. You can read Iain's interview with YAB here.
I know I'm not the only person who has played the game of trying to find rivals, opponents, or pundits who they think are always wrong. On more than one occasion during discussions which measured forecasting accuracy by comparing what people predicted with what actually happened I have heard fellow economists at BT, or read economic commentators, joke about someone "spoiling their value as a contrarian indicator" by getting a prediction right.
But I don't know of any intelligent and honest person, with good enough judgement not to be one of the partisan hardliners in all political parties for whom the mere fact of not agreeing with them makes their opponents into stupidity or evil incarnate, who has ever claimed to have found a perfect contrarian indicator who they can confidently say is always wrong.
Perhaps this is a good thing. Just as it would in a sense, be terrible if anyone could claim a monopoly on virtue or wisdom, it would be a ghastly thing if any human being were entirely lacking in those qualities.
Comments