Essential reading for aspiring patricians and those trying to spot them¶

Or, a reading list for understanding status quo maintenance through both serious scholarship and unseriously serious wizards and witches

On the scholarly value of making things up¶

This resource page commits the academic sin of mixing serious political theory with fantasy novels, as if Terry Pratchett’s observations about power are somehow equivalent to peer-reviewed scholarship. The audacity is intentional. Pratchett wrote about political systems through the lens of Discworld because fiction lets us say uncomfortable truths that non-fiction forces us to hedge with caveats and disclaimers.

So here’s our thesis: Lord Vetinari’s management of Ankh-Morpork maps onto modern technocratic governance so precisely that reading Pratchett alongside academic treatments of bureaucracy, institutional resistance, and system maintenance is not merely defensible but illuminating. If you think this trivialises serious scholarship, consider that Pratchett’s readers immediately recognise the mechanisms academics spend entire books explaining, and ask yourself which approach is more effective.

This page collects resources in two categories: the serious books about how power maintains itself, and the unserious seriousness books that somehow explain it better.

When academics explain what we already know¶

These are the books and papers that academics write when they want to explain how systems resist change, how technocracy replaces democracy, and how bureaucracy becomes self-perpetuating. They are meticulously researched, properly cited, and utterly depressing in their documentation of how thoroughly we are stuck.

On technocracy and the knowledge problem¶

Power Without Knowledge: A Critique of Technocracy, Jeffrey Friedman, Oxford University Press, 2019. The definitive academic demolition of technocratic governance. Friedman argues that technocracy requires predicting how people will respond to policies, but people’s ideas are too varied and diverse to reliably predict. The genius is showing that both expert technocracy and populist politics are essentially technocratic, assuming competence to solve social problems despite lacking the knowledge to do so. Proposes “exitocracy” as an alternative, though whether that solves the problem or just renames it is debatable. Won the 2022 Best Book Award from the American Political Science Association’s Ideas, Knowledge, and Politics Section, which tells you academics found it uncomfortably persuasive.

Technocracy and the Epistemology of Human Behavior: The Debate over Power Without Knowledge, edited by Paul Gunn, Routledge, 2023. Thirteen political theorists debate Friedman’s arguments about technocracy, expertise, and whether anyone actually knows enough to govern effectively. Covers post-structuralism, anarchism, democratic theory, and the uncomfortable question of what follows from acknowledging profound ignorance about social causation. Academic debate at its finest, which means everyone agrees the problem exists but nobody agrees on solutions.

Technocracy in America: Rise of the Info-State, Parag Khanna, Codex Books, 2021. Unironically argues that America should embrace technocracy, citing Singapore and Switzerland as models. Proposes replacing the Senate with an Assembly of Governors, seven-member executive committees, and various other reforms that sound suspiciously like “what if we just had better people in charge?” Worth reading as an example of technocratic enthusiasm that assumes experts will use power benevolently, which is precisely the assumption Friedman demolishes.

On bureaucracy and institutional resistance¶

Bureaucracy, Ludwig von Mises, Yale University Press, 1944. Mises explains why bureaucracies, whilst suited to orderly government functions, are ruinous when applied to economic sectors. Bureaucrats lack incentives for efficiency because resources don’t belong to them. Progress threatens the status quo and isn’t provisioned in the rules. Written 80 years ago, depressingly relevant today. The champions of totalitarianism call themselves progressives whilst bureaucrats multiply and restrict individual freedom step by step. If you wonder why nothing changes despite everyone agreeing it should, Mises wrote the manual.

Bending the Rules: Procedural Politicking in the Bureaucracy, Rachel Augustine Potter, University of Chicago Press, 2019. Academic examination of how bureaucrats leverage procedural knowledge to insulate policies from threat. Agencies strategically draft rules to obfuscate content or frame it favourably. Potter calls this “procedural politicking” and demonstrates that bureaucrats can achieve preferred outcomes with few people noticing. The perfect companion to Vetinari’s approach: power exercised through process rather than force.

The Federal Civil Service System and the Problem of Bureaucracy: The Economics and Politics of Institutional Change, Ronald N. Johnson and Gary D. Libecap, University of Chicago Press, 1994. Examines why, despite calls to “reinvent government,” significant change in bureaucracy remains formidable. Traces political and economic forces shaping the American civil service from 1883 onwards. Federal employees become an interest group protecting their own positions, making reform structurally difficult. The book nobody in government wants you to read, because it explains why government can’t fix government.

Bureaucratic Resistance and the National Security State, Rebecca Ingber, Iowa Law Review, 2018. Navigates the tension between viewing bureaucracy as sinister “deep state” versus benevolent constraint on presidential power. Neither view is correct. Bureaucrats wield formal authority tethered to accountable sources, but also exercise functional power with practical constraints. The bureaucracy is neither all-powerful nor fully constrained—it’s complicated, which is the least satisfying but most accurate answer.

On resistance to institutional change¶

Resistance to change in government: risk, inertia and incentives, Oliver Bettis, Policy Studies, 2014. Examines whether government is genuinely anti-innovation. Argues that formalised decision-making processes may aid rather than inhibit innovation, but acknowledges incentive structures in government encourage status quo regardless of risk preferences. Government differs from private sector in structures and objectives, making direct comparison problematic. The missing piece: it’s not that government can’t innovate, it’s that government is specifically designed not to.

Administrative responses to democratic backsliding: When is bureaucratic resistance justified?, Michael W. Bauer, Regulation & Governance, 2023. Explores when bureaucracies should resist elected governments attempting to undermine democratic norms. Backsliding governments transform bureaucracies into instruments for illiberal agendas, often covertly. The paper argues bureaucracy must defend the democratic state, which sounds lovely until you remember bureaucracies also resist reform they simply don’t like. The line between principled resistance and self-interested obstruction is surprisingly blurry.

When Pratchett explains what academics could not¶

These are Terry Pratchett’s Discworld novels, which feature Lord Vetinari and Ankh-Morpork prominently. They’re fantasy novels about wizards, witches, and walking luggage, which somehow provide better insight into political systems than most political science textbooks. This is either damning commentary on political science or extraordinary praise for Pratchett. Probably both.

The essential Vetinari novels¶

Guards! Guards!, Terry Pratchett, 1989. Vetinari’s first major appearance, establishing him as the Patrician who maintains order through subtle manipulation. A secret society summons a dragon to overthrow him, which goes about as well as most revolutionary attempts. Vetinari navigates the crisis by leveraging the City Watch, reinforcing his rule without direct confrontation. Key insight: the best way to handle revolution is to make it inconvenient and slightly embarrassing. Introduces the concept that what people want isn’t good government or justice, but things staying roughly the same.

Men at Arms, Terry Pratchett, 1993. Features the invention of a firearm (“gonne”) that threatens Ankh-Morpork’s carefully maintained equilibrium. Vetinari’s response demonstrates how to handle technological disruption: not by banning it (which creates martyrs) but by controlling its proliferation through institutional means. Also explores integration of trolls and dwarfs into the Watch, showing how diversity is leveraged not from altruism but because “alloys are stronger.” Vetinari’s approach to social progress: allow it only when it strengthens the system.

Feet of Clay, Terry Pratchett, 1996. Vetinari is poisoned, revealing how much the city depends on his management. Various guilds contemplate succession and are terrified by the prospect of actually governing, because “you got the power, but you got the problems, too.” Classic demonstration of captured state: everyone benefits from the system’s stability, making reform impossible because any change threatens everyone’s comfortable corruption. The novel’s examination of golem slavery provides sharp commentary on how economic exploitation becomes institutional normalcy.

Jingo, Terry Pratchett, 1997. War threatens between Ankh-Morpork and Klatch over a newly risen island. Pratchett’s devastating critique of nationalism, xenophobia, and how easily prejudice is exploited politically. Vetinari manoeuvres to avoid war whilst accommodating nationalist sentiment, demonstrating the patrician’s genius: appearing to yield to public pressure whilst ensuring the outcome serves his interests. Sharp observation that war is rarely about the stated reasons and usually about maintaining domestic political control.

The Truth, Terry Pratchett, 2000. The invention of newspaper journalism hits Ankh-Morpork. Vetinari’s response to free press demonstrates sophisticated understanding that controlling information is less effective than shaping the context in which information operates. Allow criticism, permit investigation, but ensure the institutional structures determining what’s “newsworthy” serve system stability. Modern media studies departments could learn from Pratchett’s treatment of how journalism reproduces existing power whilst appearing to challenge it.

Going Postal, Terry Pratchett, 2004. Vetinari appoints convicted criminal Moist von Lipwig to resurrect the postal service, demonstrating the co-option strategy in action. Take someone with revolutionary potential and give them institutional responsibility. By novel’s end, Moist is defending the system he once exploited because he’s now part of it. Perfect illustration of how systems neutralise threats by incorporation rather than suppression.

Making Money, Terry Pratchett, 2007. Moist von Lipwig runs the Royal Bank and Mint, learning that money is collective belief maintained through confidence. Vetinari’s manipulation of financial systems reveals understanding that modern power operates through economics more than force. The novel treats banking with Pratchett’s characteristic mix of satire and seriousness, showing how financial institutions simultaneously serve and control society.

The political philosophy novels¶

Night Watch, Terry Pratchett, 2002. Vimes travels back to Ankh-Morpork’s revolutionary period under Mad Lord Snapcase, showing what the city was before Vetinari’s managed stability. The revolution that overthrew Winder produced Snapcase, who was worse. The revolution that overthrew Snapcase produced Vetinari, who is… better? Different? The novel asks uncomfortable questions about whether violent revolution actually improves things or just replaces one tyranny with another. Young Vetinari appears as a student, already thinking three moves ahead.

Small Gods, Terry Pratchett, 1992. Not a Vetinari novel, but essential reading on how institutions maintain power through belief systems. The Omnian Church controls population through doctrinal enforcement whilst the actual god they worship has been reduced to a tortoise. Once people believe the institution matters more than the deity, the deity becomes irrelevant. Directly applicable to understanding how modern political institutions maintain legitimacy whilst serving functions entirely divorced from stated purposes.

Raising Steam, Terry Pratchett, 2013. Pratchett’s final Vetinari novel, examining how railway technology drives social change. Vetinari’s response: embrace technological progress, but ensure it’s integrated through institutional channels that maintain existing power structures. Progress is permitted, even encouraged, but only progress that strengthens rather than threatens the system. The novel is also poignant as Pratchett’s last major work before Alzheimer’s ended his writing, making Vetinari’s final appearance simultaneously a statement about progress and a farewell.

Why reading both matters¶

Here’s what happens when you read academic political theory alongside Pratchett: the academic work explains mechanisms in detail with proper citations and theoretical frameworks. Pratchett makes you recognise those mechanisms operating in systems you thought were different. The academic work tells you how technocracy uses expert knowledge to justify policy. Pratchett shows you Vetinari doing it, and makes you realise your government does it too.

The serious books document institutional resistance to change, demonstrating through case studies and data that bureaucracies protect themselves from reform. The Discworld novels show you Vetinari operating a system where nobody actually opposes reform, they just require proper consideration of all relevant stakeholders through appropriate processes that take long enough that the moment for change passes.

The academic literature explains procedural politicking, showing how bureaucrats leverage process to achieve preferred outcomes. Pratchett shows you Mrs Evadne Cake spending fourteen months navigating seventeen forms and six approval processes to open a tea shop, eventually abandoning the attempt not because she was stopped but because she was exhausted.

Both approaches are valuable. The academic work provides evidence, theoretical grounding, and intellectual rigour. Pratchett provides recognition, pattern-matching, and the uncomfortable laughter that comes from seeing your own reality reflected in a fantasy novel. If you read only the academic work, you understand the theory but might not recognise it operating around you. If you read only Pratchett, you recognise the patterns but lack the framework to explain them.

Together, they’re devastating. You see both how the system works and that it’s working on you right now.

Warnings, caveats and disclaimers¶

This is possibly the most pretentious resources page ever written for an Observatory section, mixing serious scholarship with fantasy novels as if they’re equivalent sources. We’re aware. The pretension is the point. If reading Pratchett alongside political science offends your academic sensibilities, consider that Pratchett’s books remain in print forty years later whilst most political science monographs are read by seventeen people and forgotten.

Start with Friedman’s Power Without Knowledge to understand why technocracy can’t work as advertised. Then read Feet of Clay to see what happens when the technocrat running the city nearly dies and everyone realises they’re terrified of actually having to govern. Notice how Pratchett dramatises Friedman’s theoretical arguments about epistemic complexity and makes them viscerally clear.

Read Potter’s Bending the Rules on procedural politicking, then read Going Postal to watch Vetinari deploy every technique Potter catalogues. Read Ingber on bureaucratic resistance, then read Night Watch to see what happens when bureaucratic resistance fails because the institution being resisted is genuinely malevolent.

A pattern I noticed and you will likely notice too: the mechanisms academics spend careers documenting are the mechanisms Terry Pratchett spent books illustrating. The difference is Pratchett makes you laugh whilst explaining how thoroughly stuck we are. The laughter doesn’t make it less true. If anything, it makes it more so.

Welcome to this annotated guide to power maintenance. The scholarship is rigorous, the fiction is sharper than it should be, and somewhere Lord Vetinari is reading this while eating candied jellyfish and thinking “how very nearly perceptive.” That’s probably the highest praise we could hope for.

Read. Both categories. In whatever order you like. By the end, you can understand how the Patrician’s playbook operates everywhere from Ankh-Morpork to your local council to your national government. Whether that understanding helps us change anything is another question entirely, and one Vetinari himself would probably suggest we consider carefully before attempting.

After all, stability is what people really want. Isn’t it?