Comment by rdtsc
16 years ago
This happened in the 50s probably so it was after the war. Also the fact that he was 12 at the time obviously meant it was just a ridiculous coincidence. If he really was suspected of being a spy, the security officer wouldn't have torn up form and would have actually made him never be able to get a clearance again.
What has happened is that the security officer simply knows how the system is set up. It cannot handle 'ridiculous' spy stories. It can handle 'no spy stories' or it can handle 'real spy stories' -- ridiculous coincidences don't fit it. So he basically had forced his guy to lie because his story fit better into 'no spy story' bin.
This is true of bureaucracies in general. They each have a number of pigeonholes they want to put people in, and the trick of dealing with them is to decide what pigeonholes they have, decide what you want to be regarded as, and taylor your answers accordingly.
> They each have a number of pigeonholes they want to put people in
I'm not sure it's entirely fair to consider it that way. Bureaucracy work on Binary options because that generally makes things a lot easier. It's a hack. It might not be perfect for every individual to answer questions - but it makes organisation a lot smoother.
The officer was happy with the answer to his question about spying; so he decided it was not relevant to include it.
To me that sounds like bureaucracy working a little bit :)
It is when it goes wrong that it goes really wrong...
(It's like the gender question; if I ever have to ask for gender, which is infrequent, now I will consistently ask "what reproductive organs do you have?"))
It may be better to pigeonhole people depending on which sex chromosomes they have (and how many of each), rather than what reproductive organs they have.
This helps cater for aneuploid people, as well as people who have underwent gender changes.