The loopholes we observe in certain provisions of our country’s constitutional and legislative structure, together with practices that have exceeded accepted public norms, make an individual’s rise within the administrative pyramid an unmistakable indicator of one thing: the expansion of his sphere of influence and authority. This, in turn, leads to the expansion of the influence of those positioned beneath him within that same pyramid.

We emphasize here the depth of the harm such practices inflict upon the public interest, and the heavy cost of this weakness and of these transgressive practices, which have gone beyond accepted norms by distorting sound principles, obscuring the identity of justice, and erasing the features of equality.

And if the end is said to justify the means, then there is no justification for these practices and no ambiguity about their underlying purpose. Their first objective is to preserve an individual’s rank, or to elevate it, within this administrative pyramid. Their origin can be understood through the reflection of collective alliances among individuals occupying different ranks, working together so that their shared objectives may shine, striving to achieve them in order to raise their standard of living and deepen the extent of their penetration — indeed, their overreach — into influence and power.

The rationale this group attaches to its actions and conduct within the administrative pyramid — according to its own personal view — rests on the ferocity of competition and conflict in the struggle to survive beneath the shade of this umbrella, which guarantees them access to spoils and the greatest possible degree of private benefit.

These practices have driven the situation toward a negative impact on society, casting their ugly image upon its economy, politics, and culture, and worsening whenever their harm intensifies because of their self-reinforcing nature. Accordingly, domestic Kuwaiti politics has become closer to what may be called “morning-tea chatter.” The chief preoccupation of every politician has become supporting or criticizing whatever any other politician says in the public arena. One finds him ever ready to take a position on every circulating issue, whether through improvisation on social media, by holding a press conference, by submitting a parliamentary question, or by directing an interpellation toward a government official.

Do the tales of “morning-tea chatter” carry any intention or capacity to produce genuine reform? Or are they merely an exploitative tool for political ascent within this administrative pyramid, by adopting the concerns of those at its lower levels and climbing upon them to reach the narrator’s own desired end? As for the ordinary people at the base of the pyramid, they are no better than the politicians within it. They too exercise influence over others weaker than themselves, pressuring politicians to adopt undeserving causes in order to obtain the largest possible share of what is distributed from oil-export rent.

All of these actions inevitably generate reactions that ignite a sense of injustice in every citizen. By “citizen” here, I mean every individual within this administrative pyramid, regardless of whether his rank is high or low. At every rank stands a number of competitors, increasing as one descends the pyramid. Accordingly, the sense of injustice rises in direct proportion as rank declines. Yet even those occupying the upper levels of the pyramid experience that feeling as well. It reflects their inability to confront challenges that push them into still greater incapacity and prevent them from stabilizing this pyramid and guaranteeing its soundness and durability. There is no doubt that they would not feel such injustice were it not for its direct effect on weakening their own positions within that hierarchy.

This sense of injustice could only lead every individual within the pyramid to fight according to his firmness, composure, and sharpness of claw, within the limits of his abilities and available opportunities. The sword of the ordinary citizen is dulled by the rising rents of residential apartments in inner districts. His ambition may go no further than dreaming of a government job that requires nothing more than recording his daily arrival and departure, with little productivity or meaningful contribution, so that he may devote himself instead to following his private business project — thereby earning both a government salary and another monthly income. On the other side, someone of higher rank, who owns properties purchased at high prices in the past, may strive to prevent the release of residential land so that the rental value of his properties does not decline — properties that may well be occupied by that same ordinary citizen. Take this as a passing example by which countless other aspects of life in Kuwaiti society may be measured.

How does the factor of revenues change the understanding of reform and slogans?

Real reform defines the problem, cost, metric, timeline, and responsibility, while a slogan relies on general language that does not change incentives. From the angle of revenues, the issue is not measured by its label alone, but by the measurable effect it leaves behind.

How does the factor of revenues change the understanding of policy design?

Policies fail when they ignore incentives, costs, and expected behavior; good intentions cannot compensate for flawed design. From the angle of revenues, the issue is not measured by its label alone, but by the measurable effect it leaves behind.

How does patronage, injustice, and administrative hierarchy affect Kuwait?

Its effect appears in how costs, incentives, and resources are managed, and in Kuwait's ability to turn decisions into sustainable value. The direct context is power, patronage, and perceived injustice within Kuwait’s administrative hierarchy and their effects on politics and society.