How Subsidiarity Got Astronauts Home and Gets the Mail Delivered

Subsidiarity: The principle by which those in authority recognize the rights of the members in a society; and those in higher authority respect the rights of those in lower authority.

From Crisis

By Mark Henry, JD

The symbolism of SpaceX rescuing astronauts when governmental agencies and massive defense contractors were seemingly unwilling or unable to act underscores the relevance of the Catholic principle of subsidiarity.

Like many Americans, my heart swelled with pride as I watched the astronauts land safely in the Gulf. The SpaceX rescue of the stranded astronauts ended wonderfully, but it also highlighted an important lesson: why a relatively small company was able to succeed where a governmental bureaucracy (NASA) and its go-to military-industrial-complex contractor (Boeing) could not. That lesson becomes clear when viewed through the Catholic social teaching of subsidiarity.

Only after the intrepid space travelers were safe and heading home did the irony of the moment strike me. The combined might of NASA and Boeing—one of the country’s largest and oldest defense contractors—was powerless to bring the astronauts back from space. Instead, it was up to the upstart SpaceX to rescue them and return them to their families.

This space escapade should be a case study studied in business school titled: “How Large Organizations Lose Their Way and Betray Their Customers.”

The symbolism of SpaceX rescuing astronauts when governmental agencies and massive defense contractors were seemingly unwilling or unable to act underscores the relevance of the Catholic principle of subsidiarity.

What is subsidiarity? The principle of subsidiarity holds that decision-making should be kept at the most local and competent level possible rather than being centralized in large, bureaucratic institutions. It is a philosophical cornerstone of two of my favorite books: Small Is Beautiful by E.F. Schumacher and Small Is Still Beautiful by Joseph Pearce. These influential books critique large-scale corporate and industrial approaches, advocating for human-centered economies, sustainability, and policies that emphasize human thriving over other considerations.
A comparison of SpaceX to behemoth entities like NASA and Boeing exposes factors that help explain this ironic David-and-Goliath story.

The Players: NASA, Boeing, and SpaceX

NASA is a government agency with about 18,000 employees. It is burdened by bureaucracy and heavily influenced by politics. Really, politics in space? Yes, indeed. Elon Musk stated that political interference prevented an earlier rescue of the stranded astronauts.

Under the Biden administration, NASA aggressively promoted Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies to incorporate into its mission and workforce. In January 2025, NASA began dismantling its DEI programs following executive orders from President Trump. These federal directives were intended to eliminate policies fostering division and inefficiency within government operations. However, these reforms were too late for the marooned astronauts who had already been launched into space and had to be rescued by SpaceX. 

Boeing was founded in 1916 and has grown into a massive, bureaucratic, and highly-regulated defense contractor and aerospace manufacturer. With approximately 155,000 employees, it operates within a top-down structure, making it heavily centralized. Once an industry leader in innovation, Boeing has stagnated due to excessive corporate bureaucracy, leading to serious safety failures like the 737 MAX crisis and ongoing supply-chain issues. The company’s reliance on outsourcing and cost cutting has undermined quality and worker autonomy. Recently, Boeing came under fire for embracing controversial DEI policies that critics say compromised quality control, contributing to numerous airline mishaps and aerospace failures.

In contrast, SpaceX, founded in 2002, operates with a leaner workforce of about 13,000 employees. SpaceX maintains a start-up culture that embraces localized problem-solving and innovation—closer to Schumacher’s vision of decentralized, human-scale enterprise. SpaceX hires employees based on merit rather than DEI policies, and it emphasizes private innovation and rapid decision-making. 

Engineers at SpaceX have more autonomy, aligning with Schumacher’s principle that work should be creative, fulfilling, and localized. SpaceX’s groundbreaking process of returning its rockets for reuse rather than wastefully jettisoning the rockets like NASA does gives it high marks in the environmental sustainability column. SpaceX’s mission-driven approach fosters purpose and innovation—far more than Boeing’s corporate, bureaucratic stagnation does. SpaceX’s approach is more decentralized compared to Boeing’s, better aligning with subsidiarity by keeping decision-making at lower levels. 

NASA and Boeing exemplify large-scale bureaucratic industrialism, which Schumacher critiques as inefficient and detached from human needs. Both NASA and Boeing get low scores on the subsidiarity scale with SpaceX getting higher marks for subsidiarity.

The footage of SpaceX’s Dragon vessel splashing down in the Gulf of America, along with stunning images of rockets returning to Earth and being caught mid-air by giant “chopstick” arms for precise landing and sustainable reuse, powerfully showcases the superiority of SpaceX’s more subsidiarity-friendly business model over NASA and Boeing’s centralized, bureaucratic approach.

A More Down-to-Earth, on the Ground Example: USPS vs. FedEx 

We do not need to gaze into the lofty heavens to witness examples of the triumph of smaller organizations outperforming large bureaucracies. They are all around us. My recent, frustrating encounter with the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) illustrates the flaws of unaccountable, centralized bureaucracies. I recently mailed an item to a client via regular mail—low-cost, low-priority. The item I had to mail had little monetary value, so I decided to save a few bucks and skip the delivery-confirmation option. 

Two weeks passed, and my client never received the package. When I returned to the post office to find out what happened, I overheard another customer at the counter with the same issue—package mailed out three weeks ago and still no delivery. The clerk suggested paying extra for tracking and confirmation. I reluctantly did so, but even now, weeks later, tracking only shows my package “in the system.” Well, a third time did the trick, but this time I used FedEx rather than the USPS, and my item was delivered safely and on time.

This experience is not unique—the USPS, a quasi-monopolistic bureaucracy, has long suffered from inefficiency and delayed service. Founded in 1775, it employs over 630,000 people. In contrast, FedEx (founded in 1971) operates with about 550,000 employees and consistently delivers faster, more reliably, and with superior tracking.

From a subsidiarity perspective, FedEx aligns more closely with this Catholic social teaching because:

• It decentralizes decision-making and prioritizes local efficiency over bureaucratic control.
• It fosters entrepreneurial innovation rather than relying on government subsidies.
• It provides customers with clear accountability rather than excuses.

Conversely, the USPS exemplifies the inefficiency of centralized structures—just like Boeing and NASA.

Bureaucracy vs. Subsidiarity: Lessons from SpaceX and FedEx 

SpaceX and FedEx policies align with subsidiarity, Schumacher’s vision of meaningful work, and sustainable innovation. Boeing, NASA, and the USPS are bureaucratic, centralized systems that stifle initiative and human flourishing.

Large organizations often drift from their founding mission, prioritizing centralized bureaucratic processes over serving their customers effectively and advancing the common good. Organizations that persist in top-down business models that fail to promote employee initiative and do not prioritize service to their customers will suffocate under their own inefficiency. Those that empower workers, foster creativity, and decentralize decision-making will thrive and better serve humanity. Organizations that chart a course correction—incorporating Catholic subsidiarity into their governance—can restore innovation, dignity, and long-term viability. Without this shift, bureaucracies risk self-destruction, as seen in Boeing’s safety scandals and the USPS’s decline.