Thank you, Ms Wehle and Ms Goughan, for this commentary. It is quite candid, quite expressive.
Our functioning constitutional rule of law democracy is quite a unique form of self-governing. In Ms Goughan's remarks, it becomes apparent the many ways any of us can clearly understand that our relationships among ourselves as people in community are guided by it. For example, "Public defenders work to prevent the government from going out, arresting anyone, and throwing them into jail without a legal cause and due process." Work backwards through this sentence; controversies or disputes among ourselves are cooperatively managed and settled by use of and within the social self-understanding of the body of law which we ourselves have agreed on over time; the common aim is evidenced-based, action-based resolution to support subsequent efforts to continue to live cooperatively together, often with novel understanding of ourselves, others, and the possibilities of understanding.
The current sets of challenges to our constitutional system are being met by us in different ways and with different self-understandings. Your outlook on your work, "...a desire for true justice and for a country that respects the rights of every single individual..." will contribute mightily and needfully to what remains of respect for democratic political society using self-governance.
As we move into the increasing number of public protests and expressions of support for our constitutional system, your feelings and thoughts are important to focus our efforts. The protests etc are opportunities to have public conversations about how we can and intend to improve our governance work together. Successes in these efforts will help us improve our efforts to support individual and group efforts to choose ways to live in the world that will benefit us all, better support future generations as choice-makers and novel solutions givers, and support the living planet out of which we all grew, within which we can robustly live.
I'm an adjunct professor of Public Administration at GWU. I taught Policy Analysis Fall 2024 and Spring 2025. In my teaching I strongly emphasize that the purpose of policy is to make the lives of the people better, and I use dystopian literature and movies to emphasize that the road to ruin is paved by the thoughtless (or thoughtfully malignant) pursuit of utopia.
My students are preparing for Masters of Public Administration, and many are at GWU to pursue or advance careers in federal public service. I've had a 35 year career in public service myself. Terrifying is the right word to describe this administration's effect on our current students.
Perversely, the professionalization of the field of public administration in academia played a role in teaching our students not to guard democratic values, but to actually assist the current administration in carrying them out.
For decades, PA has been a subfield of Political Science. Within the academic community the "legitimacy" of the study of administration in a democracy has long been in question, with the fear that expertise vested in bureaucrats, disconnected from the will of the people, would create a technocracy that overrides the will of the people.
The academic solution was the doctrine of "neutral competence." Under this doctrine, administrators can only maintain legitimacy in a democracy by assiduously following the policies of elected officials, and could only apply their own judgment as to how to execute those policies most effectively and efficiently.
The tragic irony of neutral competence is that it takes those most dedicated to the service of others, the people whose vocation is to improve the lives of all the people, and turns them into moral robots. The discipline and training of the US military, by contrast, teaches that it is the duty of all uniformed personnel to resist and disobey illegal orders. In public administration, we have taught generations of public servants to "just follow orders."
In the post-Trumpian reconstruction, we need principled leadership in both the political and administrative classes to create a new legitimacy for all where the needs of the people come first, and the power supply is shut off to those who seek their own gain at the expense of public good. We in PA have students who have self-selected into careers serving the public good. I'm much more concerned about the graduates of law schools, who disproportionately make up the ranks of elected officials, and who therefore command the loyalty of good public servants to drive us headlong into tyranny.
Thank you, Ms Wehle and Ms Goughan, for this commentary. It is quite candid, quite expressive.
Our functioning constitutional rule of law democracy is quite a unique form of self-governing. In Ms Goughan's remarks, it becomes apparent the many ways any of us can clearly understand that our relationships among ourselves as people in community are guided by it. For example, "Public defenders work to prevent the government from going out, arresting anyone, and throwing them into jail without a legal cause and due process." Work backwards through this sentence; controversies or disputes among ourselves are cooperatively managed and settled by use of and within the social self-understanding of the body of law which we ourselves have agreed on over time; the common aim is evidenced-based, action-based resolution to support subsequent efforts to continue to live cooperatively together, often with novel understanding of ourselves, others, and the possibilities of understanding.
The current sets of challenges to our constitutional system are being met by us in different ways and with different self-understandings. Your outlook on your work, "...a desire for true justice and for a country that respects the rights of every single individual..." will contribute mightily and needfully to what remains of respect for democratic political society using self-governance.
As we move into the increasing number of public protests and expressions of support for our constitutional system, your feelings and thoughts are important to focus our efforts. The protests etc are opportunities to have public conversations about how we can and intend to improve our governance work together. Successes in these efforts will help us improve our efforts to support individual and group efforts to choose ways to live in the world that will benefit us all, better support future generations as choice-makers and novel solutions givers, and support the living planet out of which we all grew, within which we can robustly live.
I'm an adjunct professor of Public Administration at GWU. I taught Policy Analysis Fall 2024 and Spring 2025. In my teaching I strongly emphasize that the purpose of policy is to make the lives of the people better, and I use dystopian literature and movies to emphasize that the road to ruin is paved by the thoughtless (or thoughtfully malignant) pursuit of utopia.
My students are preparing for Masters of Public Administration, and many are at GWU to pursue or advance careers in federal public service. I've had a 35 year career in public service myself. Terrifying is the right word to describe this administration's effect on our current students.
Perversely, the professionalization of the field of public administration in academia played a role in teaching our students not to guard democratic values, but to actually assist the current administration in carrying them out.
For decades, PA has been a subfield of Political Science. Within the academic community the "legitimacy" of the study of administration in a democracy has long been in question, with the fear that expertise vested in bureaucrats, disconnected from the will of the people, would create a technocracy that overrides the will of the people.
The academic solution was the doctrine of "neutral competence." Under this doctrine, administrators can only maintain legitimacy in a democracy by assiduously following the policies of elected officials, and could only apply their own judgment as to how to execute those policies most effectively and efficiently.
The tragic irony of neutral competence is that it takes those most dedicated to the service of others, the people whose vocation is to improve the lives of all the people, and turns them into moral robots. The discipline and training of the US military, by contrast, teaches that it is the duty of all uniformed personnel to resist and disobey illegal orders. In public administration, we have taught generations of public servants to "just follow orders."
In the post-Trumpian reconstruction, we need principled leadership in both the political and administrative classes to create a new legitimacy for all where the needs of the people come first, and the power supply is shut off to those who seek their own gain at the expense of public good. We in PA have students who have self-selected into careers serving the public good. I'm much more concerned about the graduates of law schools, who disproportionately make up the ranks of elected officials, and who therefore command the loyalty of good public servants to drive us headlong into tyranny.