Into the Woods

Abstract

In 2010, the state is not merely hollow but increasingly empty, and those of us in government have to find their energy and purpose in the process of rebuilding it. Our happy endings—the specific outcomes we claim to want—somehow come along with unexpected twists and losses. We’ve discovered that life and governance aren’t linear and predictable. In the 20th century, public administration (PA) ignored pragmatism, in large part, because it did not provide blueprints or formulas or promise specific outcomes. When PA asked, “How will this inclusive process of inquiry produce efficient results?” Pragmatism answered, “Efficiency? Does our Constitution call for efficiency? No, it’s the process that matters. Trust the process, involve as many citizens in the process as possible, invest in the development of citizens’ capacity to join and contribute to the process. If the process is right, our path through the woods will go in the right direction, and ‘right’ (if not predictable) outcomes will follow. The process is continuous, and as circumstances change, the process adapts.” In the past we rejected Pragmatism. Today, perhaps, we need to reflect on our understanding of what governance is, and possibly to reexamine those strange ideas Pragmatism offered once upon a time.