Book Review: Governance in Dark Times

Review:  Governance in Dark Times by Camilla Stivers

In her book, Governance in Dark Times, Camilla Stivers presents a thoughtful model for public service. The primary foundation for Stivers’ model is philosopher Hannah Arendt’s writing in Men in Dark Times, while the author also draws from various other philosophers to expound on specific aspects of the model.  A main strength of this work is clarity; the model is complex and as a basis for public administration it necessarily encompasses many aspects of governance.  The author effectively sets up a premise for the importance of rethinking some of the basic assumptions of governance and proceeds to elaborate clearly on the specific components of the new paradigm she puts forth through the use of practical examples from real life.  Although the work can seem unnecessarily editorial at some points, the overall message is effectively presented and proposed.  The depth of the model ultimately speaks for itself, and the reader can appreciate its value regardless of differences of opinion over the particular culprits in our current “dark times”. 

The thesis of this work is that “Public service in dark times, then, is mindful, critical, and enacted on common ground – in the world – with others.  It is hopeful, serious, and committed to freedom” (153).  Stivers presents this model for governance, exploring the philosophy behind it as well as the practical implications that must follow.

In order to understand Stivers’ model, we must first establish a definition for what she calls “dark times”.  Stivers explains in the introduction that dark times are not characterized simply by dark and tragic events such as war or acts of terrorism, which are nearly inevitable, but instead by the disappearance of the public realm where diverse individuals come together to address common concerns.  The author explains, “such speech lights up a public world, where people are joined not in agreement but in commitment to struggle with important issues” (Stivers 3).  According to the author’s model, the basis of a philosophy for public service is composed of three elements:  thinking, reason, and truth.  She explains that thinking and reason are aspects of judgment, which is considered to be the defining political faculty (Stivers 59).  In this model, thinking and reason replace scientific facts and logic as means to arriving at truth in public life – this fits clearly into the governance of the common ground, which Stivers describes later in the book.  The emphasis on judgment Stivers puts forth is a good reminder of the depth of discretion required of public administrators – judgment seems to go beyond discretion, adding an element of responsibility to think and reason with self and others. 

The distinction between government and governance is important here.  Government is a system, and it is focused largely on regulation.  Governance is an action, and it is understood in this work as having undergone a definition change over the past two decades.   Stivers explains that historically, governance was defined as “exercising public authority to fulfill a public purpose” (104), and that it implied statecraft on the part of government administrators.  She states that the definition of governance has now “expanded to include activities in the private and non-profit sector and is widely understood to mean an alternative to, a replacement for, direct government action” – focusing largely on contracts, partnerships, and networks with the private sector (Stivers 104).  This shift in definition brought about a change in means, ends, and values - now democratic freedoms are viewed and employed as means to preserve market freedoms and governance is “premised on a view of political freedom as freedom from politics” (Stivers 109).  Stivers explains that this understanding of market freedom as political freedom is based in the philosophies of Thomas Hobbes, and she effectively makes a case for how Hobbesian thought has also permeated our understanding in the current dark times as the issue of National Security is understood to be best addressed by an unshakeable authority such as Hobbes argued for.  In this way, Stivers clearly connects the way that philosophical assumptions shape everyday life, which is an important concept in general, and especially as public administrators.  In response to the shift in our understanding of governance, Stivers offers a model built instead on the philosophies of Hannah Arendt and Mary Parker Follett.  In this section, Stivers presents an effective study of various philosophies of human nature and experience.  Although a reader might disagree with some of the assumptions about basic human nature, the values that Stivers builds upon are convincing.  This model is to be based on an active citizenry and “built on assumptions that a shared reality already exists, one that envisions the state as the outgrowth of mutual promising, and politics as talk that brings different people together around mutual concerns” (112). Stivers goes on to explain that in this Arendt-Follet model, governance is to be based on people with diverse opinions and experiences engaging in dialogue, “talking and arguing about common concerns, exchanging the considered opinions formed in thinking and judging issues and in listening to one another” (116).

 The themes of shared experiences, dialogue, and civic engagement are present throughout the model and are effectively drawn from the deeper philosophical assumptions and translated into practical action.  For example, Stivers’ new model, the “governance of the common ground” as she calls it, could involve an approach to homeland security similar to the Council of National Defense during World War I which was based on a network of National, State, County and City councils working in tandem (115).  This concept and others throughout the book effectively emphasize the value of personal experience in forming policies and procedures.  Based on examples such as the Community Health Centers that Stivers describes, it seems reasonable to imagine that this model could certainly be effective on a large scale.  Another real life example of the value of personal experience can be found in the story of New Yorker and 9/11 survivor Lolita Jackson.  Jackson was working for Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. on the 70th floor of Two World Trade (also known as the South tower) on 9/11.  The Dean Witter headquarters had been in the building for many years and therefore had survived the 1983 bombing, after which the company had created their own evacuation plan.  Likely due in part to the value of personal experience, the largest tenant in the building, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. lost only 7 of its nearly 3500 employees in the 9/11 attacks.  
Stivers goes on to elaborate on a philosophy for practice based on pragmatism and public service ethics for dark times.  According to Stivers, “in pragmatism, experience is the test of a truth” (157).  She cites the potential real world application of tapping airport security personnel to make recommendations on security improvements, capitalizing on the first-hand knowledge and experience they naturally possess. She explains the value of creating a “community of inquirers” as described by pragmatist Charles Sanders Pierce “whose discovery of reality in the long run requires that its current practice be governed by consensus” (qtd. in Stivers 133).  Stivers’ pragmatic model also draws from John Dewey’s definition of philosophy, paraphrased by Stivers as “an unending, caring quest, a commitment to the practice of thinking in a systematic way about important questions without the promise of settling them once ad for all, a testing of ideas in practice, a search for the results of the results”  (127).

Overall, Stivers puts forth a reasonable, deep, and clear model for governance in dark times.  While the ideas she proposes can sound idealistic and unrealistic at first mention, she explains them with clarity from the complex philosophical basis to the logical applications.  She draws on varied sources for the philosophy behind her thesis, and what seems to be an overly complex mix of ideas comes together in the end as a clear and coherent model.  Stivers’ presentation enables the reader to grasp the general principles and assumptions of her model as they relate to one another across philosophical schools and eras.  The model is effectively presented, defended, and applied, leaving the reader with a vision for the big picture as well as some of the specifics implied.  Regardless of an individual’s opinion of Stivers’ model, it will be of help to public administrators universally as a call to consider the basic philosophical assumptions of governance.  The values of shared experience and dialogue among diverse parties are also worth exploring for all public administrators.   






References


Stivers, Camilla. (2008). Governance in Dark Times: Practical Philosophy for Public Service.  Washington, DC. Georgetown University Press.