RE LEADERSHIP

Government by the Skilled

Down through history, there have been a few examples of recognition of the fact that effective government will result from the efforts of small skilled combinations of statesmen or advisors, who are cognizant of public needs and interests.

Several centuries before the birth of Christ, China began to delegate its ruling powers to "scholar-officials," who were chosen pjursuant to state-administered competitive examinations.  These tests were continuing, so as to constitute an ever-ongoing search for new and superior talent.  Thus, the Empire was guided by appointed officials, as opposed to hereditary nobles:  a "professional civil service" of "scholar-gentry officials," if you will, whose mandates were said to comprise greater quantities of moral virtue and wisdom, than coercive and punitive laws. 

Moving to ancient Greece, during pre-Christian years, we note that Plato's Republic likewise recommended direction of the populace by individuals of high moral and intellectual status, who should be chosen by merit.

 France can also be counted among the proponents of, and hosts to, a measure of this sort of professional direction.  Beginning in the sixteenth century, the Valois royalty resorted to employment of professional officialdom as a means of avoiding interference by powerful aristocrats.  Later, during the eighteenth century, Jean-Jacques Rousseau counseled his readers that "it is the best and most natural arrangement that the wisest should govern the many."  Other Frenchmen, who favored the choosing of skilled persons to man the helm of government included Henri Saint-Simon, who, during the nineteenth century, encouraged a new leadership order from among the intellectual class; and twentieth century scholar-philosopher Pierre Bourdieu, who stressed the need for politicians to behave more like scholars than politicians.

  Corresponding with this, the political institutions of France's Second Empire (1852-1870) included a Council of State, comprised of experts who composed legislation and issued advice on technical matters.  And proceeding to the twentieth century, we find French public leadership recruited from among top-ranking graduates from the country's top-ranking schools, further educated at institutions such as the Ecole Polytechnique or Ecole d'Administration, and awardede positions within one or another of the Grands Corps or Council of Ministers.

Other places within our world have occasionally resorted to the utilization of intelligence and expertise in the operation of government.  For example, when the crown expelled the clergy from administrative posts in sixteenth century England, their places were ably filled by "university-trained laymen" of "remarkable abilities and education." (Liah Greenfeld, Nationalism)  This was in harmony with the contemporaneous writings of scholar Thomas Elyot, who proclaimed, at such an early date, that the basis of hierarchy ought be intelligence rather than nobility. (Sir Thomas Elyot, Governour)  Four centuries later, during the 1930s, in a noteworthy effort, Britain's Labor government attempted to rise above parties and politics in general, by seeking and pursuing policy recommendations issued by commissions composed of experts in the particular fields involved.

In the United States, intellectual capability and/or business acumen have at times been looked to as factors in government.  Thomas Jefferson for one, in his writings, supported an "insurrection of science, talents and courage against rank and birth."  During the Progressive era of the early twentieth century, cities cuch as Cleveland, Detroit, and Toledo elected businessmen as mayors, presuming that they could run these cities with the same efficiency as they operated their businesses (a currrent example is Michael Bloomberg, now Mayor of New York City).  When Franklin D. Roosevelt took office in 1933, he began to rescue his country, looking to the advice and guidance of a group of leading academics, who became known as his "think tank" or "brain trust."  And a later President, John F. Kennedy, likewise arrived at many of his decisions via the assistance of "some of the best brains in the country"--the best and the brightest from institutions around the [nation]...." (J.A.S. Grenville, A History of the World in the Twentieth Century; Downey, Green, eds., The Twentieth Century). 

The common denominator, in these numerous, varied, and somewhat scattered examples is the employment of what could be referred to as specially competent persons in the functions of government.

I do not wish to appear blind to the fact that most of the higher posts within the governments of the msjority of our more advanced countries are today filled by persons who are university, and frequently law school, educated.  But such training is mostly for the purpose of creating good lawyers or skillful businessmen.  Rarely is it an education specifically directed toward competence in the functions and operations of government.  Moreover, special interests, the political "game," and the distractions involved in the pursuit of re-election, seem to additionally occupy a major proportion of the time, talents, and attention of such leaders.

And when the terms of our current officials are over, they simply go out and operate lucrative law practices and/or businesses--which is what they had been trained to do in the first place.  Some will continue to function politically as well--"behind the scenes"--as lobbyists, and/or assisting other office seekers to win nominations, appointments, and elections.

And so our world thus continues to spin--maintaining its uncomfortable and dangerous status quo.  Our problems, conflicts, and tragedies continue to occur,in an almost predictable sequence.  And most of us continue on as well, in like fashion, seemingly oblivious to the fact that relief, improvement and change are in fact possible.

What we really require is abandonment of our factional ways; and of our continued entrustment of our world, our safety, our children, and our futures, to leadership by factionally oriented and factionally chosen "popular" individuals--or worse, tyrants whose status is based upon force or fear; or leaders who claim to be leaders because they are the descendants of leaders.  What we really require is leadership by skilled professionals--experts and specialists in the procedures involved in the operation of government and society--having no agenda stemming from poloitical advantage or personal self-interest.

                                                   * * * * *