The new state : $b Group organization the solution of popular governmentFollett, Mary Parker
Science
The new state : $b Group organization the solution of popular government
Follett, Mary Parker
Democracy; Political participation; Social psychology; State, The
Our reform associations, while they have fought party, have often
endeavored to substitute their own organization for the party
organization. This has often been the alternative offered to us—do we
want good government or poor government? We have not been asked if we
would like to govern ourselves. This is why Mitchell lost last year in
New York. One of the New York papers during the campaign advised Mr.
Mitchell “to get nearer the people.” But it is not for government to
“get nearer” the people; it must identify itself with the people. It
isn’t enough for the “good” officials to explain to the people what they
are doing; they must take the people into their counsels. If the Gary
system had ever been properly put up to the fathers it is doubtful if
they would have voted against it. Then a good deal of this advice in
regard to city officials “explaining” their plans in all parts of the
city leaves out of account that the local people have a great deal to
give. Some of the most uneducated, so-called, of the fathers and mothers
might have had valuable points of view to offer in regard to the
practical workings of the Gary system.
Tammany won in New York and we heard many people say, “Well, this is
your democracy, the people want bad government, the majority of people
in New York city have voted for it.” Nothing could be more superficial.
What the election in New York meant was that “the people” are cleverer
than was thought; they know that the question should not be of “good”
government or “bad” government, but only of self-government, and the
only way they have of expressing this is to vote against a government
which _seems_ to disregard them.
To say, “We are good men, we are honest officials, we are employing
experts on education, sanitation etc., you must trust us,” will not do;
some way must be devised of connecting the experts and the people—that
is the first thing to be worked out, then some way of taking the people
into the counsels of city administration. All of us criticize things we
don’t know anything about. As soon as we see the difficulties, _as soon
as the responsibility is put upon us_, our whole attitude changes. Take
the popular cry “Boston positions for Boston people.” This seems a
pretty good principle to superficial thinking. But when we know that we
have an appropriation of $200,000 a year for a certain department, and
are looking for a man to administer it, when we go into the matter and
find that there are only two or three experts for this position in the
United States, and that not one of these lives in Boston, the question
takes the concrete form, “Shall we allow $200,000 of our money to be
wasted through inept administration?” It might be said, “But city
governments do have the responsibility and yet this is just what they
are all the time doing.” Certainly, because their position rests on
patronage, but I am proposing that the whole system be changed.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account