The privilege of public service and the dangers of populist technocracy: a response to Michael Gove and Dominic Cumming's 2020 Ditchley annual lecture.

IF 1.1 3区社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE British Politics Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2020-10-18 DOI:10.1057/s41293-020-00148-2

David Blunkett, Matthew Flinders

引用次数: 0

Abstract

On 27 June 2020, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, Michael Gove, gave the Ditchley Annual Lecture on the theme of 'the privilege of public service'. Although the fact that it took place in the context of the broader Coronavirus crisis meant that it received relatively little publicity or attention, the central argument of this article is that the lecture provides great insight into the ideas shaping government policy, in general, and into the inner mind of Dominic Cummings, in particular. As such, we argue that although the lecture was given by Michael Gove, it was clearly floating ideas and themes that were taken, almost directly, from Dominic Cummings' website. We draw out and explore these themes and suggest that what they combine to offer is a dangerous blend of technocratic populism that is as intellectually splintered as it is politically naïve.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

公共服务的特权与民粹主义技术主义的危险：对迈克尔-戈夫和多米尼克-卡明 2020 年迪奇雷年度演讲的回应。

2020 年 6 月 27 日，兰开斯特公国大臣兼内阁办公厅大臣迈克尔-戈夫发表了主题为 "公共服务的特权 "的迪奇利年度演讲。虽然这次讲座是在冠状病毒危机的大背景下举行的，这意味着它得到的宣传或关注相对较少，但本文的核心论点是，这次讲座提供了一个很好的视角，让我们从总体上了解影响政府政策的思想，特别是多米尼克-卡明斯的内心世界。因此，我们认为，虽然讲座是由迈克尔-戈夫（Michael Gove）主讲的，但其中的观点和主题显然是直接取自多米尼克-卡明斯的网站。我们引出并探讨了这些主题，并指出它们结合在一起所提供的是一种技术官僚民粹主义的危险混合体，这种民粹主义在思想上是分裂的，在政治上也是幼稚的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

British Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

2.40

自引率

9.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： British Politics offers the only forum explicitly designed to promote research in British political studies, and seeks to provide a counterweight to the growing fragmentation of this field during recent years. To this end, the journal aims to promote a more holistic understanding of British politics by encouraging a closer integration between theoretical and empirical research, between historical and contemporary analyses, and by fostering a conception of British politics as a broad and multi-disciplinary field of study. This incorporates a range of sub-fields, including psephology, policy analysis, regional studies, comparative politics, institutional analysis, political theory, political economy, historical analysis, cultural studies and social policy. While recognising the validity and the importance of research into specific aspects of British politics, the journal takes it to be a guiding principle that such research is more useful, and indeed meaningful, if it is related to the field of British politics in a broader and fuller sense. The scope of the journal will therefore be broad, incorporating a range of research papers and review articles from all theoretical perspectives, and on all aspects of British politics, including policy developments, institutional change and political behaviour. Priority will, however, be given to contributions which link contemporary developments in British politics to theoretical and/or historical analyses. The aim is as much to encourage the development of empirical research that is theoretically rigorous and informed, as it is to encourage the empirical application of theoretical work (or at least to encourage theorists to explicitly signify how their work could be applied in an empirical manner).