“Whatever It Takes”: Danger, Necessity, and Realism in American Public Policy

• DOI: 10.1177/0095399720938550
• Date: 01 August 2020
• Author: Alasdair Roberts
• Published date: 01 August 2020
• Subject Matter: Perspectives

https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399720938550

Administration & Society

2020, Vol. 52(7) 1131 –1144

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0095399720938550

journals.sagepub.com/home/aas

Perspectives

“Whatever It Takes”:

Danger, Necessity, and

Realism in American

Public Policy

Alasdair Roberts1

Abstract

There are two mentalities of rule, idealism and realism, which differ in their

assumptions about how far government policy can be guided by principles

alone. The late 1990s were a highpoint for idealism, but the 21st century has

proved to be an age of realism. During recurrent crises, American leaders

have bent principles and pledged instead to “do whatever it takes” to

protect vital interests. The conditions that encourage the realist mentality—

turbulence, uncertainty, and danger—will persist in coming decades. We

should learn more about how realist statecraft works in democratic states.

Keywords

realism, crisis, ethics, leadership

Two Mentalities of Rule

The chain of crises that have confronted the United States over the last 20

years have changed public attitudes about the proper role of government.

These years of crisis have also affected the way that leaders think about the

work of governing—what is sometimes called the “mentality of rule” (Dean,

2010, pp. 24–25; Foucault, 2008; Miller & Rose, 1990, p. 2). The idealism of

1University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Alasdair Roberts, School of Public Policy, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 200 Hicks

Way, Amherst MA 01003, USA.

Email: asroberts@umass.edu

938550AASXXX10.1177/0095399720938550Administration & SocietyRoberts

research-article2020