Raising various examples that has occurred in US and also in other regions, the author of the article has examined the myth of dichotomy between the politics and the public administration. The author put forth few examples in the US how the rise of the public administrative states are not in a synchronised position with the democratic society. in view of this dichotomised understanding of the administration with politics, the author questions the perceived dichotomy and aimed at establishing how the two concepts are complementary to each other.
The central theme of the article is that it aims at showing that the clear separation f the administration from politics is a myth and he conceptualises the real roles of the relationship between the politicians and the top officials. In doing this, the author have also argued how these relations are posed in front by terms of bargains or different “role and relation” typologies. Keeping in par with the analysis of the workings of the local government all over the wetern world, the author tries to develop a complementary relationship between these apparently perceived as opposite views.
In the present essay, the author argues that there has been I the past as well as in the present a simultaneous emphasis on separation and insulation of administrators from political interference, on one hand, and interaction and incorporation of administrative contributions in the design and the implementation of public policy, on the other hand. In arguing this, he put forth various theoretical propositions including the structural perspectives, the neo organizational theories and the Policy making theories. According to the author, the concept of dichotomy was put forth in order to make convenience for the elected officials to encompass and delegate some of the unpopular rules to the administrators. He is also of the opinion that this idea of dichotomy has been persisting since the early history of US and has been able to be continued for long because of the absence of any further alternatives. There were however, in the initial stage, requirement for this separation in order to have a clear image. People in present time have took the cue from such previous practices and now utilizes this which the author called as a contrived dichotomy. The author further puts stress on the need of the interdependence between the political chair holders and the administrations; however, the roles have to be distinct. According to him, this will bring in the harmony of governance.
Despite the author’s putting forward of the arguments why the interdependence between politics and administrations are required, he also admits that there is reasons for the establishment of such separation. The various countries seek by various means of legislation to maintain the political neutrality in administration. He argues that there are tendencies of having the following situations if the functions overlap.
the first type of condition that the author thinks to have happened is the political dominance, where there are more control of the political power and less control of the administrative interdependence. Various scholars have criticized this condition since the progressive era. In the Bureaucratic autonomy condition, the administrators tend to become self-controlling and thus cares less for public interest. Also the mutual respect between the political leaders and the administrators are lost.
The author is of the view that the idealized concept would be the complementarities which will ensures a healthy interaction, mutual deference and a reciprocal influence upon each other where the administration will help in shaping the policies and give necessary content in the process of implementing those policies. The duty of the political officials would be to oversee those implementations and give necessary feedbacks.
By analyzing the different phases about what will happen in the different power holding scenarios of the political officials and the administrators, the author, in this article gave a brief overview of the possible reasons of conflicts and distrust. In putting forth the idea of complementarities, the article gives the administration process a new dimension. The public administrators will have the idea of exercising their rights and duties with having a peaceful coordination between themselves and the political officials. In this manner, they can also get rid of the situations where the officials generally tend to delegate unpopular issues upon them. Moreover, a correct situation and sharing of power will make the administration system more strong and transparent. The step by step process of the implementation of a particular context and each if their roles in this implementation can be understood thoroughly with a proper insight from this article.
The author , in the discussion of the article has taken the approach of a review of the literature and a qualitative approach by reviewing the existing experimentations and theories put forth by the former philosophers. He has taken an analytical design in identifying the cause of the sense of dichotomy among the two variables and why it has been so deep rooted in the minds of the people. Moreover, by analyzing the social constructs, he put forth the necessities of the complementarity. The article is quite well placed and has the necessary descriptions of the concepts and literatures about the myth as well as the necessity of the realities. The author by providing various scenarios that will happen because of the strained relationship of the two variables brilliantly concludes the necessity of the overlapping of them. However, the article seems to have written on a pre determined bias and thus do not focus how much the societal conditions of the early years have caused the formation of the myth of dichotomy rather hits on the fact that it is a myth that has been implanted in the mind of the people.
