Chap­ter 13 – Our Elite and Pub­lic Life rais­es press­ing con­cerns about the absence of capa­ble and cul­tured indi­vid­u­als from Amer­i­can pub­lic ser­vice. Despite pos­sess­ing the edu­ca­tion, resources, and influ­ence to guide nation­al pol­i­cy, many among the country’s social elite shy away from gov­ern­men­tal roles. One cen­tral rea­son is geography—unlike Eng­land or France, where pow­er, com­merce, and cul­ture con­verge in one city, the Unit­ed States splits its cen­ters. Wash­ing­ton, D.C., holds polit­i­cal author­i­ty, while cities like New York or Boston com­mand finan­cial and cul­tur­al influ­ence. For an ambi­tious, social­ly engaged indi­vid­ual, shift­ing to the cap­i­tal often requires aban­don­ing mean­ing­ful careers and per­son­al net­works. The result is a sys­tem where those best suit­ed to serve are often least inclined to make the sac­ri­fice.

Chap­ter 13 – Our Elite and Pub­lic Life also address­es the finan­cial draw­backs of pub­lic office. Indi­vid­u­als accus­tomed to high earn­ings in pri­vate law, finance, or indus­try must for­go sig­nif­i­cant income to serve in government—a tran­si­tion few are will­ing to make. This eco­nom­ic com­pro­mise is fur­ther com­pli­cat­ed by res­i­den­cy rules, which require rep­re­sen­ta­tives to live with­in their dis­tricts. For many urban pro­fes­sion­als who have moved away from their birth­places for bet­ter prospects, return­ing to run for office becomes imprac­ti­cal. More­over, the lack of finan­cial incen­tives makes such roles unap­peal­ing for those who already con­tribute gen­er­ous­ly through phil­an­thropy or civic work. Rather than pub­lic ser­vice being seen as an ele­vat­ed call­ing, it becomes viewed as a step down—an inef­fi­cient use of one’s poten­tial. This per­cep­tion con­tin­ues to fuel the divide between those with influ­ence and those active­ly involved in gov­er­nance.

A cul­tur­al under­cur­rent fur­ther com­pounds the issue. The chap­ter recounts sub­tle exam­ples of how high soci­ety treats polit­i­cal engage­ment with detached con­de­scen­sion. To serve in gov­ern­ment is often per­ceived as aban­don­ing one’s refined life in exchange for the rough-and-tum­ble of pub­lic debate, bureau­cra­cy, and par­ti­san bick­er­ing. Many elites, groomed for com­fort and pres­tige, shy away from the per­ceived vul­gar­i­ty of pol­i­tics. This mind­set inad­ver­tent­ly rein­forces the notion that polit­i­cal ser­vice is a less­er pursuit—something best left to pro­fes­sion­als or pop­ulists rather than those with cul­tur­al clout. In doing so, it cre­ates a class that remains vocal in cri­tique yet absent in action, effec­tive­ly remov­ing itself from the respon­si­bil­i­ties of lead­er­ship.

The impli­ca­tions of this dis­en­gage­ment rip­ple across the polit­i­cal land­scape. With capa­ble indi­vid­u­als abstain­ing, the field becomes open to those less equipped but more willing—sometimes dri­ven by ambi­tion rather than qual­i­fi­ca­tion. The pub­lic, in turn, grows dis­il­lu­sioned by the qual­i­ty of lead­er­ship, unaware that a more com­pe­tent class watch­es from the side­lines. This cycle weak­ens civic trust and invites medi­oc­rity into roles that demand excel­lence. The coun­try los­es not only skilled minds but also the bal­ance and fore­sight that sea­soned pro­fes­sion­als could offer. With­out broad­er par­tic­i­pa­tion from the elite, pub­lic pol­i­cy becomes dis­con­nect­ed from the very stan­dards of judg­ment, cre­ativ­i­ty, and expe­ri­ence that high­er edu­ca­tion and social priv­i­lege can fos­ter.

Chap­ter 13 – Our Elite and Pub­lic Life calls not just for a struc­tur­al shift but a cul­tur­al reeval­u­a­tion of pub­lic ser­vice. The idea that gov­er­nance is a noble respon­si­bil­i­ty, rather than a career detour, must be rekin­dled among those who have the lux­u­ry to choose. In nations with stronger tra­di­tions of pub­lic lead­er­ship from the upper class­es, ser­vice is a rite of pas­sage, not a detour from pros­per­i­ty. Amer­i­can soci­ety must fos­ter this mindset—not to restore aris­toc­ra­cy, but to ensure that its most capa­ble cit­i­zens con­tribute mean­ing­ful­ly to demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions. Encour­ag­ing ear­ly civic involve­ment, cre­at­ing path­ways that do not require geo­graph­ic or eco­nom­ic upheaval, and rebrand­ing polit­i­cal roles as pres­ti­gious and impact­ful can grad­u­al­ly draw new tal­ent into the pub­lic sphere.

In recent decades, ini­tia­tives like pub­lic-pri­vate fel­low­ships, pol­i­cy-focused MBA tracks, and nation­al ser­vice pro­grams have attempt­ed to bridge this divide. Pro­grams such as the White House Fel­lows or the Har­vard Kennedy School’s pub­lic lead­er­ship devel­op­ment path­ways offer mod­els for inte­grat­ing ambi­tion with ser­vice. These emerg­ing trends sug­gest that with the right struc­ture and incen­tives, a new gen­er­a­tion of lead­ers could re-engage. Chap­ter 13 is less a lament and more a challenge—an invi­ta­tion for those with the priv­i­lege of edu­ca­tion and influ­ence to step into roles that require both. If the best minds remain detached, the nation risks a future led by those with pas­sion but no prepa­ra­tion.