Moralists, Pragmatists, and Rogues: Bureaucrats in Modern Mysteries

Many contemporary mysteries feature bureaucrats struggling with difficult ethical dilemmas. Should they lie? Disobey an order? Use physical force? Break the law in order to catch a criminal? In addition to their entertainment value, mysteries offer untapped opportunities to reflect on the moral conflicts faced by civil servants. In this article, the author analyzes the work of 12 modern mystery writers whose protagonists include police detectives, a medical examiner, a prosecutor, a park ranger, and a fire chief. Several types of bureaucrats are identified including moralists, pragmatists, and rogues. The author then links these types to broader ethical philosophies, such as actutilitarianism, rule‐utilitarianism, ethical egoism, and Kant's categorical imperative. He concludes that mysteries can be an effective teaching tool for courses in ethics and public administration.     

Attacking the assets of a trust: the courts use of freezing orders

Freezing orders are a powerful tool in the hands of the courtand particularly applied when the court finds an arrangementa sham, or that there is a reason for piercing the trust veil.William Richmond-Coggan discusses the main issues.     

Reassessing U.S. Strategy in the Aftermath of the Korean War

This article examines the reassessment of U.S. strategy that Dwight D. Eisenhower directed after replacing Harry S. Truman in the White House in January 1953, as he worked to bring the Korean War to an end and then confronted the problems remaining in its aftermath. Despite much of the rhetoric of the early Eisenhower administration, the outcome of that reassessment fit more closely the objective of containment than key strategic formulations of its predecessor. Why was this so? How did the orientation apply to ending the war in Korea and sustaining the U.S. position there and elsewhere after the armistice? What insights, if any, do the process of reassessment and its outcome provide for the present? Answers to these questions serve to emphasize the dynamic and contingent nature of American strategy in the early Cold War and the importance of flexible, engaged leadership in the White House.