ABSTRACT
Hypothetical counter-factual scenarios of non-pragmatism are avoided since context is important to any application of pragmatic problem-solving approach. Similarly, the focus is on via positiva (what pragmatism looks like), rather via negativa (what pragmatism is not) descriptions, hence the focus on positive instances of pragmatism in any part of the policy process. Moreover, while pragmatism may be a good goal for any state to aim at, the mere fact of establishing it as a goal can serve to weaken one’s ability to pursue it, as an idealised vision of pragmatism itself becomes merely another distracting ideology. Pragmatism is a skill, rather than a universal attribute. The China case shows pragmatic leaders fighting to emerge from an ideological context, only able to take a pragmatic stance abroad when powerful enough to escape ideological constraints at home. While the US electoral system may push politicians to adopt ideological stances on campaign trail, checks and balances system ensures that they become more pragmatic.
