Yes, nice article. Some things should be added, however. There also is the  
de facto
but not de jure collapse of the so-called Washington Consensus on  global 
economic policy,
the need for some kind of protectionism if mid level jobs are to be  
regained, and the need
for rational immigration policy beyond "open the floodgates" of the  
Democrats and
"close the door to everybody" of the Republicans. 
 
Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
 
 
 
message dated 8/26/2011 11:00:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
[email protected] writes:

Our  East Coast friends return to their philosophical roots for a 
thoughtful  critique. No answers, but good questions.


_http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2011/the_intellectual_colla
pse_of_left_and_right_56624_ 
(http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2011/the_intellectual_collapse_of_left_and_right_56624)
 



 
The Intellectual Collapse of Left and Right
Democrats and Republicans alike are failing to convince the American people 
 that they have the answer to their country's problems. Underneath, 
however,  lies a deeper intellectual confusion. The two most plausible visions 
developed  by the US centre-left and centre-right – the "knowledge economy" and 
the  "ownership society" – lie in tatters, leaving a void in America's 
discussion  of its economic future. 
On the right, the ownership society has been disowned. The idea began with  
Chicago School libertarian economists who in the 1960s and '70s devised  
elaborate private alternatives to the social insurance programme created by  
Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. These ideas lay behind the April budget plan 
by  Paul Ryan, the Republican chair of the House of Representatives budget  
committee.  
Yet Mr Ryan's fellow Republicans rushed to distance themselves from his  
idea of replacing Medicare with insurance vouchers set to dwindle in value.  
This followed a speedy public repudiation of President George W. Bush's plan  
for partial privatisation of Social Security, the US public pension system, 
a  few years back. Both events made clear that Americans do not share the 
right's  vision of replacing public social insurance with private provision. 
The fundamental blow to the ownership society, however, was the collapse of 
 the bubble economy. Individual savings accounts, of the kind ownership 
society  advocated, were devastated by the crash. The expansion of home 
ownership,  pushed by Republicans and Democrats alike, also left millions of 
Americans  "underwater." 
Ironically, the closest thing to a victory for the concept was the 2009  
healthcare reform passed by President Barack Obama, which was modelled on  
proposals made in the 1990s by the conservative Heritage Foundation.  
Republicans repudiated this approach for partisan reasons, at the price of  
intellectual consistency. 
The collapse of this conservative vision should give the Democrats little  
comfort, however. Their idea of the knowledge economy is no more credible.  
According to 1990s "third way" progressives on both sides of the Atlantic,  
success in winner-take-all global markets would depend on human capital.  
Education was now to be what financial and real estate assets were to the  
ownership society. 
Yet the story that President Bill Clinton and British prime minister Tony  
Blair told of college-educated individuals thriving in global labour markets 
 was wrong. To begin with, America's professionals owe their relative 
affluence  largely to their protection from offshoring or competition with  
immigrants. 
Licensing laws limit entry to the guilds of lawyers, doctors and  
professors. These remain old-fashioned crafts, largely untouched by  
productivity-enhancing technology. Meanwhile, in the financial sector, bonuses  
have gone to 
old-fashioned speculators who bet with leveraged money, knowing  the state 
will socialise their losses. 
Most US job growth since the 1990s has been in three sectors: health,  
education and government. Nine of the 10 largest occupations earn less than  
the 
mean hourly wage. Those with the fastest growth are nurses, home health  
aides and customer service clerks. Middle-skill jobs with decent wages have  
disappeared, while downward mobility and unskilled immigration has swollen 
the  low-wage domestic service sector. 
America's struggling workforce faces mass unemployment, low pay, inadequate 
 benefits and highly regressive taxation. The centre-right's ownership 
society  and the centre-left's knowledge economy are irrelevant to these 
problems. It  is an insult to tell struggling health aides and store clerks to 
supplement  their income by investing in stocks. It is a cruel joke to tell 
most 
of them  that they should go to college, become entrepreneurs and found 
start-ups. 
But alternative strategies have their limits. Fostering American  
manufacturing can be justified on other grounds, but productivity growth  
ensures it 
will provide only a shrinking minority of jobs in the long run.  America's 
anti-statist culture and regional and ethnic rivalries limit the  kinds of 
redistribution, in the form of social programmes, public services or  wage 
subsidies, that have been employed in many other developed countries. 
Supporters of the ownership society and the knowledge economy alike have  
emphasised economic aspiration above economic security. That might have 
seemed  plausible during the bubble years, but it does not fit the conditions 
of  
distressed workers in today's post-crash, slow-growth economy. Whatever 
forms  the next conservatism and the next liberalism take in the US, they may 
be  based as much on a politics of security as the politics of  
aspiration.<div class="disqus-noscript"><a 
href="_http://newamerica.disqus.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newamerica.net%2Fnode%2F56624_
 
(http://newamerica.disqus.com/?url=http://www.newamerica.net/node/56624) ">View 
 the discussion 
thread.</a></div> 



-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community  
<[email protected]>
Google Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 



-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to