A Crucial Element of Democracy

This is a blog by Robert Gutierrez ...
While often taken for granted, civics education plays a crucial role in a democracy like ours. This Blog is dedicated to enticing its readers into taking an active role in the formulation of the civics curriculum found in their local schools. In order to do this, the Blog is offering a newer way to look at civics education, a newer construct - liberated federalism or federation theory. Daniel Elazar defines federalism as "the mode of political organization that unites separate polities within an overarching political system by distributing power among general and constituent governments in a manner designed to protect the existence and authority of both." It depends on its citizens acting in certain ways which Elazar calls federalism's processes. Federation theory, as applied to civics curriculum, has a set of aims. They are:
*Teach a view of government as a supra federated institution of society in which collective interests of the commonwealth are protected and advanced.
*Teach the philosophical basis of government's role as guardian of the grand partnership of citizens at both levels of individuals and associations of political and social intercourse.
*Convey the need of government to engender levels of support promoting a general sense of obligation and duty toward agreed upon goals and processes aimed at advancing the common betterment.
*Establish and justify a political morality which includes a process to assess whether that morality meets the needs of changing times while holding true to federalist values.
*Emphasize the integrity of the individual both in terms of liberty and equity in which each citizen is a member of a compacted arrangement and whose role is legally, politically, and socially congruent with the spirit of the Bill of Rights.
*Find a balance between a respect for national expertise and an encouragement of local, unsophisticated participation in policy decision-making and implementation.
Your input, as to the content of this Blog, is encouraged through this Blog directly or the Blog's email address: gravitascivics@gmail.com .
NOTE: This blog has led to the publication of a book. The title of that book is TOWARD A FEDERATED NATION: IMPLEMENTING NATIONAL CIVICS STANDARDS and it is available through Amazon in both ebook and paperback versions.

Friday, November 25, 2016

CLASS OR RACE OR BOTH?

With the importance of the white working class in the election of Donald Trump, was this election a product of racist sentiments or of a class struggle?  Has the coalition of the Democratic Party become one of higher income professionals and inner city blacks which has thrown the interests of working, Midwestern whites to the curb?  This writer’s response to these questions is that yes, the election was both an expression of racism and of class struggle.
          As pointed out in the last posting, Democratic strategists and policy makers such as Lawrence Summers had ignored the blatant economic demands of the displaced workers hit by foreign and domestic cheap labor and the effects of automation.  The reasons for this neglect are not so clear.  Was it a matter that what was called for was just beyond the ability of any politician to address and remedy?
          Of course, along comes Mr. Trump who promises solutions, but at what cost?  If his solutions call on, in effect, freezing those manufacturing facilities that exist and somehow forcing the ones that left back to the Midwest, then those policies would be either so un-capitalistic and/or unconstitutional that one wonders how the feat will be accomplished.
          It would be un-capitalistic in that it would call for trade wars.  A way to freeze existing plants and foundries is to slap tariffs on imported goods.  The thing is, that would most likely be met with tariffs from the other countries involved.  Hence, international trade would be highly curtailed and that would raise our prices and make our economy very unproductive.  It would also limit the economy by hurting existing exports.
          What is needed is a vast retraining program and its accompanying governmental investment that, up to now, this government, when run by either party, has been unwilling to do.  And it would also call for employment program(s) that would supply the needed income while such retraining was taking place.  Again, a strong government effort.  Conservatives, who basically have controlled the policy making organs of government (Congress and legislatures), are ideologically antagonistic.
          If there is one thing that unites all conservatives, it is the idea of smaller government and these problems call for, albeit for a limited period, a much bigger government – the type of effort characterizing the New Deal of the 1930s.  And that is the class side of this concern.
          As for the race side, here is where government, as in the words of Hillary Clinton, is not so effective in changing minds or hearts.  What government can do is put laws in effect making discrimination illegal and it can place resources in the grasp of targeted groups experiencing the deficiencies in the system – but not change hearts.[1]
          Secretary Clinton had the plans, but she was deficient in communicating them, plus all her accumulated baggage (mostly placed there by Republican efforts to discredit her).  The point was the challenge for a more dual view:  attacking the inequities of class and the racism that exists against blacks and immigrants.  What was missing was the language which “Working Together,” as a slogan attempted to capture, but fell short.
          Why?  It fell short because the nation abandoned a federalist view some fifty or sixty years ago, and assuming that a slogan can rekindle the type of collaborative inclinations that once existed is unrealistic.  Building bridges, not walls, is dreamy for people who feel and understand the collaborative nature of our constitutional makeup.  The res publica is simply not there and that is part of the problem that cannot be fixed in a political campaign.  It calls for a concerted effort.
          Some have been vocal for a dual message – meeting the class challenges and the racism, especially held among the affected white working class – but that order cannot be met or addressed when there is an opposing side countering with messages more resonant with the existing electorate.  What is heartening is that the collaborative side received more votes, albeit poorly distributed to make the difference needed in the Electoral College.



[1] George Packer, “The Unconnected,” The New Yorker 92, no. 35 (2016):  48-61.

No comments:

Post a Comment