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 12, 2021

A POST COLD WAR LANDSCAPE

 

This blog is currently reviewing various problems related to how Americans interact and how, in turn, those social processes reflect the challenges posed by the natural rights perspective.  That view has become dominant among Americans in the way they see governance and politics.  The last two postings have highlighted economic activity and specifically commented on trade and comparative advantage.

          Perhaps history will designate this current time as the post-Cold War era.  To the extent this is true, looking back might be helpful.  In the years leading to the end of the twentieth century, one can detect academic and journalistic commentators who warned of what was developing then and has reached fruition now.  At that earlier time, concerns over various industries were being pointed out. 

As the last posting identified, those were industries in technological space – industries such as microelectronics, biotechnology, tele-communication, and computers plus software.  At the turn of the century, international markets had not experienced the full effect low-income nations would have on those industries.  Today, one is hard pressed to buy a new car since computer chips cannot be sufficiently obtained due to the pandemic and the resulting disruptions of many supply chains that have occurred.  The shortage of computer chips, for example, has had an inordinate effect.

Here is the way the predictions sounded back at the turn of the century:  the major competitors, including those of low wage countries, have yet to see the highest levels of labor competition which seem to be in the future.  As the former communist nations become more capitalistic, their educated work force will enter the global labor market.  “Communism ran bad economies but good school systems.”[1]  Once the former communist world learns to play the capitalist game, employers will have access to a relatively well-educated work force of 1.9 billion people. 

Lester Thurow, who points this out, further writes,

Suppose one gave a comprehensive examination to all high school graduates in America to test their educational qualifications and then gave that same examination to everyone in the old Communist world … How many of the latter world pass the exam with test scores higher than those achieved by the average American high school graduate?  The answer is essentially “infinity” – hundreds of million of people know more than the average American.[2]

In most cases, those educated or trained people excel in the technical areas that promised to be the job producing ones in what was then the future.  And that future is now and the only aspect that didn’t turn out as predicted: the leaders of that eventuality are still under communist rule, that being China and Vietnam.

          The two leading Anglo post-industrial nations, the US and Great Britain, have opted for the individualistic perspective – the natural rights view – in the way they define their competitive institutions.  This perspective has led to strategies that have been shortsighted and geared to maximizing profits.  It has also led to making money the new-fashioned way:  securities trading, leverage buyouts, and stock options.

          An economy so directed is neither creating new wealth to its potential nor increasing productivity.  Early, Germany and Japan adopted more of a communitarian perspective (at that time, Seymour Martin Lipset provided ample statistical evidence for this comparative assertion, particularly in the case of Japan[3]).  What about today?  One way to see how this approach has advanced through the years is to observe how the two nations interact economically today.

          In 2012 the Bertelsmann Foundation conducted a survey of the German population and asked how the people viewed Japan.  They were overwhelmingly positive.  They expressed seeing Japan less as a competitor and more as a partner.  The Japanese reciprocated with their overall positive view of Germany.  The poll, for example, found 97% of the Japanese had a positive view as opposed to 3% who had a negative view.[4]

          Early on, Japan’s government took a much stronger role in coordinating its economic efforts.  Corporations through cross stock ownership arrangements known as Keirstsus[5] in the industrial sector, own 78% of stocks within industrial groups on the Tokyo stock exchange.  These arrangements transcend individual businesses and industries, and, in turn, they advance high efficiencies. 

Today, Japan is the fourth largest economy of the world and Germany ranks third.  These comparisons are tricky.  For example, one can look at wealth per capita – as expressed on the average (the mean) or median – and perhaps get a better sense of which countries and their related approaches do a better job.  But any review seems to bolster the sense that communitarian views fare better in providing more equal but prosperous results.

As for the Keirstsu example, these arrangements have established strong systemic conditions that encourage coordination and lend themselves to a communitarian perspective of shared goals and values.  This should not be an indictment of capitalism, but a “gut-check” to unbridled capitalism as exemplified by policies generally denoted as neoliberal policies which became dominant in the US since the 1980s.[6]

These more communitarian approaches are strong organized conditions that encourage coordination and lend themselves to shared goals and values.  Under a communitarian perspective, the goal is not profit maximization, but market share maximization.[7]  They can be sustained only by populations that share a federated view of their citizenry, i.e., a general sense that that people share a national partnership.

And this leads one’s analysis of the economic landscape to another important factor, the prominence of monolithic corporations.  First, the stage needs to be set.  These entities have acted as the great arbitrators in the economy since their rise in the late 1800s.  They have determined products, wages, and prices.  They maintained a balance which did a good job of keeping the consumer demands of the US reasonably satisfied.

Due to the emerging competition from abroad and the easy access to labor markets, financial resources, transportation facilities, and distribution systems available to any smaller competitors, the pristine perch of the huge corporations no longer exists in many industries.  Perhaps the exception is the social media industry.  Many monoliths have experienced serious downsizing.  According to Robert Reich,[8] in the 1990s, every competitor turned to being leaner if not meaner.  This blog will pick up this turn in the next posting.



[1] Lester C. Thurow, The Future of Capitalism:  How Today’s Economic Forces Shape Tomorrow’s World (New York, NY:  William Morrow and Company, Inc.), 45.

[2] Ibid., 46.

[3] Seymour Martin Lipset, American Exceptionalism:  A Double Edged-Sword (New York, NY:  W. W. Norton and Company, 1996).

[4] “Finanzachrichten – Borse and Wirtschaft aktuell,” www.wallstreet-online.de. , attempted to access November 11, 2021.  This is a difficult site to access.

[5] Keirstsu means a business network in Japan that is made up of various companies and organized by supply chains.  The sense is that members are partners, distributors, and at times financiers.  These relations are bolstered by cross ownerships of stock though individual members sustain their independence in their operations.  They, collectively, have been described as “headless combines.”  This blogger thinks they exemplify federated arrangements.  See Daniel Liberto, “Keirstsu,” Investopedia (2021), accessed November 11, 2021. 

[6] William K. Tabb, The Restructuring of Capitalism in Our Time (New York, NY:  Columbia University Press, 2012).

[7] Lester C. Thurow, Head to Head:  The Coming Economic Battle among Japan, Europe, and America (New York, NY:  MacMillan Publishing Company, 1992).

[8] Robert B. Reich, The Work of Nations:  Preparing Ourselves for the 21st -Century Capitalism (New York, NY:  Vintage Books) AND “Is Lean Manufacturing Still Relevant in 2021and Beyond?”, Four Principles (n.d.), accessed November 11, 2021, https://fourprinciples.com/expert-opinion/is-lean-manufacturing-still-relevant-in-2021-and-beyond/ .

No comments:

Post a Comment