A Progressive Alternative?

[aeolium]

I was interested to hear by chance an interview with the Brazilian philosopher Roberto Unger on the BBC World Service. This is someone who at least seems to be seeking to articulate a progressive alternative to the current political and economic structures. The ideas are not always entirely clear (at least to me) in their practical implications but they are thought-provoking. Here is the TV version of the interview (about 24 mins):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03hdhh4/HARDtalk_Roberto_Unger_Philosopher/

There is also a text version of a different interview here (in which he was inter al arguing for a progressive alternative to Obama).

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

yes i kind of gave up on Unger after being initially bewitched ...

here is another bewitching idea [for me] a federal British state with real decentralised power

Britain is lumbered with a pre-modern state. Building a smarter state thus requires the formation of something new and different. The better economic future that Adonis and his colleagues envision cannot be delivered without the re-formation of Britain as a genuine federal state – a state grounded on a written constitution and delivering “maximum devolution” to its English regions as well as its nations.

[aeolium]

Yes, it's an attractive idea but there are problems apart from those mentioned in the article. One is that for any kind of devolution of power to be really effective it needs to be real power, with the ability to raise taxes and not be so dependent on the central government grant to local authorities, which has enabled this government to impose swingeing cuts which have to be implemented by the councils. Yet there are two reasons why this will be difficult: firstly, that no government wants to surrender control of the purse-strings (whatever fine words it has uttered pre-election about returning power to the local communities) and secondly that the tax-raising power of, say, London is infinitely greater than that of, say, Powys (or whatever equivalent mid-Wales region you want to construct). Unless there is some mechanism for transferring money between richer and poorer regions to smooth out those inequalities then federalism will not improve things. And that mechanism almost certainly has to be central government, so you're back to the old grant-dependency.

Another problem is that I don't get the sense of particular regional consciousness in the different parts of Britain - apart, obviously, from the national consciousness of Scotland and Wales especially (and possibly Cornwall). The affinity seems to be to more local areas, the old counties perhaps, and big metropolitan districts. That's something that might change over time but it could initially mean that a regional 'government' would be seen by some in the region as just as distant as the Westminster government currently appears.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

well aeolium all government entails alienation of the populace, my bet is that Regional Authority less so than Westminster and the awful Treasury .... to argue against Regional Government because it reuires the raising of taxes regionally, and not totally centrally is not to raise an obstacle but to object in principle to the nature of the beast ... i do entirely believe that a thoroughgoing regionalism is the only radical option available to us ... and it is a shame we are not discussing the full ramifications in depth in our national politics - the Scottish Referendum is an exercise in irrelevance for me since it presupposes an entity, England, as existing with a character of pernicious domination .... they could usefully be opening up the debate on what a society on these islands can be rather than twittering on about their pet whine, the English and their supposed perfidy .... i am sure my grannies and their spouses never did anything antagonistic to the people fro the northern regions of these islands and no one else's grannies &c as long as they were not part of the Hanoverian and Windsor Establishment/Aristocracy/and the Edinburgh and London financial Mafia ... it is no longer reasonable nor virtuous to claim to be 'English' despite both Alfred and Daughter's Great Virtue ....

A chapter in The Ancient Human Occupation of Britain states that the Last Glacial Maximum "saw an almost complete depopulation of England, Germany and the northern half of France, starting around 23,000 years ago, with the possible exception of rare ephemeral incursions into the southern half of Germany".[9] Humans probably returned to the region of the British/Irish peninsula about 14,700 years ago as the Ice Age started to end.[10] Eighty percent of the DNA of most Britons, according to modern research, has been passed down from a few thousand individuals who hunted in this region during the last Ice Age. Compared to this, subsequent migrations from mainland Europe had little genetic impact on the British.

wicki

see also

[aeolium]

I'm not opposed to the idea of federalism, calum - quite the reverse. I prefer the German set-up to ours though for historical reasons it's easier for them as we moved relatively early towards a heavily centralised state. I just think that the implications of constitutional changes need to be thought through.

As for the Scottish situation, it should be remembered that they were an independent nation for longer than they have been under government from Westminster. I don't think their decision is particularly a matter of 'culture' but rather whether the community that lives there - formed of multiple ethnicities and cultures like that of many other places - wishes to continue to be governed from Westminster. All forms of political arrangement - empires, economic communities, nations - are transient historical artefacts and there is nothing permanent or even semi-permanent about any of them. We share our culture, our humanity, with everyone else on the globe but that does not mean we want a world government. For political arrangements to continue, in democracies at least, it requires the consent of the communities that live within them and, if that consent is lost, ultimately the political arrangement is likely to change.

[Richard Tarleton]

Looking at the calibre of politician in the Wales govt and assembly, and in my own and certain other Welsh county councils, the prospects for greater regionalism and devolution are not encouraging IMV if these are in any way typical of elsewhere.

[Serial_Apologist]

We share our culture, our humanity, with everyone else on the globe but that does not mean we want a world government.

We already have one, in the form of the international network of stock exchanges, backed up by the World Bank and its local/regional acolytes.

The problem is not internationalism versus localism, but the need to establish a global, grass-roots accountable, alternative. That's going to take time, involving bilateral agreements between countries respecting human and democratic rights, environmental protection, etc. It could start with Britain (for example) discussing these possibilities with certain Latin American countries.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

many would prefer a much more authoritative UN - both in terms of environmental issues and in terms of protecting justice and civil society - hard as that would be ....

the shambles at local level is nowhere near the awfulness of the shambles in the current British State ... and one function that would undoubtedly be carried out at national level would be the review of regional performance and comparisons of quality of life, health, education etc in the different regions ....

as for traditional loyalties to old counties etc .... give it two year and the new regions would have strong local affiliations ....

as near the Swiss as possible imv .... [ a corporate Head of State not an individual/President/Monarch; well founded regions and a culture of active citizenship]

pipe dreams i know

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

btw it is a very interesting interview Sacher gives him all the conventional arguments but he still comes out fighting .... however i remain an adherent of Brand's view of the futility of voting in pour present circumstance ... none of the available alternatives address the issues or propose solutions that are likely to be effective in tackling our rather serious challenges

[Serial_Apologist]

many would prefer a much more authoritative UN - both in terms of environmental issues and in terms of protecting justice and civil society - hard as that would be ....

the shambles at local level is nowhere near the awfulness of the shambles in the current British State ... and one function that would undoubtedly be carried out at national level would be the review of regional performance and comparisons of quality of life, health, education etc in the different regions ....

as for traditional loyalties to old counties etc .... give it two year and the new regions would have strong local affiliations ....

as near the Swiss as possible imv .... [ a corporate Head of State not an individual/President/Monarch; well founded regions and a culture of active citizenship]

pipe dreams i know

Pipe dreams insofar as imagination stretching, but what I think is that were A British government to develop trading arrangements with countries with reasonably reputable records, a grouping of such countries could be a midway position from which to start building that accountable UN; my ideal of starting from and building up grassroots democratic structures (whether council or region-based) ab initio is just going to take too long; it also doesn't take into account the role that institutions play in triggering movements at the base. I've been reading up on my Geoff Hodgson, see...

[ahinton]

We already have one, in the form of the international network of stock exchanges, backed up by the World Bank and its local/regional acolytes.

The problem is not internationalism versus localism, but the need to establish a global, grass-roots accountable, alternative. That's going to take time, involving bilateral agreements between countries respecting human and democratic rights, environmental protection, etc. It could start with Britain (for example) discussing these possibilities with certain Latin American countries.

Sure - but would you trust it just because there might appear to be evidence of a purportedly sincere attempt to inaugurate such a concept in practice? I'm far from certain that I would!...

[Serial_Apologist]

Sure - but would you trust it just because there might appear to be evidence of a purportedly sincere attempt to inaugurate such a concept in practice? I'm far from certain that I would!...

Provided one trusted sufficiently the protagonists involved, there wouldn't be much choice, one wouldn't have thought.