Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 24 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

A Review of : "The Future of American Progressiveism," by Roberto M. Unger and Cornel West

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages)   1 comment
Message Herbert Calhoun
Become a Fan
  (26 fans)
In this short, intense but sharply focused book, entitled "The Future of American Progressivism," the authors put before us the major problem of our times: If Francis Fukayama's claim that (at least in principle) democracy represents the endpoint of our political evolution, then it is high time that the rest of the world line up to get aboard the fast moving Western democratic train, right?

Well, not exactly according to this book, as these two scholars see enough cracks developing in the "Western democratic project" that those considering adopting it should take a more careful second look at the problems of Western democracies before jumping aboard. Using the USA as exhibit one, they engage in a high-level and spirited critique that points out what the major problems are with Western democracies. They then offer both theoretical and specific practical suggestions as to how those problems might best be overcome.

As they see it, the preeminent problem of Western democracy is rampant inequality coupled with social and economic insecurity -- which, if not handled delicately and properly, can end up repeating the experience of a dehumanizing elite hierarchy imposing its will on the rest of the population. It is the same experience we have seen repeated so often in Third world autocracies.

The question this book poses and then attempts to answer is this: How do peoples of the world successfully jump aboard the democratic train while avoiding its inherent traps and defects, traps and defects that are rapidly emerging in the contemporary American example? The general answer they give lies in seeing that true progressive ideas again find their way back into the market place of ideas. The specific and practical answers they give are that the U.S. and aspiring countries must:

(1) Invest in the real economy and in the "common good" rather than having the rich serve themselves.

(2) Broaden the gateways of access to the vanguard of innovative knowledge-based production. And disseminate advanced experimental productive practices among the small and medium size businesses that form the heart of the American economy.

(3) Make available to all Americans a type of education that accords priority to capabilities, both conceptual and practical: of analysis, synthesis, and recombination of ideas and of things.

(4) And to this end, reconcile local management of the schools with national standards of investments and quality.

(5) Engage society in the competitive provision of public services as the best way of enhancing their quality, while using the powers of government to ensure a universal minimum of provisions.

(6) Insist on the high level of taxation required for the financing of such alternatives. (What matters in the short term is the overall level of the tax take and how it is spent. Later on, it can be made more progressive through a steeply progressive tax on individual consumption); and

(7) Above all, take politics out of the shadow of money.

Their analysis of American democracy boils down to the current defects in the existing two-party system.

The Republican Party imagines that only if government becomes less costly and restrictive -- i.e., with lower taxes and fewer regulations -- economic growth would make up for inequality. When Republicans are in power, they imagine that trickle down economics will take care of any inequality. But history has shown that this has been little more than just a Republican "wet dream." The truth is that under Republican rule, we have seen inequality increase enough to threaten freedom and prosperity as well as democratic progress. The Republican program thus is not so much a viable answer to the problems of democracy as it is a sop to America's wealthy elites.

The Democratic Party, on the other hand, proposes no new direction. Its idea is simply to put a human face on Republican programs, in an effort to implement their programs with a rhetorical humanizing facelift. Even democrats agree that this is less a project than it is an abdication of the progressive voice in the American political dialogue.

Both parties agree that the bond markets should be left unrestrained and thus should get what they want: They are allowed to be reckless so long as they do so only on behalf of the rich. Both parties also agree that fiscal and monetary stimulus should be used to make up for the absence of any consequential broadening of economic and educational opportunity. But only the democrats believe that the bitter pill of disempowerment should be sweetened with a touch of tax fairness however modest its effects may be. The Republicans simply don't care; they want the rich to pay no taxes and for business to operate as if the American economy were their private preserve and thus still the Wild Wild West.

These authors understand too that our democratic process has been reduced to a four-year ideological Kabuki dance orchestrated by corporate money. It is corporate money that underwrites the campaigns of those in both political parties. The two parties are thus handcuffed to each other, sentenced to march in lockstep down the political aisle with the politics and ideology of their corporate paymasters.

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Must Read 1   Well Said 1   Valuable 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Herbert Calhoun Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Retired Foreign Service Officer and past Manager of Political and Military Affairs at the US Department of State. For a brief time an Assistant Professor of International Relations at the University of Denver and the University of Washington at (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Welcome to Kingdom Palin, the land of no accountability

Ten reasons why Mr. Obama will lose the Presidential race in 2012.

A Review of Bill Maher's Book "The NEW new Rules"

Book Review of "The Arc of Justice" by Kevin Boyle

Review of Edward Klein's Book "The Amateur"

A Review of the Movie “Capitalism A Love Story” Is Michael Moore a Permanent (Anti-) Capitalist gadfly or Change Age

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend