| |
New
Living Diary
Index
New participatory
democracy
Taming the Corporations
My Welsh socialism
My New
Socialist Settlement
Globalise the left!
Bevan re-visited
|
|
|
item0073A 1030, 1031
1030
26 July 2004
EU? America?
Both models are wrong
Our "new" younger TU leaders are seeking
to push the UK economic debate in precisely the wrong direction. They
argue that under Blair, Labour has swung too far towards the unfettered
capitalism of the USA, and that we ought to swing back towards the more
protectionist EU labour market model, with strong Union rights and
powerful firing constraints.
I think they are right about Blair, but
wrong about the EU. I do not buy the pendulum imagery. EU
labour market models are far too rigid, too protectionist, too much of a
deterrent to new investment and enterprise.
The need is for a new view of our fellow
workers, and their "economic" significance. There is no such thing as a
"labour market" comparable with commodity markets: that is a misleading,
capitalist parallel. We must accord to each fellow worker the
dignity of equal partner, enjoying more powerful
individual rights, new and better forms
individual security - enjoyed
as of civil right, without the necessity of mediation by trade unions.
I readily admit that this personalised,
dynamic view of the economy is nowhere fully formulated. Older
misleading models still prevail, particularly the mischievous doctrine of fixed-cakery.
- Part of the solution lies in my
prescription for Adjustment Pay. But in designing the new model,
there is still much thinking to be done.
Does any of this resonate with you? Drop me a line
<
Back to Home Page
1031
10
August
2004
More means worse
George Monbiot is a passionate and committed campaigner. True, I am often
infuriated by his other-worldliness, and inability to generate practical
political solutions.
But I respect his passion, and his perceptions. And
I accept his current analysis, which contends that current generations may
well be enjoying the best of global existences, never to be repeated. Global warming and climatic
degradation, he contends in this week’s
Guardian, are bound to bring far
less satisfactory conditions beckoning, for our grandchildren.
Now:
Armageddon is not for me – temperamentally,
one of my abiding faults is to believe that
“something will turn up”… But I remain convinced that standards of living
throughout the globe are destined to approximate more closely to each other,
and that “average” living standards in the “wealthy West” will be reduced,
certainly in relative terms, perhaps also in absolute terms. And I am
convinced that, in political terms, we must plan for such an eventuality.
All our politicians ought to be devoting part of their Summer hols to
working out how to break this news to their peoples...
Indeed, that challenge lies at the core of my own socialism. If you will
revert to the masthead of my HomePage, you will find my credo –
-
You are in the company of Roger Warren Evans,
Welsh socialist lawyer and company director, on a journey to work out a new socialist order capable of generating equality
and freedom for the world. Nothing less
will do.
The
search must be for a set of principles which are capable of carrying
universal conviction across national boundaries - irrespective of history, language and culture.
The UN declaration of Human Rights is not that document, partly because it
is not comprehensive, and partly because it is unrealistic. This very
Internet constitutes a huge force for the homogenisation of political
principle.
My daily life is now spent in contact with hundreds of refugees,
brought to Swansea from hugely varying countries of origin, who have enjoyed
greatly varying living standards. They are already affected by global
pressures which have nothing to do with climate change. Their moves already
pose real challenges for "western" societies - political innovation is
urgently required. And there is no doubt that the distress and
dislocation which will be caused by climate change will add greatly to those
pressures. Local and regional wars, and natural disasters, will bring
us all closer and closer together. The political search is on, to
resolve the resulting issues.
What
would such a “universal socialism” be like? I have tried to imagine that
new world. And I think it would look like this –
 Identifiable
“territories” would continue to fall within the jurisdiction of
democratically-governed “Nation States”, whose Governments would retain all
powers to govern by way of “legislation” regulating affairs within their own
territory, including the admission of non-citizens to the territory;
The
State would retain a monopoly of military force and Police powers, within a
regulatory constitutional framework; these would be countered by the
assurances of individual security accorded, as a minimum, by the European
Convention of Human Rights;
The
primary responsibility of “the State” would be universal primary education,
universal healthcare, some form of universal last-resort financial
assistance, and a universal old age-pension; other forms of benefit would
necessarily vary from State to State, reflecting national levels of
monetised wealth; consideration should be given to a new form of
international-treaty cover, for the payment of compensation to natural
persons whose property or livelihood have been destroyed by the
unforeseeable consequences of climate change;
The
State would bear responsibility for highways and the primary physical
networks of communication, including telecommunications, whereas
communications undertakings would ordinarily operate within the market
economy;
“The
economy” would be a function of individual “private” initiative, by way of a
myriad “market” transactions; standards of legality would be set and
enforced by the State, but the State would not trade; the State would ensure
openness and transparency in the conduct of the economy, and in particular
restrain the trading freedoms of artificial legal persons;
The
State would retain exceptional powers of regulatory intervention or
requisition relating to –
-
compulsory
medication (disease, pandemics, risks to public health);
-
civil and
military emergencies;
-
rationing
of food, water and other scarce supplies.
Many
of you will have other ideas. And I am keenly aware that this
model a “liberal” view of the economy, and of the relationship
between the Individual and the State – that is, after all, “where I come
from”. But I do suggest that the model is of universal attractiveness, and
potentially of universal application.
 I propose this framework for your consideration, as a “universal
nation-State
constitution”. I say that, living within a framework of this kind, all
peoples - tribes, families, individuals, would enjoy the security and
freedom from fear that is the prerequisite of any "good life". I fully appreciate that billions of people eke out their
daily lives within systems which fall far, far short of these
principles. Equally, it seems to me essential that we seek UN agreement
on a realistic common code, within the framework of which all global systems
can in due course be compared and encouraged.
If
we could do this, we would take a step towards understanding, and resolving,
the awful pressures of climate change, against which George Monbiot so
graphically warns. Climate change is but one example of the universal
gross injustices, which it is for socialists everywhere to address...
What do you think? Drop me a
line
<
Back to Home Page
|
|