Tag Archives: Tribalism

A Union of Consent

I read about British politics primarily as a hobby, but it’s also a source of useful perspective. One example of the latter is the recurring and explicit reference to the United Kingdom as “a union of consent,” in discussions of internal political fractures.

It’s a vague principle, but an important one: that political unions are not shackles for eternity, and societies which profess respect for fairness and self-determination need to allow some form of peaceful divorce.

I recently wrote my federal elected officials to advise that our own country (re)establish this principle in some explicit way, now, because I think that in future we will wish we had done so during relatively amicable and orderly times.

Read More →

Policy vs. Tribalization

The past week has brought out a language of real alarm from a variety of elite voices, on the subject of Republicans’ rejection of democracy. Yesterday, retired general McCaffrey wrote this, which might have been cribbed from any number of my own posts:

Wild as this is to witness, a few things make me skeptical about its possible import. First, I cannot assume that this alarm will have any impact at all on either the larger population or the people with power to choose national policy. Second, perhaps a minor point, but it is such a demonstration of elite decadence that the demotion of far-right Republican Liz Cheney seems to be the main prompt for this alarm. Good grief.

Third, I’m forced to question the potential at this point for any policies or rules to contain what is a kind of cultural folk migration.

Read More →

Good Jobs

What exactly is a “good job?”

Here is another concept that is not new, but has recently popped up in my reading enough times that it begs some inspection.

What is a “good job,” and in particular, is it in any way better than just having the equivalent income with no strings attached?

I don’t think there is any firm answer here, ultimately. I suspect that “good jobs” are like “the American dream,” or “free market,” i.e. terms so vague in use that they are immune to obsolescence. “Good jobs” are not a mathematical calculation you can disprove, nor are they an ISO standard or defined by the dictionary. The concept only has meaning because, and as, people choose to believe it does. Regardless of what component ideas a critical study may strip away, the terms live on through a combination of other components that are still valid, plus widespread readiness to pretend that the false components are still true.

I feel like picking at this a bit, anyway. Why do so many people choose to believe that this is a meaningful, and important, object?

Read More →

Failed states

The coverYesterday brought me last week’s issue of The Economist, which promises coverage of “the Republican victory and what it means for America’s broken government.” The casualness of this reference to American government as “broken” is particularly interesting, to me, because I distinctly recall a different editorial stance from the same publication less than five years ago. Then, they noted a growing sense that “the political system is broken. America has become ungovernable,” before declaring that “we argue to the contrary.”

Poking into their newest cover story, the transformation is remarkable. Then, they allowed that various systemic problems “should be corrected. But even if they are not, they do not add up to a system that is as broken as people now claim.” Overall, they insisted, “the basic system works as intended.” The real problem was that “Mr Obama” would not compromise.

Fast-forward to 2014, and subheadline to their story is “Republicans have won a huge victory. Now they must learn to compromise [emphasis added].” This prospect, moreover, they categorize as an optimist’s hope, and a faint one absent systemic reforms. Now, The Economist warns that “even if the optimists are right [emphasis added], America faces a host of ailments that seem beyond the reach of today’s politics.” If this is to change, Americans “need to change the way they elect their leaders.”

So, I guess I won that argument. Progress. Splendid.

…oh, wait, the society I live in is breaking down. Actually this is terrifying.

Read More →