Not Just "More of a One" - City and Potential

One of today's Internet themes seems to be that of sameness, in reaction to the latest rounds of reports. As I was casting about with various ideas this morning, a post by Kurt Schuler at Free Banking helped me to focus. Schuler was decrying the seeming need to always reduce a complex world into simple representative components, when he came across a relevant passage. In these long ago thoughts from Aristotle's Politics, Book II, Chapter 4, there is a complaint that seems to echo some reactions of the present:

I am speaking of the claim that it is best for the city to be entirely one to the greatest possible degree, for Socrates adopts that hypothesis (in Plato's Republic). And yet, it is evident that by advancing and becoming more of a one, it will not be a city. For a city  is by nature a certain kind of multiplicity; by becoming more of a one it would turn from a city into a household and from a household into a human being.  

Why might such thoughts be important for the present? After all, the process of "becoming a one" has been going on for as long as anyone can remember. In a sense, that certain "sameness" appeared as one of globalization's ultimate compromises, at least in terms of standardization but also - to a degree - in terms of expectations as to what a middle class was supposed to represent, which spread around the world. Indeed, elements of that process will continue, as globalization continues to change local economies.

Just the same, there is a counter current which is often missed. While globalization makes different parts of the world look or feel "similar", the process affects cultures in different ways. What's more, even regional "takes" in the U.S. belie what one might expect. Only there is a problem: we have blunted expectations as to how regional, national and local differences might actually be perceived, let alone actually put to any practical purpose or recognition. Even as people are now digitally able to reflect the world around them, they don't have well recognized ways to do so in terms that can actually become locally defined. Because of that, a struggle continues between us and globalization, instead of globalization being able to work to our benefit.

How might we actually think about this in economic terms? The real potential of the 21st century city lies in better adaptations of knowledge use. How we hold ideas and knowledge not only matters at individual levels, it makes a difference as to whether those thought processes are able to fully manifest in economic realities. What's more, by assigning greater economic significance to how individuals are able to use their time with one another, each city has the opportunity to allow globalization to work to its advantage. Cities are in a perfect position to recapture knowledge and skills resources, which their governments and institutions are no longer able to fully utilize.

By no means would such a process have to change the basic dynamic between city, state and nation: a dynamic that continues to depend on infrastructure which assist in the production and movement of tradable goods. Rather, cities have a chance to mold their non tradable sectors into more dynamic and often even tradable elements, which would also have a renewed capacity to express their own personality and style. In the present, a city's non tradable sectors are being created in ways which create unnecessary burdens on all who try to maintain them, and there has not been enough understanding as to how fragile the structures themselves actually are.

The primary shift for any local economy would be that its "infinity" setting, in growth based terms, would continue to trend towards services. For quite understandable reasons, people have pulled back the throttle somewhat, on once seemingly infinite growth in physical goods. However, an inadvertent loss in services growth was the unfortunate result. It was the worst time possible to have to pull back in services, both for those who need them and those who want to participate in them.  Not only do local economies need to place services on a better growth trajectory, but they need to do so in terms which create far more inclusivity and flexibility, than what is allowed in knowledge and skills use of the present.

To be sure, all of this is a tremendous challenge, but by no means is it impossible. Not to do so means accepting the unacceptable - that is, the slow growth trajectory of the present which would mean that too many people get left behind in the current economy. Such an unfortunate result would also ripple out to the greater population for years to come. However, cities of the present have a chance to overcome such a reality, by accepting the challenge of creating new space for their unemployed and underemployed. Not only could our cities become revitalized by the process, they can also become "more than one", by allowing their own citizens to reflect and share the parts of the world that especially have meaning, to them.  In spite of what it may seem, globalization has many facets, and every city can become unique again by reflecting the facets which mean the most, to its own citizens.