One could be forgiven, for wondering why populism seems to bring out the worst in today's rural urban divide. While progressives too long ignored the importance of these connections (here in the U.S.), conservative populists are opting to make them even more fragile, via polarized cultural battles. Yet how do opposing sides expect to fit square pegs into round holes? Can't we just "live and yet live"?
Nevertheless, the struggles to impose a single set of political preferences on millions of citizens, appear as though just getting started. Yoram Hazony, for instance, is among those who reason that a "one size fits all" framework is suitable for nationalist governance. Even though I'm dismayed at nationalist arguments on the rise, history has plenty of clues why the most recent manifestation of this tendency, isn't particularly well timed. Extensive control over the lives of citizens is no simple matter, once non tradable and service sectors come to the fore in extended cycles.
Centralized control depends on the promises a government can make and keep, at least for its most highly valued citizens. Yet today's budgetary realities have become too precarious, to maintain the welfare state that has emerged since the 20th century. Given the natural scarcities of non tradable sector product which is connected to time and place, this major component of advanced economies is not as amenable to governmental redistribution, as the tradable sector activity which nations were able to take for granted in recent centuries. Put simply, there's lots of wishful thinking all around, re what fiscal policy is still expected to accomplish in the near future.
While this is a somewhat depressing moment for libertarians and classical liberals, perhaps all isn't lost. We still have the option of transforming non tradable sector patterns, so that the natural scarcities of non tradable sector product, need not remain such a economic restraint for populations and governments alike. It's still possible to pursue new frontiers for economic freedom in a knowledge based economy, for a full range of income levels. New platforms for economic engagement could help to bridge the urban rural divide in positive ways. We have the ability to use abundance to augment scarcity, instead of allowing scarcity to slowly drain away the natural abundance of nations.
Economic freedom requires well functioning platforms which make it possible to support a broad array of production possibilities. Only recall how the conceptual freedom of the United States in its early years, was in large part due to strong local community production. No nation can expect to maintain economic dynamism indefinitely, if many of its towns, cities and communities suffer too long from lack of production potential. Ultimately, our economic freedom would fade away, if too many decide that large segments of society need not take part in our economic destinies.
No comments:
Post a Comment