Friday, July 31, 2009

Third Way and One World Order

Did you think that the information regarding the Third Way was interesting? Since that was just the beginning, here is a little bit more for you to noodle on for the weekend.

The following is the introduction to a memo that was put out by the Third Way to "Interested Parties" and written by Matt Bennett, Vice President for Public Affairs and Michael Earls, Culture Project Policy Advisor

"SUBJECT: Conservative Abuses of Power

When they took over the reins of federal power, conservatives in Congress and the White House campaigned on promises to “restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives” (“The Republican Contract with America”) and to “restore honor and dignity to the Oval Office” (Bush 2000). But in the last five years, those same leaders have abused their positions of power in a manner more naked and profound than any Washington has seen since at least the Teapot Dome scandal in the 1920s. This has left even their fellow conservatives up in arms – John Dean, President Nixon’s White House Counsel, has recently published books detailing these abuses entitled “Conservatives Without Conscience” and “Worse Than Watergate.”

Third Way recommends that progressives use “abuse of power” as a theme to unify a range of issues." [bold added]

With this memo in mind, here is what the online Wikipedia states about the Third Way.

"The Third Way is a term that has been used to describe a political position which attempts to transcend left-wing and right-wing politics by advocating a mix of some left-wing and right-wing policies.[1] Third Way approaches are commonly viewed as representing a centrist compromise between capitalism and socialism, or between market liberalism and democratic socialism. However, proponents of third way philosophies often claim that the third way represents a synthesis of these competing viewpoints, distinct from and superior to both of its sources, rather than simply a compromise or mixture.[2] This claim is embodied in the alternative description of the Third Way as the Radical center.

Past invocations of a political 'third way', in this sense, have included the Fabian Socialism, Distributism, Technocracy (bureaucratic), Keynesian economics, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, and Harold Macmillan's 1950s One Nation Conservatism....

...The Third Way rejects both socialism and laissez-faire approaches to economic governance, but chiefly stresses technological development, education, and competitive mechanisms to pursue economic progress and governmental objectives.[6] One of its central aims is to protect the modern welfare state through reforms that maintain its economic integrity...

A leading defender of the spread of Third Way influence in modern democracies has been British sociologist Anthony Giddens. Giddens regularly expounds on Third Way philosophy through contributions to progressive policy think tank Policy Network."

What is the Policy Network? It's connected to the Third Way through Anthony Giddens. Here is the definition from Wikipedia.

"Policy Network is a London-based international think tank which is dedicated to promoting progressive policies and the renewal of social democracy. It was established in December 2000 with the support of heads of government including Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, Gerhard Schröder, Goran Persson, and Giuliano Amato.

There stated objective is to develop and promote a modern progressive agenda based upon the ideas and experiences of social democratic modernisers. They argue that in order to meet challenges of globalisation, the centre-left needs to embark on a process of permanent renewal...

Its current work programmes include an EU "fit for purpose" in a global age[1]; the politics of climate change[2]; the myths and realities of labour migration[3]; the future of social democracy[4]; and globalisation and social justice...

One of its more prominent projects in recent years concerned the European Social Model. The objective of this research project was to investigate the means by which Europe's various models for welfare states can be adapted to meet 21st century challenges. It has also focused on areas such as economic reform, migration and integration, the environment, progressive government and public service reform." [bold added]

In a link on the Policy Network website, I was able to connect to an article (really a compliation of articles) that discusses many aspects of a One World Order, New World Order, or International Order.

"Global power revisited
The United States in a changing world order

Focusing on the role of the US in a changing world order, this reader brings together "insider" and "outsider" perspectives on three key global challenges: managing the economic and political fallout of the global financial crisis; forging an integrated international security policy based on multilateral cooperation, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan; and the challenges of climate change, energy security and proliferation for global governance."

The website link for the above informations is Foresight

As with anything that runs deep in planning and organizing in government, every link I follow to find out more, gives more insight. Thus, looking into Progressive Governance, I found interesting concepts and language regarding governance following this "financial crisis".

"These developments have huge implications. First and foremost, they present progressive governments and policymakers around the world with the task of re-building an international economic and financial order at a time when the tendency is to focus on state-level solutions. ...

At the same time, as faith in unregulated markets crumbles, progressives urgently need to fill an ideological vacuum which risks being taken over by populists. ... The result is vastly different views on the needed reforms, including the viability and effects of global stimulus plans, the benefits and scope of increased financial regulation, or the measures needed to correct global economic imbalances.

In short, the challenges ahead carry a great opportunity for progressives but also a risk. On the one hand, the strength of modern social-democratic politics has always been to recognise and come to terms with new realities. On the other hand, this “progressive moment” will requires a fundamental overhaul of centre-left policies, recognising not only the urgency and severity of the current crisis, but also the complex relationship between the quest for social justice, the need for economic dynamism and sustainable development in the global age....

The aim of this “handbook of ideas” is to advance this debate by bringing together short policy recommendations...the contributions touch on challenges which governments of all stripes need to address, but which we think are of particular relevance for progressives, in some cases even presenting major dilemmas...

Improving governance of financial markets is ultimately only one component, albeit a crucial one, for building a more equitable and sustainable international order.

Having shaken the foundations of unquestioned belief in free markets, the global crisis has led to growing calls for the state to be a more prominent facilitator of growth.

With levels of unemployment and distress rising, the need for modern social protection policies is greater than ever. Even the most ardent supporters of market-based solutions for social needs are starting to realise that the state will need to play a more active role, as, for instance, the US debate on healthcare illustrates. In this context, what kind of welfare state and social policies should we strive for?" [bold added]

As you read, the memo about conservatives abuse of power must include separate laws for "Progressives", "CentreLeft", and etc because every link that includes more information on the topic, reflects more involvement and "power" by government, or "the state".

Additionally, the increase in the "blame game" by Obama towards the Bush Administration following his inauguration is not acceptable in any level of "leadership". True leadership takes responsibility for the good and the bad as the Bush Administration is now long gone and the Obama Administration is strattling a deficit and new "policies" that is definitely being administered by their own administration.

No comments: