Thursday, April 8, 2010

A bridge to the 21st century *

Writing in The New York Times this week, Thomas Friedman shed new light on some familiar themes and introduced me to a new constituency that could play a huge role in U.S. politics and economic affairs in the next few years.

"Who's Up For Building Bridges?" he asks, referring to the question of which political party is going to strengthen America's ability to compete in the global marketplace while practicing greater fiscal discipline. Based on the quagmire that currently passes for national politics, it's certainly not going to be the Republicans, who've become the Party of No. But it won't necessarily be the Democrats, either, if they can't get beyond a decades-long agenda of major entitlement programs.

Friedman argues that both major parties have essentially come to the end of the road of the divergent paths they've pursued during the 20th century. The GOP embraced the Reagan Revolution perhaps too much, with an incessant call for tax cuts, deregulation and a government-is-the-problem mantra. Meanwhile, with the passage of health care reform, the Democrats essentially brought the New Deal-FDR Revolution to its logical conclusion.

So, who's looking ahead to the 21st century to push us toward the creation of new jobs in a greatly changed environment -- both literal and figurative? President Obama is at least trying, Friedman says.
"Obama-ism posits that we are now in a hypercompetitive global economy, where the country that thrives will be the one that brings together the most educated, creative and diverse work force with the best infrastructure -- bandwidth, ports, airports, high-speed rail and good governance."
In a world with a warming climate and a steadily growing population -- projected to hit 9.2 billion by 2050 -- demand for clean energy is going to expand mightly. And so we should expect energy technology to be the next great global industry.

Anyone who thinks that can be achieved without government involvement -- whether offering incentives or setting high national education standards -- is delusional. Globalization has weakened both parties, Friedman argues -- and I'll suggest interested readers check out his column rather than take up more space here explaining why.

He concludes by pointing to the emergence of so-called "Newocrats," a new constituency created by globalization "which combines the multinational corporate manager, the technology enterprepreneur and engineer, and the aspirational members of the meritocracy." Such people would have leaned Republican in the past but now many lean toward Obama.

"They don't agree with everything he's proposing," Friedman concludes, "but they sense that he is working on that bridge to the 21st century, while today's GOP/Tea Party is just not in the game."

If he's right, that gives me some encouragement in the short run, for the 2010 mid-term elections, and for the long run, if our president can bring together enough level-headed people in business, labor, education and government to pull their oars in the same direction.

Photograph: Fred R. Conrad, The New York Times

* This column marks my 301st post since I started this blog a little over 15 months ago. Thanks to one and all who've been along for some or most of the ride.

No comments:

Post a Comment