When Machiavelli completed The Prince in 1514, he was not to know that it would become one of the most infamous books for the next five centuries. Indeed the worst things anyone could do in gaining or retaining power came to be known by that deplorable adjective, ‘Machiavellian’.
Anyone who has actually studied the works of Machiavelli, especially his Discourses, an essential companion to The Prince, would know that Machiavelli was far from being a friend of deceptive and arbitrary rule. After all he was the one who insisted that “when it is necessary for [a ruler] to proceed against the life of someone, he must do it on proper justification and for manifest cause.”
But before we look further at why the common misunderstanding should be corrected, we should consider a current trend that projects an even more perverse interpretation of Machiavelli. Take the BBC programme, ‘Who’s Afraid of Machiavelli?’, aired just last year. Instead of challenging the view that Machiavelli was seeking to guide people with power to use it immorally, the makers of the programme and all who were invited to speak on it not only reinforced that view, but also claimed that it was to be celebrated. Their take on Machiavelli essentially came down to this: if you’re running a government or a large business, you have to be ruthless; you have to make others fear you; and you have to go with your judgement alone on what should be done, and get it done by whatever means necessary.
For these political insiders and business gurus, Machiavelli should not be denounced for advocating nasty power play, but praised for validating it as essential in getting the business of a ruler or top executive done.
But while some people may revel in imagining that even the most ruthless behaviour (of their own or the leaders they advised) would be endorsed by a world famous thinker, there are three crucial points they should have noted. First, when Machiavelli advised that the ends would justify the means, he was very specific about what those ends were, namely the establishment and development of a free republic – i.e., an association of citizens who collectively have a say through public deliberations over how they are to be governed. The people are, he insisted, “more prudent, more stable, and of better judgment than a prince.” So unless the leader in question is genuinely striving to create and secure a form of governance which spreads power more evenly to all people, nothing is justified; least of all, any action to simply make oneself more powerful and feared.
Secondly, the authoritarian model is only recommended where the option of a free republic is not immediately attainable. Machiavelli’s advice was not that a leader should be authoritarian, but that if one were living in a state where power was concentrated exclusively at the top and rival forces would resort to vicious means to seize the throne (not to mention stopping anyone from democratising power to the citizenry), then one would have to be ruthless in countering those threats and firm in securing one’s own power. But if one were in a free republic, or had managed to transform an absolute monarchy into one, then there would be no excuse for using repressive measures.
Thirdly, for Machiavelli, even when a ruler is steering a course from the prevailing authoritarian conditions to a free republic, it does not mean that anything is permissible. One has to ask if one’s actions are helping or hindering the all important process of bringing about a form of governance whereby people can speak feely about contested issues and jointly secure their safety and prosperity without being dependent on the whims of one individual (or an elite).
Indeed Machiavelli was consistently critical of rulers who put their own desires above the good of the people. In relation to the ruthless tyrant, Commodus, he wrote, “Commodus, to whom it should have been very easy to hold the empire, for, being the son of Marcus, he had inherited it, and he had only to follow in the footsteps of his father to please his people and soldiers; but, being by nature cruel and brutal, he gave himself up to amusing the soldiers and corrupting them, so that he might indulge his rapacity upon the people; on the other hand, not maintaining his dignity, often descending to the theatre to compete with gladiators, and doing other vile things, little worthy of the imperial majesty, he fell into contempt with the soldiers, and being hated by one party and despised by the other, he was conspired against and was killed.” The Marcus referred to here, incidentally, is Emperor Marcus Aurelius, the stoic, philosophical, compassionate ruler of Rome.
If political and business leaders want to learn the real lessons from Machiavelli, they should stop focusing on expanding their personal power as an end in itself, and start devoting themselves to empowering others to share in decision-making so that it is never the elite few but always the people who together determine the common good.
--
For an extended discussion of Machiavelli’s political ideas with reference to historical leaders, see this interview with Henry Tam, made by the Documentary Film-Makers Cooperative: http://youtu.be/bJqnqdFC2VU
Friday, November 21, 2014
News Release: A Novel Exposé of Government
What lies behind government rhetoric? How much are big corporations actually pulling all the strings? Will it be long before democracy collapses altogether?
In his new novel, Whitehall through the Looking Glass, Henry Tam, a political analyst and former senior civil servant, presents us with a disturbing vision of what’s in store for us.
The story is set in the near future, when the Consortium, working in cahoots with multi-billionaire monarch, George VIII, dictates terms to those in charge of governing both Britain and the US. It tells how the Consortium expands its power until there is no one left who can stand in its way. Or so it appears, until a defiant civil servant and a secret resistance movement threaten to bring its reign to an end.
The novel combines a fast-moving plotline, satire and futuristic invention to bring home the nightmare awaiting any society that allows its government to be taken over by the corporate elite. As one reviewer observed, it is “funny and scary in equal measure.”
Leading figures in politics and government have been forthright with their praise:
“Henry Tam knows how government works, and how fragile democracy is. With his insider knowledge and surreal imagination, he has given us an extraordinary dystopian tale about corporate greed and political collusion.” (Baroness Kay Andrews, former Government Minister)
“Forget ‘Yes, Minister’ and ‘The Thick of It’; if you want a sharp satirical look at life inside the corridors of power, read Whitehall through the Looking Glass … Tam’s novel also has a serious message about the dire consequences when corporations take over the running of a government.” (Sonny Leong, Chief Executive, Civil Service College)
“This is a timely reminder of the dangers of the rapidly-accelerating corporatisation of our political and economic life. ... As the general election approaches, Tam’s book is an important reminder of the risks of crude neoliberal ideology.” (Frances O'Grady, General Secretary, TUC – Trades Union Congress)
“Half asleep, the UK is becoming an ever more elitist society, that has left fairness and common-sense behind; ... What we need is Henry Tam's absurdist vision of Whitehall to help wake us all up.” (Dr. Simon Duffy, Director, Centre for Welfare Reform)
"The narrative is all the more compelling because Tam's world is often as familiar as it is fantastical. This is not so much a lesson from history as a warning from the here and now. It's a cautionary tale and a call to action, but also a gripping read." (Peter Bradley, ex-MP and Director, Speakers’ Corner Trust)
“Beautifully, deftly written, Whitehall through the Looking Glass is dark and compelling reading. A deeply sobering wake up call to us all against the political complacency of our times.” (Dame Jane Roberts, Chair, NLGN – the New Local Government Network)
Whitehall through the Looking Glass is the second novel by Henry Tam. His first novel, Kuan’s Wonderland, is a widely acclaimed political fable, which has been recommended by educational institutions such as the Equality Trust, WEA and the Cooperative College. His non-fiction books include the seminal Communitarianism: a new agenda for politics and citizenship, nominated by New York University Press for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order; Progressive Politics in the Global Age; and Against Power Inequalities.
He has previously worked as the Head of Civil Renewal in the Home Office, and Deputy Director in the Department for Communities & Local Government. He is currently an academic at the University of Cambridge and blogs on ‘Question the Powerful’.
****
The E-book version is available from: Amazon UK or Amazon US.
The Paperback version is available from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace.
To see in full what have been written about Whitehall through the Looking Glass, see: http://hbtam.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/public-commentators-on-whitehall.html
In his new novel, Whitehall through the Looking Glass, Henry Tam, a political analyst and former senior civil servant, presents us with a disturbing vision of what’s in store for us.
The story is set in the near future, when the Consortium, working in cahoots with multi-billionaire monarch, George VIII, dictates terms to those in charge of governing both Britain and the US. It tells how the Consortium expands its power until there is no one left who can stand in its way. Or so it appears, until a defiant civil servant and a secret resistance movement threaten to bring its reign to an end.
The novel combines a fast-moving plotline, satire and futuristic invention to bring home the nightmare awaiting any society that allows its government to be taken over by the corporate elite. As one reviewer observed, it is “funny and scary in equal measure.”
Leading figures in politics and government have been forthright with their praise:
“Henry Tam knows how government works, and how fragile democracy is. With his insider knowledge and surreal imagination, he has given us an extraordinary dystopian tale about corporate greed and political collusion.” (Baroness Kay Andrews, former Government Minister)
“Forget ‘Yes, Minister’ and ‘The Thick of It’; if you want a sharp satirical look at life inside the corridors of power, read Whitehall through the Looking Glass … Tam’s novel also has a serious message about the dire consequences when corporations take over the running of a government.” (Sonny Leong, Chief Executive, Civil Service College)
“This is a timely reminder of the dangers of the rapidly-accelerating corporatisation of our political and economic life. ... As the general election approaches, Tam’s book is an important reminder of the risks of crude neoliberal ideology.” (Frances O'Grady, General Secretary, TUC – Trades Union Congress)
“Half asleep, the UK is becoming an ever more elitist society, that has left fairness and common-sense behind; ... What we need is Henry Tam's absurdist vision of Whitehall to help wake us all up.” (Dr. Simon Duffy, Director, Centre for Welfare Reform)
"The narrative is all the more compelling because Tam's world is often as familiar as it is fantastical. This is not so much a lesson from history as a warning from the here and now. It's a cautionary tale and a call to action, but also a gripping read." (Peter Bradley, ex-MP and Director, Speakers’ Corner Trust)
“Beautifully, deftly written, Whitehall through the Looking Glass is dark and compelling reading. A deeply sobering wake up call to us all against the political complacency of our times.” (Dame Jane Roberts, Chair, NLGN – the New Local Government Network)
Whitehall through the Looking Glass is the second novel by Henry Tam. His first novel, Kuan’s Wonderland, is a widely acclaimed political fable, which has been recommended by educational institutions such as the Equality Trust, WEA and the Cooperative College. His non-fiction books include the seminal Communitarianism: a new agenda for politics and citizenship, nominated by New York University Press for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order; Progressive Politics in the Global Age; and Against Power Inequalities.
He has previously worked as the Head of Civil Renewal in the Home Office, and Deputy Director in the Department for Communities & Local Government. He is currently an academic at the University of Cambridge and blogs on ‘Question the Powerful’.
****
The E-book version is available from: Amazon UK or Amazon US.
The Paperback version is available from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace.
To see in full what have been written about Whitehall through the Looking Glass, see: http://hbtam.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/public-commentators-on-whitehall.html
Sunday, October 12, 2014
The Art of Making Science Work
Between any scientific discovery relevant to a problem facing society, and the delivery of an effective policy solution, lies the no-man’s land of implementation uncertainty.
On 28th July 2014, I gave a talk at the University of Cambridge to a group of educational psychologists gathered at the ‘Implementing Implementation Science’ conference. The challenge, I explained, was about navigating through three sets of tricky issues:
* Being Scientific about Science
* Being Sensible about Public Policy
* Being Effective about Implementation
Here are my notes for the talk, addressing each of these key issues:
Being Scientific about Science
Rethinking our epistemological assumptions:
• What do we really know about science? Does it give us a picture of reality or a succession of hypotheses?
o Science as a system of standard procedures & indisputable proof
o Science as continuous with intuition & spiritual understanding
o Science as common sense, but whose common sense?
o Science as a revisable probabilistic & empirically checkable set of tools
• Degrees of predictability in different spheres of investigation. What is expected in anticipating the movement of planets or particles may not be an appropriate model for anticipating the changing behaviour or attitudes of people.
o Policy makers and the naïve model of scientific certainty
o Acceptable variations of predictability v. Unacceptable fluctuations of reliability
o Cause & effect of behavioural changes
• What are the criteria for replicability? The conditions for technological replication need to be adapted to the setting in question.
o Replicability in impact of physical clearance of harmful substance
o Replicability in impact of prescription of medication
o Replicability in impact of caring support
Being Sensible about Public Policy
Preparing for delivery obstacles:
• The challenge of managing political expectations: how implementation failures can simply be a case of ‘over-hyping’ or ‘under-selling’.
o The twin nightmare of setting criteria for evaluation forms AND agreeing what to put into the press release.
• Over-hyping what may be achieved is a recipe for disaster.
• Under-selling the actual value of a policy is self-defeating (for it will lead to under-investment).
• The problem of guiding delivery: there is no such thing as ‘pressing a button’ in initiating a social policy solution.
o Even the paradigm of rolling out an inoculation programme has proven to be problematic.
o Recipients of treatment/initiatives are not mindless subjects.
o And people who ‘deliver’ the solutions are not mere mechanisms – e.g., of sending out disempowered staff to tell the public about a public body’s commitment to empowerment.
• The need for patience and active learning: how lack of curiosity kills the policy mouse.
o Science’s key strength is its empirically-based revisability: e.g., when there are many variables, you have to learn from what actually happens – alley gate example and community safety.
o Community health projects: the need for relationships to build up in neighbourhoods.
o The financial regime stamps out cautious and responsible management of public funds (spend it or lose it syndrome – support for asset transfer).
Being Effective about Implementation
Promoting cooperative problem-solving in schools:
Research commissioned by the Carnegie UK Trust (& ALT) into the impact of student participation in schools and colleges found that :
o students were happier and felt more in control of their learning; while disruptive behaviour in class was reduced.
o it had the twin effect of teachers’ practice improving and students gaining in awareness of the learning process;
o enhanced skills of communication and competence as a learner;
• Communication is an integral part of policy delivery: if you’re too vague, delivery is lost in translation – E.g., more participation -> formal school council with no major decision, and no wider engagement with most pupils
• Training: People are partners, not tablets: you can’t just hand them out – E.g., restorative justice in schools: some heads claim they do it because they sit perpetrators and victims down to talk about it (BUT HOW is the key)
• Evolving Procedures (Observation changes quantum outcome, interaction generates social impact): E.g., implementing solution development rather than delivering solutions in participatory budgeting. You need wider engagement, proper sampling & explaining, effective facilitating, before the exercise can deliver priorities young people take ownership in.
On 28th July 2014, I gave a talk at the University of Cambridge to a group of educational psychologists gathered at the ‘Implementing Implementation Science’ conference. The challenge, I explained, was about navigating through three sets of tricky issues:
* Being Scientific about Science
* Being Sensible about Public Policy
* Being Effective about Implementation
Here are my notes for the talk, addressing each of these key issues:
Being Scientific about Science
Rethinking our epistemological assumptions:
• What do we really know about science? Does it give us a picture of reality or a succession of hypotheses?
o Science as a system of standard procedures & indisputable proof
o Science as continuous with intuition & spiritual understanding
o Science as common sense, but whose common sense?
o Science as a revisable probabilistic & empirically checkable set of tools
• Degrees of predictability in different spheres of investigation. What is expected in anticipating the movement of planets or particles may not be an appropriate model for anticipating the changing behaviour or attitudes of people.
o Policy makers and the naïve model of scientific certainty
o Acceptable variations of predictability v. Unacceptable fluctuations of reliability
o Cause & effect of behavioural changes
• What are the criteria for replicability? The conditions for technological replication need to be adapted to the setting in question.
o Replicability in impact of physical clearance of harmful substance
o Replicability in impact of prescription of medication
o Replicability in impact of caring support
Being Sensible about Public Policy
Preparing for delivery obstacles:
• The challenge of managing political expectations: how implementation failures can simply be a case of ‘over-hyping’ or ‘under-selling’.
o The twin nightmare of setting criteria for evaluation forms AND agreeing what to put into the press release.
• Over-hyping what may be achieved is a recipe for disaster.
• Under-selling the actual value of a policy is self-defeating (for it will lead to under-investment).
• The problem of guiding delivery: there is no such thing as ‘pressing a button’ in initiating a social policy solution.
o Even the paradigm of rolling out an inoculation programme has proven to be problematic.
o Recipients of treatment/initiatives are not mindless subjects.
o And people who ‘deliver’ the solutions are not mere mechanisms – e.g., of sending out disempowered staff to tell the public about a public body’s commitment to empowerment.
• The need for patience and active learning: how lack of curiosity kills the policy mouse.
o Science’s key strength is its empirically-based revisability: e.g., when there are many variables, you have to learn from what actually happens – alley gate example and community safety.
o Community health projects: the need for relationships to build up in neighbourhoods.
o The financial regime stamps out cautious and responsible management of public funds (spend it or lose it syndrome – support for asset transfer).
Being Effective about Implementation
Promoting cooperative problem-solving in schools:
Research commissioned by the Carnegie UK Trust (& ALT) into the impact of student participation in schools and colleges found that :
o students were happier and felt more in control of their learning; while disruptive behaviour in class was reduced.
o it had the twin effect of teachers’ practice improving and students gaining in awareness of the learning process;
o enhanced skills of communication and competence as a learner;
• Communication is an integral part of policy delivery: if you’re too vague, delivery is lost in translation – E.g., more participation -> formal school council with no major decision, and no wider engagement with most pupils
• Training: People are partners, not tablets: you can’t just hand them out – E.g., restorative justice in schools: some heads claim they do it because they sit perpetrators and victims down to talk about it (BUT HOW is the key)
• Evolving Procedures (Observation changes quantum outcome, interaction generates social impact): E.g., implementing solution development rather than delivering solutions in participatory budgeting. You need wider engagement, proper sampling & explaining, effective facilitating, before the exercise can deliver priorities young people take ownership in.
Saturday, September 13, 2014
‘Dystopia of the Powerful’ Novels
Introduction
Dystopian fiction provides a dramatic means to draw attention to what life may be like if power continues to be concentrated in an unaccountable few. The two widely acclaimed novels, Whitehall through the Looking Glass and Kuan’s Wonderland, hold up a mirror to the dark arts of societal manipulation, political intrigues, and the dangers of becoming disempowered.
You can find out more about both novels (including the reviews from general readers as well as those involved in political education) as follows:
• For the satirical Whitehall through the Looking Glass, set in a technologically futuristic but otherwise realistic Whitehall (as only a long time insider can depict), where the government itself has been taken over by the Consortium, click on: Guide to Whitehall
• For the allegorical Kuan’s Wonderland, set in the mysterious world of Shiyan where a young boy has been forcibly transported to, and no one he encounters is what they appear to be, click on: Guide to Kuan
(The two novels can be read independently of each other, though they have plot and character connections)
What are the key issues to reflect on
• Do we know who are accumulating power at our expense?
• What are the tricks used to get people to back those who will only exploit them?
• Why the longer we leave politics to the powerful, the worse things will get for us?
• What does it take to unmask and challenge those who want us to be completely powerless against them?
• Do we understand how people can be motivated by different ideals and concerns to unite around a common cause of ensuring none is too powerful to oppress others?
How to get hold of these novels
For Whitehall through the Looking Glass, you can get:
The E-book version from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
The Paperback version from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace
For Kuan’s Wonderland, you can get:
The E-book version from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
The Paperback version from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace
Options for further engagement
You can:
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share the novel(s) with others through a reading group
• Set up a discussion group to explore the key themes and ideas directly with the author
• Use the novel(s) as the basis for a class on promoting political reflections through dystopian fiction
The Equality Trust, for example, has chosen Kuan’s Wonderland as a key text for engaging young people in exploring the problem of inequality. See their Young Person’s Guide to Inequality (Stories Page), and the teaching aid to promote class discussion, which can be downloaded for free (but beware of spoilers) by clicking on: ‘A Novel Exploration of Inequality’
The WEA has used Kuan’s Wonderland as a basis to engage learners about the problem of inequality. See the WEA page.
Supplementary Texts
In addition to Whitehall through the Looking Glass and Kuan’s Wonderland, and the two probably best known dystopian novels – Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Huxley’s Brave New World – the following are also worth reading for their respective vision of how society could turn out if a powerful elite were allowed to accumulate wealth, government positions, and control over the media and the use of force:
• Atwood, M., The Handmaid’s Tale
• Bachman, R. (aka Stephen King), The Running Man
• Bradbury, R., Fahrenheit 451
• Lewis, S., It Can’t Happen Here
• London, J., The Iron Heel
• Moore, A., V for Vendetta
• Wyndham, J., The Chrysalids
Dystopian fiction provides a dramatic means to draw attention to what life may be like if power continues to be concentrated in an unaccountable few. The two widely acclaimed novels, Whitehall through the Looking Glass and Kuan’s Wonderland, hold up a mirror to the dark arts of societal manipulation, political intrigues, and the dangers of becoming disempowered.
You can find out more about both novels (including the reviews from general readers as well as those involved in political education) as follows:
• For the satirical Whitehall through the Looking Glass, set in a technologically futuristic but otherwise realistic Whitehall (as only a long time insider can depict), where the government itself has been taken over by the Consortium, click on: Guide to Whitehall
• For the allegorical Kuan’s Wonderland, set in the mysterious world of Shiyan where a young boy has been forcibly transported to, and no one he encounters is what they appear to be, click on: Guide to Kuan
(The two novels can be read independently of each other, though they have plot and character connections)
What are the key issues to reflect on
• Do we know who are accumulating power at our expense?
• What are the tricks used to get people to back those who will only exploit them?
• Why the longer we leave politics to the powerful, the worse things will get for us?
• What does it take to unmask and challenge those who want us to be completely powerless against them?
• Do we understand how people can be motivated by different ideals and concerns to unite around a common cause of ensuring none is too powerful to oppress others?
How to get hold of these novels
For Whitehall through the Looking Glass, you can get:
The E-book version from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
The Paperback version from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace
For Kuan’s Wonderland, you can get:
The E-book version from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
The Paperback version from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace
Options for further engagement
You can:
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share the novel(s) with others through a reading group
• Set up a discussion group to explore the key themes and ideas directly with the author
• Use the novel(s) as the basis for a class on promoting political reflections through dystopian fiction
The Equality Trust, for example, has chosen Kuan’s Wonderland as a key text for engaging young people in exploring the problem of inequality. See their Young Person’s Guide to Inequality (Stories Page), and the teaching aid to promote class discussion, which can be downloaded for free (but beware of spoilers) by clicking on: ‘A Novel Exploration of Inequality’
The WEA has used Kuan’s Wonderland as a basis to engage learners about the problem of inequality. See the WEA page.
Supplementary Texts
In addition to Whitehall through the Looking Glass and Kuan’s Wonderland, and the two probably best known dystopian novels – Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Huxley’s Brave New World – the following are also worth reading for their respective vision of how society could turn out if a powerful elite were allowed to accumulate wealth, government positions, and control over the media and the use of force:
• Atwood, M., The Handmaid’s Tale
• Bachman, R. (aka Stephen King), The Running Man
• Bradbury, R., Fahrenheit 451
• Lewis, S., It Can’t Happen Here
• London, J., The Iron Heel
• Moore, A., V for Vendetta
• Wyndham, J., The Chrysalids
Communitarians: an introduction
Who are the 'Communitarian' thinkers? How have their ideas developed over time? And what are the core elements of the cooperative gestalt they advocate as vital to the development of inclusive communities?.
The term ‘communitarian’ first came into usage in the 1840s to describe the approach to community building through cooperative education and organisation that was promoted by Robert Owen and his followers in Britain and America [Note 1].
Owenites maintained that people’s lives could be substantially improved if they interacted with one another in mutually supportive communities, rather than carrying on with exploitative arrangements, which benefited a powerful few at the expense of the majority. They pressed for experimental alternatives to be developed to test out how social arrangements could be reformed irrespective of what traditional beliefs might be invoked to defend the status quo. And they believed education held the key to giving people the skills, confidence and will to bring about new socio-economic structures and power relations.
By late 19th/early 20th century, Owenite communitarian ideas of egalitarian cooperation and democratic solidarity were emerging as key elements in the converging political visions of the New Liberals in Britain, progressives like Dewey and Croly in America, Durkheim in France, and social democrats in Germany and Scandinavia.
This communitarian ethos infused the New Deal, the founding of the NHS, and the political consensus for safeguarding the common good in the post-War years. But it was to come under severe attack from market individualists in the 1980s. The rise of the ‘New Right’ ideology of Thatcher and Reagan privileged the elite who were able to manipulate the market to help them accumulate ever-greater wealth and power at the expense of other people’s security and wellbeing.
Against this corrosive trend, in the 1990s a group of social and political theorists in Britain and America adopted ‘communitarian’ as the name for their shared philosophical outlook. In their writings [Note 2], both the relativist notion of supposing individuals should be left alone to act as they wish, and the authoritarian demand to impose the rigid order of hierarchical communities, are equally rejected. Instead arguments are put forward for enabling ordinary citizens and those in leadership positions to find ways to build and sustain a more inclusive form of community life, with the help of shared learning, deliberative dialogues and participatory forms of collective decision-making.
Reviving the cooperative-communitarian tradition, these writers exposed the threats of relentless marketisation and plutocratic politics, which were turning people into disempowered beings unable to overcome marginalisation and oppression. Their yardstick for assessing reform is whether it will help people relate to each other in mutually supportive and democratically cooperative ways in shaping their political governance, the enterprise in which they work, their living conditions and environment, and any organisation that may impact on their lives. The development of the cooperative gestalt they promoted is to be guided by three principles:
The three key communitarian principles
First, the principle of cooperative enquiry requires anyone making an assertion to be judged with reference to the extent to which informed participants deliberating under conditions of thoughtful and uncoerced exchanges would concur. Any provisional consensus reached by one group of individuals must in turn be open to possible revisions. The ultimate strength of any truth claim rests with the likelihood of that claim surviving the critical deliberations of ever expanding communities of enquirers.
Secondly, the principle of mutual responsibility requires all members of any community to take responsibility for enabling each other to pursue those values that stand up to the test of reciprocity. What an individual may value cannot expect to command the respect from others if its pursuit is incompatible with the realisation of goals valued by others. The range of mutual responsibilities may cover the provision of protection and support for all who would otherwise be vulnerable.
Thirdly, the principle of citizen participation requires that all those affected by any given power structure are able to participate as equal citizens in determining how the power in question is to be exercised. All those subject to potentially binding commands should be entitled to learn about, review, and determine how to reform decision-making processes. This applies to not only government institutions, but also businesses, schools and community organisations.
The communitarian reform agenda
The form of community life favoured by communitarians is that which progressively evolves in the direction recommended by these principles. It follows that modern corporations as much as traditional communities must change to enable people to interact in far more cooperative and mutually respectful ways. It means that social cohesion is not to be secured from rigid homogeneity, but from the cultivation of common values that thrive on moral sensitivity and cultural diversity. It will challenge those who seek to construct a distorted sense of identity out of the ‘superiority’ they imagine they possess over those who are traditionally discriminated against. And far from focusing on just one’s own nation, or one’s neighbourhood community, it supports the authentic quest for a richer sense of belonging to a multiplicity of communities, and to the building of mutual support and cooperative relations across borders when that is essential in the age of globalisation.
--
Note 1:
Although some writers have combined praise for their idealised form of ‘community’ with reactionary defence of outmoded traditions and hierarchies, none of them has used the term ‘communitarian’ to describe themselves, for the understandable reason that the term is actually associated with the progressive philosophy espoused by a long line of thinkers. The term has been regarded in some quarters as having ‘anti-liberal’ connotation solely because in the 1980s, it was used by academic commentators as a generic label for an otherwise diverse group of thinkers (Alasdair MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, Michael Sandel, and Michael Walzer) who had one thing in common: they all penned criticisms of John Rawls’ liberal philosophy because it treated people as unencumbered selves without reference to their relationships to their communities. All these writers rejected the categorisation of them as ‘communitarians’, and apart from MacIntyre, their wider writings showed that they were not against liberal ideas in general, only particular formulations of them.
Note 2:
Bellah, R., et al. (1991). The Good Society. Vintage Books.
Bellah, R. (1996). ‘Community Properly Understood’, in Responsive Community, Vol.6, issue 1, Winter 1995/96, pp.49-54.
Bellah, R. & Sullivan, W. (2001), ‘Cultural Resources for a Progressive Alternative’ in Tam (2001).
Boswell, J. (1990). Community and the Economy: the Theory of Public Co-operation. Routledge, London.
Cladis, M.S. (1992). A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and contemporary social theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Etzioni, A. (Ed.), (1998). The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.
Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Selznick, P. (2002). The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington.
Tam, H. (1998). Communitarianism: a new agenda for politics and citizenship. Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Tam, H. (Ed.) (2001). Progressive Politics in the Global Age. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Tam, H. (2011). ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’, in Forum for promoting 3-19 comprehensive education, Volume 53, Number 3, 2011.
--
For more information, see the guide to Henry Tam’s Communitarianism.
The term ‘communitarian’ first came into usage in the 1840s to describe the approach to community building through cooperative education and organisation that was promoted by Robert Owen and his followers in Britain and America [Note 1].
Owenites maintained that people’s lives could be substantially improved if they interacted with one another in mutually supportive communities, rather than carrying on with exploitative arrangements, which benefited a powerful few at the expense of the majority. They pressed for experimental alternatives to be developed to test out how social arrangements could be reformed irrespective of what traditional beliefs might be invoked to defend the status quo. And they believed education held the key to giving people the skills, confidence and will to bring about new socio-economic structures and power relations.
By late 19th/early 20th century, Owenite communitarian ideas of egalitarian cooperation and democratic solidarity were emerging as key elements in the converging political visions of the New Liberals in Britain, progressives like Dewey and Croly in America, Durkheim in France, and social democrats in Germany and Scandinavia.
This communitarian ethos infused the New Deal, the founding of the NHS, and the political consensus for safeguarding the common good in the post-War years. But it was to come under severe attack from market individualists in the 1980s. The rise of the ‘New Right’ ideology of Thatcher and Reagan privileged the elite who were able to manipulate the market to help them accumulate ever-greater wealth and power at the expense of other people’s security and wellbeing.
Against this corrosive trend, in the 1990s a group of social and political theorists in Britain and America adopted ‘communitarian’ as the name for their shared philosophical outlook. In their writings [Note 2], both the relativist notion of supposing individuals should be left alone to act as they wish, and the authoritarian demand to impose the rigid order of hierarchical communities, are equally rejected. Instead arguments are put forward for enabling ordinary citizens and those in leadership positions to find ways to build and sustain a more inclusive form of community life, with the help of shared learning, deliberative dialogues and participatory forms of collective decision-making.
Reviving the cooperative-communitarian tradition, these writers exposed the threats of relentless marketisation and plutocratic politics, which were turning people into disempowered beings unable to overcome marginalisation and oppression. Their yardstick for assessing reform is whether it will help people relate to each other in mutually supportive and democratically cooperative ways in shaping their political governance, the enterprise in which they work, their living conditions and environment, and any organisation that may impact on their lives. The development of the cooperative gestalt they promoted is to be guided by three principles:
The three key communitarian principles
First, the principle of cooperative enquiry requires anyone making an assertion to be judged with reference to the extent to which informed participants deliberating under conditions of thoughtful and uncoerced exchanges would concur. Any provisional consensus reached by one group of individuals must in turn be open to possible revisions. The ultimate strength of any truth claim rests with the likelihood of that claim surviving the critical deliberations of ever expanding communities of enquirers.
Secondly, the principle of mutual responsibility requires all members of any community to take responsibility for enabling each other to pursue those values that stand up to the test of reciprocity. What an individual may value cannot expect to command the respect from others if its pursuit is incompatible with the realisation of goals valued by others. The range of mutual responsibilities may cover the provision of protection and support for all who would otherwise be vulnerable.
Thirdly, the principle of citizen participation requires that all those affected by any given power structure are able to participate as equal citizens in determining how the power in question is to be exercised. All those subject to potentially binding commands should be entitled to learn about, review, and determine how to reform decision-making processes. This applies to not only government institutions, but also businesses, schools and community organisations.
The communitarian reform agenda
The form of community life favoured by communitarians is that which progressively evolves in the direction recommended by these principles. It follows that modern corporations as much as traditional communities must change to enable people to interact in far more cooperative and mutually respectful ways. It means that social cohesion is not to be secured from rigid homogeneity, but from the cultivation of common values that thrive on moral sensitivity and cultural diversity. It will challenge those who seek to construct a distorted sense of identity out of the ‘superiority’ they imagine they possess over those who are traditionally discriminated against. And far from focusing on just one’s own nation, or one’s neighbourhood community, it supports the authentic quest for a richer sense of belonging to a multiplicity of communities, and to the building of mutual support and cooperative relations across borders when that is essential in the age of globalisation.
--
Note 1:
Although some writers have combined praise for their idealised form of ‘community’ with reactionary defence of outmoded traditions and hierarchies, none of them has used the term ‘communitarian’ to describe themselves, for the understandable reason that the term is actually associated with the progressive philosophy espoused by a long line of thinkers. The term has been regarded in some quarters as having ‘anti-liberal’ connotation solely because in the 1980s, it was used by academic commentators as a generic label for an otherwise diverse group of thinkers (Alasdair MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, Michael Sandel, and Michael Walzer) who had one thing in common: they all penned criticisms of John Rawls’ liberal philosophy because it treated people as unencumbered selves without reference to their relationships to their communities. All these writers rejected the categorisation of them as ‘communitarians’, and apart from MacIntyre, their wider writings showed that they were not against liberal ideas in general, only particular formulations of them.
Note 2:
Bellah, R., et al. (1991). The Good Society. Vintage Books.
Bellah, R. (1996). ‘Community Properly Understood’, in Responsive Community, Vol.6, issue 1, Winter 1995/96, pp.49-54.
Bellah, R. & Sullivan, W. (2001), ‘Cultural Resources for a Progressive Alternative’ in Tam (2001).
Boswell, J. (1990). Community and the Economy: the Theory of Public Co-operation. Routledge, London.
Cladis, M.S. (1992). A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and contemporary social theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Etzioni, A. (Ed.), (1998). The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.
Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Selznick, P. (2002). The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington.
Tam, H. (1998). Communitarianism: a new agenda for politics and citizenship. Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Tam, H. (Ed.) (2001). Progressive Politics in the Global Age. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Tam, H. (2011). ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’, in Forum for promoting 3-19 comprehensive education, Volume 53, Number 3, 2011.
--
For more information, see the guide to Henry Tam’s Communitarianism.
Friday, September 12, 2014
Climate Change: a philosophical debate
Climate Change: should science guide politics – or politics guide science?
A Day Conference and Colloquium arranged by the Philosophical Society of England (www.philsoc.co.uk)
Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London EC1V OHB.
Saturday, 11th October 2014, 10.30a.m. – 4.30 p.m.
Anthropogenic climate change has been described as one of the most serious problems facing the 21st century, yet public debate of the issue is plagued by uncertainty. What are the likely consequences and what costs would be involved in attempting to mitigate them? Science and mathematics are needed to test the empirical claims and to consider the questions they raise about risk assessment and probability. But, alongside the natural sciences, ethics, philosophy and the social sciences also have a crucial role to play.
PROGRAMME
10.30 a.m. Arrival and registration.
11.00 a.m. 'Cosmopolitan Ethics in the Anthropocene'
Michael Northcott, Professor of Ethics at the University of Edinburgh
Chair: Dr. Henry Tam
1 p.m. Lunch.
2 p.m. ‘Technology introductions in the context of decarbonisation: lessons from recent history’
Michael J Kelly, Professor of Technology, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge .
Chair: Professor Brenda Almond
3.45 p.m. Tea and opportunity for informal discussion
4.30 p.m. END OF CONFERENCE
Registration charge, including lunch and morning and afternoon tea or coffee, is £15.
Payment is required by October 1st 2014 but places can be reserved by sending a deposit of £5 to the Hon. Sec. at the address below. For conference enquiries please contact the Chair of the Society, Michael Bavidge: m.c.bavidge@newcastle.ac.uk. Cheques should be made out to ‘The Philosophical Society of England’ and sent to the Honorary Secretary of the Society Alan Brown, 9 Olney Court, Oxford OX14LZ.
Registered Charity No. 1140044.
A Day Conference and Colloquium arranged by the Philosophical Society of England (www.philsoc.co.uk)
Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London EC1V OHB.
Saturday, 11th October 2014, 10.30a.m. – 4.30 p.m.
Anthropogenic climate change has been described as one of the most serious problems facing the 21st century, yet public debate of the issue is plagued by uncertainty. What are the likely consequences and what costs would be involved in attempting to mitigate them? Science and mathematics are needed to test the empirical claims and to consider the questions they raise about risk assessment and probability. But, alongside the natural sciences, ethics, philosophy and the social sciences also have a crucial role to play.
PROGRAMME
10.30 a.m. Arrival and registration.
11.00 a.m. 'Cosmopolitan Ethics in the Anthropocene'
Michael Northcott, Professor of Ethics at the University of Edinburgh
Chair: Dr. Henry Tam
1 p.m. Lunch.
2 p.m. ‘Technology introductions in the context of decarbonisation: lessons from recent history’
Michael J Kelly, Professor of Technology, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge .
Chair: Professor Brenda Almond
3.45 p.m. Tea and opportunity for informal discussion
4.30 p.m. END OF CONFERENCE
Registration charge, including lunch and morning and afternoon tea or coffee, is £15.
Payment is required by October 1st 2014 but places can be reserved by sending a deposit of £5 to the Hon. Sec. at the address below. For conference enquiries please contact the Chair of the Society, Michael Bavidge: m.c.bavidge@newcastle.ac.uk. Cheques should be made out to ‘The Philosophical Society of England’ and sent to the Honorary Secretary of the Society Alan Brown, 9 Olney Court, Oxford OX14LZ.
Registered Charity No. 1140044.
Friday, August 22, 2014
Communitarianism: democracy & cooperation
Introduction
No political theory is uncontested. The ‘Question the Powerful’ project adopts as its premise the progressive position advocated by communitarians, civic republicans, and deliberative democrats – namely, that collective power should be exercised in accordance with the informed deliberations of all who are affected by that power to cultivate shared values and secure their common wellbeing. This position and its policy implications for education, business & employment, citizen protection, community development, and the role of government are set out in Henry Tam’s Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship, which was nominated by New York University Press for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order, and widely praised by reviewers:
• “The book is an excellent statement of the communitarian approach to politics and citizenship.” - Desmond King, Professor of Politics, University of Oxford (Times Higher Education Supplement).
• “Philosophically and social-scientifically literate, Tam's mind is a galaxy of bright ideas, at once general and pragmatically specific.” - Tony Skillen, University of Kent (Radical Philosophy).
• “Tam … writes with clarity and conviction. A 'must' for all who care not only about communitarianism, but about community and indeed a good society.” - Amitai Etzioni, Professor of Sociology, George Washington University (Responsive Community).
• “The great strength of Tam's book is that he not only offers a clear conceptual framework for communitarianism … but also a practical agenda for how theory can be translated into action in schools, workplaces and the voluntary sector.” - Iain Byrne, University of Essex (Citizen).
What are the key issues to reflect on
• Why democracy cannot function without the deliberative engagement of citizens?
• What common values can be cultivated despite the differences in beliefs and customs?
• What are the key principles for guiding policy development to build more inclusive communities?
• How can the conflicting demands in society be constructively reconciled without making any unjust concession?
• In response to criticisms that communitarian democracy is either too idealistic/demanding or complacent/ineffectual, what are the counter-arguments?
How to get hold of the resources
You can order Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship (paperback or hardback) from most high street or online bookstores. There are often cheap second hand copies available from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
Macmillan Palgrave is currently considering bringing out an e-version of the book.
Options for further engagement
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share Communitarianism with others through a political forum or a reading group
• Set up a discussion group to explore the key themes and ideas directly with the author
• Use the book as the basis for a series of lessons on policy ideas that ought to be reflected in political priorities
Supplementary Texts
You can find out more about the communitarian approach by reading:
• 'Communitarians: an introduction' (2014): a guide to communitarian writers and their ideas.
• 'The Radical Communitarian Synthesis' (2014): a short historical account of the evolution of communitarian thought.
• ‘Cooperative & Communitarian: a common heritage’ (2012): a short piece on the common social and intellectual roots of the cooperative movement and communitarian critique of society.
Other works by key communitarian advocates for democracy:
• Bellah, R., et al. (1991). The Good Society. Vintage Books.
• Bellah, R. (1996). ‘Community Properly Understood’, in Responsive Community, Vol.6, issue 1, Winter 1995/96, pp.49-54.
• Bellah, R. & Sullivan, W. (2001), ‘Cultural Resources for a Progressive Alternative’ in Tam (2001, see below).
• Boswell, J. (1990). Community and the Economy: the Theory of Public Co-operation. Routledge, London.
• Cladis, M.S. (1992). A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and contemporary social theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
• Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and its Problems. Henry Holt & Co. (For an excellent exposition of Dewey’s ideas, see Campbell, J., (1995). Understanding John Dewey. Open Court; and Ryan, A., (1955). John Dewey and the high tide of American Liberalism. WW Norton & Co.)
• Etzioni, A. (Ed.), (1998). The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.
• Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Selznick, P. (2002). The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington.
Many leading communitarian thinkers such as Bellah and Selznick contributed to Tam, H. (ed.) (2001). Progressive Politics in the Global Age. Polity Press, Cambridge.
It is available (hardback/paperback) in bookshops and online bookstores.
No political theory is uncontested. The ‘Question the Powerful’ project adopts as its premise the progressive position advocated by communitarians, civic republicans, and deliberative democrats – namely, that collective power should be exercised in accordance with the informed deliberations of all who are affected by that power to cultivate shared values and secure their common wellbeing. This position and its policy implications for education, business & employment, citizen protection, community development, and the role of government are set out in Henry Tam’s Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship, which was nominated by New York University Press for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order, and widely praised by reviewers:
• “The book is an excellent statement of the communitarian approach to politics and citizenship.” - Desmond King, Professor of Politics, University of Oxford (Times Higher Education Supplement).
• “Philosophically and social-scientifically literate, Tam's mind is a galaxy of bright ideas, at once general and pragmatically specific.” - Tony Skillen, University of Kent (Radical Philosophy).
• “Tam … writes with clarity and conviction. A 'must' for all who care not only about communitarianism, but about community and indeed a good society.” - Amitai Etzioni, Professor of Sociology, George Washington University (Responsive Community).
• “The great strength of Tam's book is that he not only offers a clear conceptual framework for communitarianism … but also a practical agenda for how theory can be translated into action in schools, workplaces and the voluntary sector.” - Iain Byrne, University of Essex (Citizen).
What are the key issues to reflect on
• Why democracy cannot function without the deliberative engagement of citizens?
• What common values can be cultivated despite the differences in beliefs and customs?
• What are the key principles for guiding policy development to build more inclusive communities?
• How can the conflicting demands in society be constructively reconciled without making any unjust concession?
• In response to criticisms that communitarian democracy is either too idealistic/demanding or complacent/ineffectual, what are the counter-arguments?
How to get hold of the resources
You can order Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics & Citizenship (paperback or hardback) from most high street or online bookstores. There are often cheap second hand copies available from: Amazon UK or Amazon US
Macmillan Palgrave is currently considering bringing out an e-version of the book.
Options for further engagement
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share Communitarianism with others through a political forum or a reading group
• Set up a discussion group to explore the key themes and ideas directly with the author
• Use the book as the basis for a series of lessons on policy ideas that ought to be reflected in political priorities
Supplementary Texts
You can find out more about the communitarian approach by reading:
• 'Communitarians: an introduction' (2014): a guide to communitarian writers and their ideas.
• 'The Radical Communitarian Synthesis' (2014): a short historical account of the evolution of communitarian thought.
• ‘Cooperative & Communitarian: a common heritage’ (2012): a short piece on the common social and intellectual roots of the cooperative movement and communitarian critique of society.
Other works by key communitarian advocates for democracy:
• Bellah, R., et al. (1991). The Good Society. Vintage Books.
• Bellah, R. (1996). ‘Community Properly Understood’, in Responsive Community, Vol.6, issue 1, Winter 1995/96, pp.49-54.
• Bellah, R. & Sullivan, W. (2001), ‘Cultural Resources for a Progressive Alternative’ in Tam (2001, see below).
• Boswell, J. (1990). Community and the Economy: the Theory of Public Co-operation. Routledge, London.
• Cladis, M.S. (1992). A Communitarian Defense of Liberalism: Emile Durkheim and contemporary social theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
• Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and its Problems. Henry Holt & Co. (For an excellent exposition of Dewey’s ideas, see Campbell, J., (1995). Understanding John Dewey. Open Court; and Ryan, A., (1955). John Dewey and the high tide of American Liberalism. WW Norton & Co.)
• Etzioni, A. (Ed.), (1998). The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.
• Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Selznick, P. (2002). The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington.
Many leading communitarian thinkers such as Bellah and Selznick contributed to Tam, H. (ed.) (2001). Progressive Politics in the Global Age. Polity Press, Cambridge.
It is available (hardback/paperback) in bookshops and online bookstores.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)