INTRODUCTION
No one has given politics a bad name more than professional politicians – they never tire of trotting out the inane comment, whenever some important event is unfolding, that “we must leave politics out of this.” Perhaps what they mean is that on those occasions they should stop for a moment trying to score points against other parties, but politics is precisely what they should be engaging in.
Unfortunately, politicians have alienated the public so much that more and more people just give up on politics – they are consumed by an ever-present sense of futility, and they are convinced nothing they do would make any difference.
But that of course is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Once people give up on politics – and I don’t just mean voting, but sharing ideas and collaborating on bringing about changes – we cease to be a body of citizens, and become fragmented, isolated, vulnerable individuals.
Politics is in fact the only antidote to powerlessness. It is the practice whereby citizens in a shared domain come together and work out what is to be done for their common wellbeing.
If one or a few simply impose their decisions on everyone else, there is dictatorship, not politics.
If everyone goes his or own way and never accepts any general rule as binding on them, we have anarchy, not politics.
Only politics give us the opportunity to deliberate as a group, to dispute and agree without resorting to violence, and establish common rules and policies.
And one of the most pressing tasks of lifelong learning is to remind everyone what politics has helped us achieve, and why we must act politically to protect our common interests. And the more powerful the opponents we face, the more necessary it is to tackle them through effective political engagement.
Let us look back at six examples and see what we have had to rely on politics to achieve for us. And as we’re often told that it’s important for our national identity to remember key dates, we’ll pick out 6 years that hold a special place in our political history:
One. 1215 (Magna Carta)
In the past, people who were displeased with their ruler would try to seize the throne from them, or force them to abdicate, or even kill them. But a group of barons in the 13th century decided to use a political approach instead. They devised a charter and collectively pressed King John to agree to it. John gave his consent and though he rejected it soon afterwards, it became a focus for a shift in structural power, leading to the election of representatives in the Parliament championed by Simon de Montfort.
Political Achievement 1: Limit the Abuse of Power
Two. 1605 (The Advancement of Learning)
As late as the 15th and 16th centuries, there was no systematic science or technology to speak of. There would the odd inventions or discoveries made by individuals working on their own. Francis Bacon, a leading politician who would become the Lord Chancellor, put forward a comprehensive reform programme in his book, The Advancement of Learning, and presented it to King James I, who sarcastically dismissed it as “Like the peace of God, it passes all understanding.” But Bacon did not rely just on the King; he networked extensively, and it led to the founding of the Royal Society, with a royal charter from Charles II (James’ grandson). It became a model for the cultivation & promotion of cooperatively tested empirical knowledge.
Political Achievement 2: Improve Knowledge & Rationality
Three. 1776 (Common Sense)
The so-called Glorious Revolution was a settlement between the monarch and the wealthy elite of the country. And after 1688, the government refused to listen to any request for allowing every adult to have a vote in electing their representative in Parliament. One political activist turned to pamphlet and book writing to stir up popular demands. And when Tom Paine went to America, his ideas provided just the catalyst the people who had settled there needed. They would not accept some hedged settlement with King George III, but cut their links with the monarchy altogether, and became a democratic republic instead. Paine then used the success of the new political system in America to promote change in France and Britain. And while extremists in France and ultra reactionaries in Britain derailed progress in their different ways, democracy was to advance through the 19th century in both countries.
Political Achievement 3: Open the Door to Democracy
Four. 1851 (The Sheffield Female Political Association)
Back in America, the slaves were not given a vote. And when Anne Knight joined the campaign to end slavery, she discovered two things: one was the importance of changing public attitudes about slavery when slave owners would go on and on about the economic costs of abandoning it; and the other was that the problem of deep-seated prejudice affected women too.
When she went to the World Anti-Slavery Convention in London in 1840, she found out that women were not allowed to participate in the discussions. She established in 1847 the first organisation to campaign for women suffrage and inspired subsequent feminist demands to eradicate unequal treatment of women (it was 1918 that women over 30 with property got the vote, and only 1928 that women aged 21+ got the vote).
Political Achievement 4: Rally Against Prejudice
Five. 1905 (Progressive Government)
Through the 19th century, even as there was growing acceptance (though slow it was) that everyone, men and women, should have the vote, and be given equal respect politically, there was a parallel trend that not only condoned, but celebrated the widening gulf between the rich and the poor – and dismissed that there should be any equal respect when it came to economic interactions.
The turning point came with the Liberal victory of 1905, which heralded the systematic redistribution of common resources to bridge the divide between the haves and have-nots. For example:
• Free school meals
• Workers compensation for suffering from accidents at work
• In 1908, introduced pensions for those over 70.
• Spending significantly increased to alleviate unemployment.
• The National Insurance Act (Part I) passed in 1911 gave workers the right to sick pay
It was by no means easy, as Lloyd George remarked: "the partisan warfare that raged around these topics was so fierce that by 1913, this country was brought to the verge of civil war."
Political Achievement 5: Build Economic Solidarity
Six. 1942 (Beveridge’s Report - The Slaying of Giants)
Beveridge’s Report set out a vision for slaying the five giant evils of Want, Idleness, Disease, Squalor, and Ignorance. In tackling ignorance, there continued to be many obstacles. For example,
• teachers were from time to time threatened with pay cut of 10% or more;
• women teachers were not only paid less but had to stop teaching once they were married;
• & parents could stop sending their children to school once they were 14.
The National Union of Teachers campaigned in public, organised strikes where necessary, and also collaborated with politicians to change the law, and the status of teachers and respect for education reached a high point.
Political Achievement 6: Safeguard Education
CONCLUSION
Since 1980s, market individualism has grown and collective politics declined.
Now all six political achievements are under threat.
It is important to remember what they are and that we should revive politics to defend them.
• Magna Carta inspired the development of human rights; now this government is planning to abolish the Human Rights Act and withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights.
• Instead of supporting the general advancement of learning, research grants are increasingly directed to meet corporate interests.
• Democracy is put into reverse – stopping people voting is the new game in town: prisoners, changing registration system which could reduce the number of people who can vote, and look at America, where the Republicans have concocted numerous ways to stop the poor and ethnic minorities from voting.
• Prejudice against immigrants, against disabled people, against the poor are stoked on a daily basis. And equal pay for women is still a battle to be won.
• Economic solidarity is being jettisoned, the welfare state is being dismantled, and income inequalities, after falling in the post-war years, have kept widening since the 1980s.
• And education is reduced to a sifting machine to pick out the few for top jobs and package the rest for compliance and low expectations.
For those of us who live in the six counties within the East of England, there is a further significance to the six examples we considered:
• Before the Barons presented the Magna Carta to King John to seal in 2015, they gathered in the previous year before the shrine of St Edmunds to discuss and agree their tactics in dealing with John. The shrine was of course in Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk.
• The great political advocate for ‘The Advancement of Learning’, Francis Bacon, was ennobled as Viscount St Albans, because his family home was in St Albans, Hertfordshire.
• And arguably the most influential political writer of all times, Tom Paine, was born in Thetford, Norfolk.
• The tireless critic of slavery and champion of women rights, Anne Knight, came from Chelmsford, Essex.
• The Liberal Government that came into office in 1905 was led by Henry Campbell Bannerman, one of 14 Prime Ministers who graduated from the University of Cambridge in Cambridgeshire.
• And the man who led the National Union of Teachers as their General Secretary from 1931 to 1947 was Frederick Mander, who earlier on in his career was the headmaster of a school in Luton, Bedfordshire.
We have in the East of England an immensely rich political heritage, and we should with confidence and pride build on it and extend political education to as many people as possible so that they can exercise their power as citizens to counter money interests and corrosive prejudices, and help enhance our common wellbeing.
--
[This is a summary paper based on the speech I gave to the WEA (East of England) Annual Meeting, on 8 November 2014]
Power in society should be exercised for the common good, not private gains. Henry Tam’s publications connect political theory and practice, and provide accessible resources for civic education, social criticism, and public policy advice.
Thursday, June 25, 2015
Sunday, May 3, 2015
Find out more about: Together We Can
Together We Can is a series of practical resources for cooperative problem-solving named after the policy programme developed by Henry Tam when he was the Government’s Head of Civil Renewal (Home Office), and later Deputy Director in charge of Community Empowerment Delivery (Dept for Communities & Local Government) between 2003 and 2010. The resources outlined below include both reports/advice that grew directly out of his policy work, and supplementary papers and presentations by him to highlight the key lessons for community activists and public policy makers on how citizens can cooperate together to solve the problems they face.
Together We Can: resources from the civil renewal programme
• ‘Together We Can’ action plan: the cross-government plan with commitments in the key public policy areas.
• Annex to ‘Together We Can’ action plan: with details of the proposed initiatives.
• ‘Together We Can’ 2005/2006 review: reports from the Secretaries of State and Ministers on progress in 12 Government Departments.
• ‘Take Part’: resources for ‘Active Learning for Active Citizenship’.
• ‘Guide Neighbourhoods’: how communities can learn cooperative problem-solving and civic activism from each other.
• ‘Civic Pioneers’ first report and second report: collaborative working between local authorities and citizens to improve local quality of life.
• ‘Participatory Budgeting’: resources to expand the use of participatory budgeting in deciding how to allocate public resources.
• ‘Quirk Review’: report on community management and ownership of public assets).
• ‘Asset Transfer Unit’: resources to support the transfer of assets to community-based organisations.
• ‘Active Citizens, Strong Communities – progressing civil renewal’: a pamphlet setting out the Home Secretary’s core objectives and policies.• ‘Councillors Commission’: report with recommendations on how to improve the democratic role of elected local councillors.
Together We Can: supplementary resources by Henry Tam on cooperative problem-solving
• ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’: a review of the Together We Can programme (Forum Journal, Vol 53, Number 3, 2011)
• ‘Cooperative Problem-Solving & Education': on the evidence for suggesting why cooperative problem-solving should be taught more widely (published by the Forum Journal, 2013).
• 'The Cooperative Gestalt': an essay on the cooperative mindset and progressive lifelong learning (Question the Powerful, November 2013)
. ‘Cooperative Problem-Solving: the key to a reciprocal society’: including a joint statement with academics and practitioners on key elements of successful cooperative problem-solving (Question the Powerful, October 2012)
• ‘The Case for Cooperative Problem-Solving’: a statement of why cooperative problem-solving is needed in tackling social, economic and environmental problems (Question the Powerful, May, 2012)
• ‘Awareness, Agitation, Action’: presentation to WEA Oxford (May 18 2012) – Part 1 & Part 2
• 'The Importance of Being a Citizen’: in Active Learning for Active Citizenship, ed. by John Annette & Marjorie Mayo, (NIACE, 2010)
• ‘Together We Can tackle the power gap’: presentation on Innovations in Participation: Citizen Engagement in Deliberative Democracy, at the ‘Frontiers of Innovation Conference: Celebrating 20 Years of Innovation in Government’ (the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation, 1 April 2008, Harvard, USA) [from 33.40 on]
• ‘Civil Renewal: the agenda for empowering citizens’, in Re-energizing Citizenship: Strategies for Civil Renewal, ed. by Gerry Stoker, Tessa Brannan, and Peter John, (Macmillan Palgrave, 2007).
• Serving the Public: customer management in local government, by Henry Tam (Longman: 1993)
• Marketing, Competition & the Public Sector, ed. by Henry Tam (Longman: 1994)
Together We Can: resources from the civil renewal programme
• ‘Together We Can’ action plan: the cross-government plan with commitments in the key public policy areas.
• Annex to ‘Together We Can’ action plan: with details of the proposed initiatives.
• ‘Together We Can’ 2005/2006 review: reports from the Secretaries of State and Ministers on progress in 12 Government Departments.
• ‘Take Part’: resources for ‘Active Learning for Active Citizenship’.
• ‘Guide Neighbourhoods’: how communities can learn cooperative problem-solving and civic activism from each other.
• ‘Civic Pioneers’ first report and second report: collaborative working between local authorities and citizens to improve local quality of life.
• ‘Participatory Budgeting’: resources to expand the use of participatory budgeting in deciding how to allocate public resources.
• ‘Quirk Review’: report on community management and ownership of public assets).
• ‘Asset Transfer Unit’: resources to support the transfer of assets to community-based organisations.
• ‘Active Citizens, Strong Communities – progressing civil renewal’: a pamphlet setting out the Home Secretary’s core objectives and policies.• ‘Councillors Commission’: report with recommendations on how to improve the democratic role of elected local councillors.
Together We Can: supplementary resources by Henry Tam on cooperative problem-solving
• ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’: a review of the Together We Can programme (Forum Journal, Vol 53, Number 3, 2011)
• ‘Cooperative Problem-Solving & Education': on the evidence for suggesting why cooperative problem-solving should be taught more widely (published by the Forum Journal, 2013).
• 'The Cooperative Gestalt': an essay on the cooperative mindset and progressive lifelong learning (Question the Powerful, November 2013)
. ‘Cooperative Problem-Solving: the key to a reciprocal society’: including a joint statement with academics and practitioners on key elements of successful cooperative problem-solving (Question the Powerful, October 2012)
• ‘The Case for Cooperative Problem-Solving’: a statement of why cooperative problem-solving is needed in tackling social, economic and environmental problems (Question the Powerful, May, 2012)
• ‘Awareness, Agitation, Action’: presentation to WEA Oxford (May 18 2012) – Part 1 & Part 2
• 'The Importance of Being a Citizen’: in Active Learning for Active Citizenship, ed. by John Annette & Marjorie Mayo, (NIACE, 2010)
• ‘Together We Can tackle the power gap’: presentation on Innovations in Participation: Citizen Engagement in Deliberative Democracy, at the ‘Frontiers of Innovation Conference: Celebrating 20 Years of Innovation in Government’ (the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation, 1 April 2008, Harvard, USA) [from 33.40 on]
• ‘Civil Renewal: the agenda for empowering citizens’, in Re-energizing Citizenship: Strategies for Civil Renewal, ed. by Gerry Stoker, Tessa Brannan, and Peter John, (Macmillan Palgrave, 2007).
• Serving the Public: customer management in local government, by Henry Tam (Longman: 1993)
• Marketing, Competition & the Public Sector, ed. by Henry Tam (Longman: 1994)
Saturday, May 2, 2015
Find our more about: ‘Together We Can’
Together We Can is a series of practical resources for cooperative problem-solving named after the policy programme developed by Henry Tam when he was the Government’s Head of Civil Renewal (Home Office), and later Deputy Director in charge of Community Empowerment Delivery (Dept for Communities & Local Government) between 2003 and 2010. The resources outlined below include both reports/advice that grew directly out of his policy work, and supplementary papers and presentations by him to highlight the key lessons for community activists and public policy makers on how citizens can cooperate together to solve the problems they face.
Together We Can: resources from the civil renewal programme
• ‘Together We Can’ action plan: the cross-government plan with commitments in the key public policy areas.
• Annex to ‘Together We Can’ action plan: with details of the proposed initiatives.
• ‘Together We Can’ 2005/2006 review: reports from the Secretaries of State and Ministers on progress in 12 Government Departments.
• ‘Take Part’: resources for ‘Active Learning for Active Citizenship’.
• ‘Guide Neighbourhoods’: how communities can learn cooperative problem-solving and civic activism from each other.
• ‘Civic Pioneers’ first report and second report: collaborative working between local authorities and citizens to improve local quality of life.
• ‘Participatory Budgeting’: resources to expand the use of participatory budgeting in deciding how to allocate public resources.
• ‘Quirk Review’: report on community management and ownership of public assets).
• ‘Asset Transfer Unit’: resources to support the transfer of assets to community-based organisations.
• ‘Active Citizens, Strong Communities – progressing civil renewal’: a pamphlet setting out the Home Secretary’s core objectives and policies.• ‘Councillors Commission’: report with recommendations on how to improve the democratic role of elected local councillors.
Together We Can: supplementary resources by Henry Tam on cooperative problem-solving
• ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’: a review of the Together We Can programme (Forum Journal, Vol 53, Number 3, 2011)
• ‘Cooperative Problem-Solving & Education': on the evidence for suggesting why cooperative problem-solving should be taught more widely (published by the Forum Journal, 2013).
• 'The Cooperative Gestalt': an essay on the cooperative mindset and progressive lifelong learning (Question the Powerful, November 2013)
. ‘Cooperative Problem-Solving: the key to a reciprocal society’: including a joint statement with academics and practitioners on key elements of successful cooperative problem-solving (Question the Powerful, October 2012)
• ‘The Case for Cooperative Problem-Solving’: a statement of why cooperative problem-solving is needed in tackling social, economic and environmental problems (Question the Powerful, May, 2012)
• ‘Awareness, Agitation, Action’: presentation to WEA Oxford (May 18 2012) – Part 1 & Part 2
• 'The Importance of Being a Citizen’: in Active Learning for Active Citizenship, ed. by John Annette & Marjorie Mayo, (NIACE, 2010)
• ‘Together We Can tackle the power gap’: presentation on Innovations in Participation: Citizen Engagement in Deliberative Democracy, at the ‘Frontiers of Innovation Conference: Celebrating 20 Years of Innovation in Government’ (the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation, 1 April 2008, Harvard, USA) [from 33.40 on]
• ‘Civil Renewal: the agenda for empowering citizens’, in Re-energizing Citizenship: Strategies for Civil Renewal, ed. by Gerry Stoker, Tessa Brannan, and Peter John, (Macmillan Palgrave, 2007).
• Serving the Public: customer management in local government, by Henry Tam (Longman: 1993)
• Marketing, Competition & the Public Sector, ed. by Henry Tam (Longman: 1994)
Together We Can: resources from the civil renewal programme
• ‘Together We Can’ action plan: the cross-government plan with commitments in the key public policy areas.
• Annex to ‘Together We Can’ action plan: with details of the proposed initiatives.
• ‘Together We Can’ 2005/2006 review: reports from the Secretaries of State and Ministers on progress in 12 Government Departments.
• ‘Take Part’: resources for ‘Active Learning for Active Citizenship’.
• ‘Guide Neighbourhoods’: how communities can learn cooperative problem-solving and civic activism from each other.
• ‘Civic Pioneers’ first report and second report: collaborative working between local authorities and citizens to improve local quality of life.
• ‘Participatory Budgeting’: resources to expand the use of participatory budgeting in deciding how to allocate public resources.
• ‘Quirk Review’: report on community management and ownership of public assets).
• ‘Asset Transfer Unit’: resources to support the transfer of assets to community-based organisations.
• ‘Active Citizens, Strong Communities – progressing civil renewal’: a pamphlet setting out the Home Secretary’s core objectives and policies.• ‘Councillors Commission’: report with recommendations on how to improve the democratic role of elected local councillors.
Together We Can: supplementary resources by Henry Tam on cooperative problem-solving
• ‘Rejuvenating Democracy: lessons from a communitarian experiment’: a review of the Together We Can programme (Forum Journal, Vol 53, Number 3, 2011)
• ‘Cooperative Problem-Solving & Education': on the evidence for suggesting why cooperative problem-solving should be taught more widely (published by the Forum Journal, 2013).
• 'The Cooperative Gestalt': an essay on the cooperative mindset and progressive lifelong learning (Question the Powerful, November 2013)
. ‘Cooperative Problem-Solving: the key to a reciprocal society’: including a joint statement with academics and practitioners on key elements of successful cooperative problem-solving (Question the Powerful, October 2012)
• ‘The Case for Cooperative Problem-Solving’: a statement of why cooperative problem-solving is needed in tackling social, economic and environmental problems (Question the Powerful, May, 2012)
• ‘Awareness, Agitation, Action’: presentation to WEA Oxford (May 18 2012) – Part 1 & Part 2
• 'The Importance of Being a Citizen’: in Active Learning for Active Citizenship, ed. by John Annette & Marjorie Mayo, (NIACE, 2010)
• ‘Together We Can tackle the power gap’: presentation on Innovations in Participation: Citizen Engagement in Deliberative Democracy, at the ‘Frontiers of Innovation Conference: Celebrating 20 Years of Innovation in Government’ (the Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation, 1 April 2008, Harvard, USA) [from 33.40 on]
• ‘Civil Renewal: the agenda for empowering citizens’, in Re-energizing Citizenship: Strategies for Civil Renewal, ed. by Gerry Stoker, Tessa Brannan, and Peter John, (Macmillan Palgrave, 2007).
• Serving the Public: customer management in local government, by Henry Tam (Longman: 1993)
• Marketing, Competition & the Public Sector, ed. by Henry Tam (Longman: 1994)
Sunday, April 12, 2015
10 Books on the Progressive Tradition
What is the progressive tradition? What is that mindset that inspires people to challenge misguided thinking and oppressive practices so as to open up opportunities for future improvements? Between early 17th and mid-20th century, a new philosophy of life emerged to drive scientific, social and political reforms. Below are ten books which examine key aspects of how this tradition has developed, the opposition it encountered, and what lessons contemporary progressives may draw from the struggles. For anyone looking for some general background reading on what being progressive is really about, this selection should help:
Enlightenment: An Interpretation (Vols 1 & 2), by Peter Gay (Wildwood House: 1973)
Witch-hunting, Magic & the New Philosophy: an introduction to the debates of the scientific revolution 1450-1750, by Brian Easlea (Harvester Press: 1980)
Uncertain Victory: social democracy and progressivism in European and American thought 1870-1920, by James T. Kloppenberg (Oxford University Press: 1986)
The Scientific Intellectual: the psychological & sociological origins of modern science, by Lewis S. Feuer (Transaction Publishers: 1992)
The Republican Moment: struggles for democracy in nineteenth century France, by Philip Nord (Harvard University Press: 1995)
The Five Giants: a biography of the welfare state, by Nicholas Timmins (Fontana Press: 1996)
Atlantic Crossings: social politics in a progressive age, by Daniel T. Rodgers (Harvard University Press: 1998)
Enemies of the Enlightenment: the French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of Modernity, by Darrin M. McMahon (Oxford University Press: 2001)
The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America came to be, by Michael Lux (John Wiley & Sons: 2009)
Against Power Inequalities: a history of the progressive struggle, by Henry Tam (Birkbeck: 2010; new edition: 2015)
Enlightenment: An Interpretation (Vols 1 & 2), by Peter Gay (Wildwood House: 1973)
Witch-hunting, Magic & the New Philosophy: an introduction to the debates of the scientific revolution 1450-1750, by Brian Easlea (Harvester Press: 1980)
Uncertain Victory: social democracy and progressivism in European and American thought 1870-1920, by James T. Kloppenberg (Oxford University Press: 1986)
The Scientific Intellectual: the psychological & sociological origins of modern science, by Lewis S. Feuer (Transaction Publishers: 1992)
The Republican Moment: struggles for democracy in nineteenth century France, by Philip Nord (Harvard University Press: 1995)
The Five Giants: a biography of the welfare state, by Nicholas Timmins (Fontana Press: 1996)
Atlantic Crossings: social politics in a progressive age, by Daniel T. Rodgers (Harvard University Press: 1998)
Enemies of the Enlightenment: the French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of Modernity, by Darrin M. McMahon (Oxford University Press: 2001)
The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America came to be, by Michael Lux (John Wiley & Sons: 2009)
Against Power Inequalities: a history of the progressive struggle, by Henry Tam (Birkbeck: 2010; new edition: 2015)
Sunday, March 22, 2015
10 Things about the State of Our Democracy
It is easy to dismiss democracy as not working when in reality we lack a working democracy. Some components are in place, but there are serious flaws and gaps that urgently need to be addressed. Otherwise, the drift towards plutocracy will continue towards the point of no return. Here are ten points to note about the current state of democracy in the UK:
No.1: The 20%-backed Rule
In the elections held in 2001 and since, the average turnout has been 62%. But once we take into account that 15% are not even registered to vote, we realise that out of all those who are eligible to vote, 15% haven’t registered, 33% don’t use their vote though they are registered, leaving just 52% who actually cast a vote. And on average this 52% is split between 20% whose vote go to the party that forms the government (or the leading partner of a coalition government) and 32% who vote for some other party to run the country. In other words, the politicians who are setting the policies for us all are generally backed by just 20% of all those eligible to vote.
No.2: Two-Thirds Safe Seats
Almost 60% of the 650 seats (that’s 380 of them) are so safe that they are routinely predicted to remain with their incumbent parties, and they do. A further 10% are considered fairly safe as to attract relatively little attention from rival parties, leaving 30% (i.e., 194 seats) as marginals (these have majorities of 10% or less, and would change with a 5% swing against current MP). So for all the people living outside those 30% marginal seats, if they want to replace their sitting MPs, they know they are on a statistical mission impossible. Every vote cast against these incumbents, in every election, would be just another wasted vote.
No.3: Selective Devolution
More powers are to be devolved to Scotland’s 5.3 million residents. But British residents living elsewhere are told that they will have to go on accepting ‘Whitehall knows best’. London and six of the other eight regions in England have a population either similar to or substantially larger than that of Scotland’s. The citizens living in these diverse areas have no more faith that a remote political elite in Westminster will be responsive to their needs and concerns, but they are for now ignored. Would they have to set up an independence movement before their case for devolved powers is taken seriously?
No.4: Pseudo-Localism
All the talk of localism has less to do with reviving local democracy than to undermine it. Whitehall has the power to impose decisions on land use and commercial development, even if these will only serve a few big corporations at the expense of countless local people who have to live with the unenviable consequences. And while local authorities are handed all the cuts to sort out, they are firmly deprived of the powers to raise any tax revenue. Local people can vote for any party so long as the party does not seek to secure more resources to meet local needs.
No.5: Use & Abuse of Referendum
It seems that when people can see relatively clearly the arguments for and against something (e.g., fracking for shale gas), the government would rather push ahead with it than give the public a chance to decide through, say, a referendum. But when it is something so complicated such as whether the legal and economic arrangements, which the UK has put in place with the rest of the European Union, should be put aside through the UK leaving the EU, then we are offered a referendum even though few could vote with much understanding of the issues. Curiously, while the TTIP (Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership) also raises questions about our country’s sovereignty to decide for itself, it will not be put to a referendum.
No.6: Voting Rights of Vested Interests
Elected politicians in a local authority have to declare their interest if they stand to gain or lose personally from a proposal that has been put to a vote. In such a case, they have to withdraw from the debate and not vote on the proposal. By contrast, in Parliament, an MP or a member of the House of Lords can join in the discussion of any bill even if they may gain from it becoming an act, and they can vote on it without any hindrance, as many did when they voted for opening up the NHS by passing more lucrative contracts to private healthcare companies, in which these Parliamentarians owned shares.
No.7: Plutocracy
Corporate money already buys media controls, advertising & PR, lobbying and lawsuits, secret tax deals, and of course policy influence via party donations. The Government has shown how much it welcomes this by ignoring the Electoral Commission’s recommendations and changing the law to allow a 23% increase on what can be spent in campaigning in the runup to the next elections. With the wealthiest corporate backers, the Government’s strategy is to win elections by promising behind closed doors what they will deliver for those with most money.
No.8: Blanket Ban on Prisoners Voting
At the other end of the social hierarchy, the UK is still alone amongst advanced democracies to insist on a blanket ban to prevent all prisoners from voting. There may be good reasons to deny those who have been convicted of some of the most serious crimes from having a say on who should govern the country, but there is no justification for claiming that anyone sentenced to jail should automatically lose the opportunity to vote. The offences which give rise to such sentences may have no bearing on whether the individuals concerned ought to have a democratic say about their country. Some of these offences may even be less objectionable than MPs cheating on their expense claims and defrauding the public, yet the vast majority of MPs voted to reject a bill brought forward to limit the ban on voting to just those prisoners serving over 4 years.
No.9: Prime Minister Question Time
The showcase for our democracy at work is supposed to be Prime Minister Question Time when obsequious members of the PM’s own party put forward ‘questions’ to enable the PM to reply by saying how wonderful everything is. It is also the occasion when the PM and Leader of the Opposition have to score media points against each other by sounding as rude, dismissive, and arrogant as possible. In effect, the centrepiece of the mechanism for holding the Prime Minister to account is a farcical non-event that reminds the country weekly that there is no executive accountability.
No.10: Parties Coming to an End
Back in 1983, almost 4% of the electorate belong to one or another of the main political parties. Now in 2015 that has dropped to well under 1%. Parties no longer inspire confidence of loyalty. To ordinary people, they are invisible except for once in a blue moon they come around to ask for your vote (assuming you live in one of those marginal seats). Even to their dwindling members, they rarely contact them apart from when they are asking for money. Once a compass for voting allegiance, political parties will become increasingly irrelevant unless they radically reform themselves to offer people something more.
No.1: The 20%-backed Rule
In the elections held in 2001 and since, the average turnout has been 62%. But once we take into account that 15% are not even registered to vote, we realise that out of all those who are eligible to vote, 15% haven’t registered, 33% don’t use their vote though they are registered, leaving just 52% who actually cast a vote. And on average this 52% is split between 20% whose vote go to the party that forms the government (or the leading partner of a coalition government) and 32% who vote for some other party to run the country. In other words, the politicians who are setting the policies for us all are generally backed by just 20% of all those eligible to vote.
No.2: Two-Thirds Safe Seats
Almost 60% of the 650 seats (that’s 380 of them) are so safe that they are routinely predicted to remain with their incumbent parties, and they do. A further 10% are considered fairly safe as to attract relatively little attention from rival parties, leaving 30% (i.e., 194 seats) as marginals (these have majorities of 10% or less, and would change with a 5% swing against current MP). So for all the people living outside those 30% marginal seats, if they want to replace their sitting MPs, they know they are on a statistical mission impossible. Every vote cast against these incumbents, in every election, would be just another wasted vote.
No.3: Selective Devolution
More powers are to be devolved to Scotland’s 5.3 million residents. But British residents living elsewhere are told that they will have to go on accepting ‘Whitehall knows best’. London and six of the other eight regions in England have a population either similar to or substantially larger than that of Scotland’s. The citizens living in these diverse areas have no more faith that a remote political elite in Westminster will be responsive to their needs and concerns, but they are for now ignored. Would they have to set up an independence movement before their case for devolved powers is taken seriously?
No.4: Pseudo-Localism
All the talk of localism has less to do with reviving local democracy than to undermine it. Whitehall has the power to impose decisions on land use and commercial development, even if these will only serve a few big corporations at the expense of countless local people who have to live with the unenviable consequences. And while local authorities are handed all the cuts to sort out, they are firmly deprived of the powers to raise any tax revenue. Local people can vote for any party so long as the party does not seek to secure more resources to meet local needs.
No.5: Use & Abuse of Referendum
It seems that when people can see relatively clearly the arguments for and against something (e.g., fracking for shale gas), the government would rather push ahead with it than give the public a chance to decide through, say, a referendum. But when it is something so complicated such as whether the legal and economic arrangements, which the UK has put in place with the rest of the European Union, should be put aside through the UK leaving the EU, then we are offered a referendum even though few could vote with much understanding of the issues. Curiously, while the TTIP (Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership) also raises questions about our country’s sovereignty to decide for itself, it will not be put to a referendum.
No.6: Voting Rights of Vested Interests
Elected politicians in a local authority have to declare their interest if they stand to gain or lose personally from a proposal that has been put to a vote. In such a case, they have to withdraw from the debate and not vote on the proposal. By contrast, in Parliament, an MP or a member of the House of Lords can join in the discussion of any bill even if they may gain from it becoming an act, and they can vote on it without any hindrance, as many did when they voted for opening up the NHS by passing more lucrative contracts to private healthcare companies, in which these Parliamentarians owned shares.
No.7: Plutocracy
Corporate money already buys media controls, advertising & PR, lobbying and lawsuits, secret tax deals, and of course policy influence via party donations. The Government has shown how much it welcomes this by ignoring the Electoral Commission’s recommendations and changing the law to allow a 23% increase on what can be spent in campaigning in the runup to the next elections. With the wealthiest corporate backers, the Government’s strategy is to win elections by promising behind closed doors what they will deliver for those with most money.
No.8: Blanket Ban on Prisoners Voting
At the other end of the social hierarchy, the UK is still alone amongst advanced democracies to insist on a blanket ban to prevent all prisoners from voting. There may be good reasons to deny those who have been convicted of some of the most serious crimes from having a say on who should govern the country, but there is no justification for claiming that anyone sentenced to jail should automatically lose the opportunity to vote. The offences which give rise to such sentences may have no bearing on whether the individuals concerned ought to have a democratic say about their country. Some of these offences may even be less objectionable than MPs cheating on their expense claims and defrauding the public, yet the vast majority of MPs voted to reject a bill brought forward to limit the ban on voting to just those prisoners serving over 4 years.
No.9: Prime Minister Question Time
The showcase for our democracy at work is supposed to be Prime Minister Question Time when obsequious members of the PM’s own party put forward ‘questions’ to enable the PM to reply by saying how wonderful everything is. It is also the occasion when the PM and Leader of the Opposition have to score media points against each other by sounding as rude, dismissive, and arrogant as possible. In effect, the centrepiece of the mechanism for holding the Prime Minister to account is a farcical non-event that reminds the country weekly that there is no executive accountability.
No.10: Parties Coming to an End
Back in 1983, almost 4% of the electorate belong to one or another of the main political parties. Now in 2015 that has dropped to well under 1%. Parties no longer inspire confidence of loyalty. To ordinary people, they are invisible except for once in a blue moon they come around to ask for your vote (assuming you live in one of those marginal seats). Even to their dwindling members, they rarely contact them apart from when they are asking for money. Once a compass for voting allegiance, political parties will become increasingly irrelevant unless they radically reform themselves to offer people something more.
Friday, March 6, 2015
Against Power Inequalities: a historical guide
Introduction
Against Power Inequalities is a global history of the emergence of power inequalities around the world, the progressive struggle to rein in those with excessive power, and the ideas and movements that have sustained the drive for more inclusive communities. It provides an accessible guide to the roots of exploitation and oppression in power imbalance, explains their inter-connections across time and nations, and sets out how some of them have been overcome while other challenges still remain.
It has been a widely recommended book for political education:
• “Tam’s book is an intellectual tour de force … It bears reading and re-reading, because the issues of power and community are so fundamental, and the history so rich and evocative.” - C. Derber, Professor of Sociology, Boston College (USA)
• “… a book that is breathtaking in its panoramic overview of the genealogy of power inequalities and the struggles against them. ... In its forensic, but always optimistic, analysis of how citizens have worked in the past, and continue to work, towards a fairer, more just society, we have an inspirational example of a text that speaks truth to power.” - D. Reay, Professor of Education, University of Cambridge
• “Henry Tam tells the inspiring, global story of democratic struggles against concentrated power and offers guidance for progressives today. It is a broad, bold, and thoughtful manifesto for popular democratic reform.” - P. Levine, Research Director, Jonathan Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service, Tufts University (USA)
• “Tam's book is a kaleidoscope of human history in which he tells a compelling story. He understands the nature of power and the negative impacts it can have in almost any conceivable culture.” - R. Spellman, Chief Executive, Workers Educational Association
• “[The] work of a truly independent scholar.” - E. M. H. Hirsch Ballin, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Tilburg, The Netherlands
• “Henry Tam is a master storyteller.” - E. Mayo, Secretary General, Co-operatives UK
• “The author boldly claims that his book provides a historical guide to the progressive struggle for power redistribution, and draws out the underlying obstacles to the development of more inclusive communities. This is a mightily ambitious claim. ... Having read the new edition of Against Power Inequalities, I now recognise the power of his keyboard, and believe his claim for the book to be justified." - J. Tizard, the Huffington Post (UK)
What are the key issues to reflect on
• What does the historical pattern tell us about how power inequalities are likely to arise?
• Do we discern common roots of oppression in greed for power regardless of differences in culture-specific beliefs and customs?
• What are the key factors behind successful attempts to counter domination by the powerful?
• Why must the struggle against power inequalities be sustained if exploitative relationships are not to re-emerge?
• What democratic activism can actually achieve despite the odds?
How to get hold of this publication
The new expanded edition, published in 2015 to commemorate the 8th centenary of Magna Carta, is available in e-book and paperback format.
Click on Against Power Inequalities for details.
Options for further engagement
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share Against Power Inequalities 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 an exercise in retracing the key moments in the historical struggle against those with excessive power, and identifying the lessons for contemporary attempts to reverse the growth of power inequalities.
Supplementary Texts
In addition to Against Power Inequalities, the following books are useful to broaden our historical understanding of the struggle to curb the powerful and promote democratic inclusion for all:
• Gay, P. Enlightenment: An Interpretation (Vols 1 & 2), Gay (Wildwood House: 1973)
• Kloppenberg, J. T., Uncertain Victory: social democracy and progressivism in European and American thought 1870-1920, by (Oxford University Press: 1986)
• Lux, M. The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America came to be, (John Wiley & Sons: 2009)
• McMahon D. M., Enemies of the Enlightenment: the French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of Modernity, (Oxford University Press: 2001)
• Nicholas T., The Five Giants: a biography of the welfare state, (Fontana Press: 1996)
• Nord, P., The Republican Moment: struggles for democracy in nineteenth century France, (Harvard University Press: 1995)
• Rodgers, D. T., Atlantic Crossings: social politics in a progressive age, (Harvard University Press: 1998)
Against Power Inequalities is a global history of the emergence of power inequalities around the world, the progressive struggle to rein in those with excessive power, and the ideas and movements that have sustained the drive for more inclusive communities. It provides an accessible guide to the roots of exploitation and oppression in power imbalance, explains their inter-connections across time and nations, and sets out how some of them have been overcome while other challenges still remain.
It has been a widely recommended book for political education:
• “Tam’s book is an intellectual tour de force … It bears reading and re-reading, because the issues of power and community are so fundamental, and the history so rich and evocative.” - C. Derber, Professor of Sociology, Boston College (USA)
• “… a book that is breathtaking in its panoramic overview of the genealogy of power inequalities and the struggles against them. ... In its forensic, but always optimistic, analysis of how citizens have worked in the past, and continue to work, towards a fairer, more just society, we have an inspirational example of a text that speaks truth to power.” - D. Reay, Professor of Education, University of Cambridge
• “Henry Tam tells the inspiring, global story of democratic struggles against concentrated power and offers guidance for progressives today. It is a broad, bold, and thoughtful manifesto for popular democratic reform.” - P. Levine, Research Director, Jonathan Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service, Tufts University (USA)
• “Tam's book is a kaleidoscope of human history in which he tells a compelling story. He understands the nature of power and the negative impacts it can have in almost any conceivable culture.” - R. Spellman, Chief Executive, Workers Educational Association
• “[The] work of a truly independent scholar.” - E. M. H. Hirsch Ballin, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Tilburg, The Netherlands
• “Henry Tam is a master storyteller.” - E. Mayo, Secretary General, Co-operatives UK
• “The author boldly claims that his book provides a historical guide to the progressive struggle for power redistribution, and draws out the underlying obstacles to the development of more inclusive communities. This is a mightily ambitious claim. ... Having read the new edition of Against Power Inequalities, I now recognise the power of his keyboard, and believe his claim for the book to be justified." - J. Tizard, the Huffington Post (UK)
What are the key issues to reflect on
• What does the historical pattern tell us about how power inequalities are likely to arise?
• Do we discern common roots of oppression in greed for power regardless of differences in culture-specific beliefs and customs?
• What are the key factors behind successful attempts to counter domination by the powerful?
• Why must the struggle against power inequalities be sustained if exploitative relationships are not to re-emerge?
• What democratic activism can actually achieve despite the odds?
How to get hold of this publication
The new expanded edition, published in 2015 to commemorate the 8th centenary of Magna Carta, is available in e-book and paperback format.
Click on Against Power Inequalities for details.
Options for further engagement
• Contact the author with your questions
• Share Against Power Inequalities 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 an exercise in retracing the key moments in the historical struggle against those with excessive power, and identifying the lessons for contemporary attempts to reverse the growth of power inequalities.
Supplementary Texts
In addition to Against Power Inequalities, the following books are useful to broaden our historical understanding of the struggle to curb the powerful and promote democratic inclusion for all:
• Gay, P. Enlightenment: An Interpretation (Vols 1 & 2), Gay (Wildwood House: 1973)
• Kloppenberg, J. T., Uncertain Victory: social democracy and progressivism in European and American thought 1870-1920, by (Oxford University Press: 1986)
• Lux, M. The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America came to be, (John Wiley & Sons: 2009)
• McMahon D. M., Enemies of the Enlightenment: the French Counter-Enlightenment and the Making of Modernity, (Oxford University Press: 2001)
• Nicholas T., The Five Giants: a biography of the welfare state, (Fontana Press: 1996)
• Nord, P., The Republican Moment: struggles for democracy in nineteenth century France, (Harvard University Press: 1995)
• Rodgers, D. T., Atlantic Crossings: social politics in a progressive age, (Harvard University Press: 1998)
Thursday, March 5, 2015
Cooperation Unbound: a reciprocal model for democratic education
The problem with undemocratic institutions – be they the government of a country or a business – is that they do the bidding of those in charge at the top, without being accountable to others who have to live with the consequences of their actions.
One of the most notable features of the democratic struggle during the 19th/early 20th centuries was the drive to enable the disempowered majority to learn why and how they go about getting a greater say about the decisions that affected them. Reformists who wanted democratic cooperation to replace authoritarian controls recognised their cause could only be effectively advanced if education played its part.
And in quick succession, learning providers such as the Working Men’s College (founded 1854), Cooperative Women’s Guild (1883), Ruskin College (1899), Workers’ Educational Association (1903), Cooperative College (1919), National Council of Labour Colleges (1921), were set up. But ironically, the achievement of universal suffrage for all adults aged 18+, the establishment of the welfare state, and the emergence of the (short-lived) post-war consensus on social justice, had by the 1970s led many to believe that the struggle for democracy and cooperation was over.
Support for politically orientated education began to slip down the agenda, and at every subsequent economic downturn, funding from state and philanthropic sources would be further cut, and lifelong learning in general became more tightly squeezed into employment-focused training to meet the needs of a largely non-cooperative economy.
In order to rebuild the momentum to democratise state and business institutions so that cooperation is structurally and culturally embedded in how they operate, four steps should be taken to develop a new business model with reciprocity at its heart.
First, lifelong learning providers should explore with representatives (from social, cooperative, and community enterprises; trades unions; worker-owned/worker-run partnerships; and other progressive institutions) what type of education will best encourage and enable more people to contribute to the success of those organisations, both in terms of how to apply the principles of democratic cooperation internally, and how to promote suitable economic and political changes externally.
Secondly, they need to put in place partnership arrangements to deal with course development, financial commitment, and impact review. These should be at a level that would be neither too large to render communications superficial nor too small to hinder economies of scale. This points to a federated structure with Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, London, East of England, and other English regions (or sub-regional City-Regions such as Greater Manchester or Greater Birmingham) as likely units of strategic cooperation to steer and monitor progress. Within their own areas, they can set their respective priorities, but they will also have the option of sharing course contents and other provisions across the UK where appropriate.
Thirdly, the partners can agree their organisational backing and funding support on the basis of how they will benefit in directly quantifiable economic terms and as measured by SROI (social return on investment), from a range of courses and programmes co-designed to raise awareness and understanding of:
• Why institutions work better to the extent they are more democratically run.
• How to correct superficial or flawed approaches to facilitate democratic cooperation so that real improvement can be made.
• What kind of incremental changes can be brought forward to modify non-democratic institutions in the short-term.
• How to transform existing institutions or set up new ones so that they are legally, financially, democratically robust enough to foster high performance and stakeholders’ satisfaction.
• What the common problems are in running and developing institutions committed to democratic cooperation, and how they can be addressed to bring about greater benefits for all.
• What lessons can be learnt from experience around the world in advancing democratic cooperation in different sectors or institutional contexts.
Finally, when partnership structures, course contents/delivery, and funding agreement are in place, further investment support can be sought from relevant government agencies, social investors, CDFIs (community development finance institutions), and progressive foundations to help with the continuous improvement of the learning opportunities and the expansion of their access. Instead of short-term wheel-reinventing projects, the partners will be in a position to make a strong case for sustained investment in the provision of effective courses that will enhance the resilience, performance and growth of democratic institutions in all sectors.
Back in 1879, Professor James Stuart of the University of Cambridge, a leading proponent of adult education, remarked that the cooperative movement “is a democratic movement if there ever was one. It therefore cannot repose on the good sense of a few; its success will depend on the good sense of the masses.” And while the connections between education and democratic cooperation have in recent decades been weakened in Britain, the value of ensuring these two elements are properly integrated can be seen in areas where cooperative working has as a result been highly successful in securing stability, prosperity and social justice – e.g., Mondragon in Spain, and Emilia Romagna in Italy. In both these regions, a vast range of cooperative organisations joined forces through federated structures to ensure, amongst other things, education is provided to sustain the long-term health of democratic cooperation as a way of intra and inter institutional life.
It is time we accept that we cannot rely on goodwill funding or grants dispensed to those on the receiving end of a supplicant relationship. We must integrate the objectives of social justice, economic vibrancy, and political inclusion into a reciprocal partnership, and use that as the foundation to revitalise democratic education.
One of the most notable features of the democratic struggle during the 19th/early 20th centuries was the drive to enable the disempowered majority to learn why and how they go about getting a greater say about the decisions that affected them. Reformists who wanted democratic cooperation to replace authoritarian controls recognised their cause could only be effectively advanced if education played its part.
And in quick succession, learning providers such as the Working Men’s College (founded 1854), Cooperative Women’s Guild (1883), Ruskin College (1899), Workers’ Educational Association (1903), Cooperative College (1919), National Council of Labour Colleges (1921), were set up. But ironically, the achievement of universal suffrage for all adults aged 18+, the establishment of the welfare state, and the emergence of the (short-lived) post-war consensus on social justice, had by the 1970s led many to believe that the struggle for democracy and cooperation was over.
Support for politically orientated education began to slip down the agenda, and at every subsequent economic downturn, funding from state and philanthropic sources would be further cut, and lifelong learning in general became more tightly squeezed into employment-focused training to meet the needs of a largely non-cooperative economy.
In order to rebuild the momentum to democratise state and business institutions so that cooperation is structurally and culturally embedded in how they operate, four steps should be taken to develop a new business model with reciprocity at its heart.
First, lifelong learning providers should explore with representatives (from social, cooperative, and community enterprises; trades unions; worker-owned/worker-run partnerships; and other progressive institutions) what type of education will best encourage and enable more people to contribute to the success of those organisations, both in terms of how to apply the principles of democratic cooperation internally, and how to promote suitable economic and political changes externally.
Secondly, they need to put in place partnership arrangements to deal with course development, financial commitment, and impact review. These should be at a level that would be neither too large to render communications superficial nor too small to hinder economies of scale. This points to a federated structure with Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, London, East of England, and other English regions (or sub-regional City-Regions such as Greater Manchester or Greater Birmingham) as likely units of strategic cooperation to steer and monitor progress. Within their own areas, they can set their respective priorities, but they will also have the option of sharing course contents and other provisions across the UK where appropriate.
Thirdly, the partners can agree their organisational backing and funding support on the basis of how they will benefit in directly quantifiable economic terms and as measured by SROI (social return on investment), from a range of courses and programmes co-designed to raise awareness and understanding of:
• Why institutions work better to the extent they are more democratically run.
• How to correct superficial or flawed approaches to facilitate democratic cooperation so that real improvement can be made.
• What kind of incremental changes can be brought forward to modify non-democratic institutions in the short-term.
• How to transform existing institutions or set up new ones so that they are legally, financially, democratically robust enough to foster high performance and stakeholders’ satisfaction.
• What the common problems are in running and developing institutions committed to democratic cooperation, and how they can be addressed to bring about greater benefits for all.
• What lessons can be learnt from experience around the world in advancing democratic cooperation in different sectors or institutional contexts.
Finally, when partnership structures, course contents/delivery, and funding agreement are in place, further investment support can be sought from relevant government agencies, social investors, CDFIs (community development finance institutions), and progressive foundations to help with the continuous improvement of the learning opportunities and the expansion of their access. Instead of short-term wheel-reinventing projects, the partners will be in a position to make a strong case for sustained investment in the provision of effective courses that will enhance the resilience, performance and growth of democratic institutions in all sectors.
Back in 1879, Professor James Stuart of the University of Cambridge, a leading proponent of adult education, remarked that the cooperative movement “is a democratic movement if there ever was one. It therefore cannot repose on the good sense of a few; its success will depend on the good sense of the masses.” And while the connections between education and democratic cooperation have in recent decades been weakened in Britain, the value of ensuring these two elements are properly integrated can be seen in areas where cooperative working has as a result been highly successful in securing stability, prosperity and social justice – e.g., Mondragon in Spain, and Emilia Romagna in Italy. In both these regions, a vast range of cooperative organisations joined forces through federated structures to ensure, amongst other things, education is provided to sustain the long-term health of democratic cooperation as a way of intra and inter institutional life.
It is time we accept that we cannot rely on goodwill funding or grants dispensed to those on the receiving end of a supplicant relationship. We must integrate the objectives of social justice, economic vibrancy, and political inclusion into a reciprocal partnership, and use that as the foundation to revitalise democratic education.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)