It is increasingly clear that the liberal welfare state is not sustainable in its current form, and its costs and inefficiencies are increasingly present and real and are putting huge burdens on our economy at every level. This can’t really go on. From here on, the Left has mostly to play a defensive game of retrenchment and reaction, and this is an exhausting game, especially for liberals.
This comment encapsulates part of the argument that Jim Bennett and I make in our forthcoming book, America 3.0: Rebooting American Prosperity in the 21st Century – Why America’s Greatest Days Are Yet to Come.
The liberal welfare state is long past its peak. The question is, what next? We offer some predictions. But the main thing to consider is the transformative nature of the era we are living through. Both sides of the political spectrum are still stuck in 20th Century thinking, both thinking that the Blue Model can be tinkered with. It can’t. The challenge for Conservatives will be to figure out what they want to conserve and how to adapt their principles to the times. Progressives will need to figure out how to preserve their goals of protecting the weak and powerless using new methods, since the old ones are not working and will not continue to be popular once voters understand the burdens and costs.
8 thoughts on “The Liberal Welfare State is not Sustainable”
There’s a long thread going on at Sarah Hoyt’s blog, about how we can ‘build underneath’ – which is I think what you are saying; things that we can do in a small way to connect, and reinforce our institutions so that society doesn’t cave in catastrophically.
BTW,it may interest you to know that Chicagoboyz is now my home page … not Insty. I was going to more links on the Boyz blogroll than I ever was going to Instys. And their new comment system at PJM and loosing all the archives on the Belmont Club was the last straw. Brave new world…
” loosing all the archives on the Belmont Club was the last straw. Brave new world…”
What is with that ? I gave up trying to register after years of commenting. National Review is getting more difficult to comment on. All my comments are now “moderated” and I never go back to see if they appear. Do they realize that people stop reading ?
There seems to have been some kind of management shift at PJM. Pity. I hope they restore the comment archives.
BTW, please don’t hesitate to let me know about any new links you’d like to see on the CB blogroll.
That is the question that many BELMONT CLUB/PJMedia regulars are asking. I know of at least one of the bylined writers who was not notified of the changes ahead of time. The management, after posting the notice of the NEW!!! and EXCITING!!! system will not respond to questions at all.
There are rumors that certain Leftists have bought enough stock to take over and are deliberately running it into the ground for ideological reasons. The longer the refusal to answer persists, the more likely it seems to be the case.
The matter of the archives is a real sore point. They say that it just was not possible to go to the new [and ridiculous] system unless they deliberately tossed the archives. Storage is cheap, and the task itself is quite easy. Several software developers have commented confirming this.
Events on a number of fronts are moving fast. And PJM, while vexing, is not short term critical. I suspect that short term critical will be defined for people in the next few months.
PJM was always run by a “former,” “reformed” Communist (Simon), although PJM supported plenty of hard-left causes it was somehow mistaken for being “rightist” or “conservative.” Now that the “former” Communist no longer run the place, there is no restraining hand to keep PJM from becoming a clone of HuffPo.
“We offer some predictions”
I look forward to reading your book, but it isn’t high on my list. I don’t expect to live long enough to see A3.0. (No, I am no about to die; I just think any transformation away from our current regime could take decades.)
Here’s the press release on the PJM changes:
I haven’t seen any reason to think that there’s been any kind of political coup there. If archives were deleted, that reflects what is IMO a very bad technical/marketing decision, the sort of thing that old-media companies do when working in a world they don’t understand very well.
Last month, it was announced that Allen West had joined PJM as director of next-generation programming:
I think there are some cumbersome things about the way PJM works, but I think there enterprise, and Roger Simon in particular, have contributed a great deal.
Erisguy, we figure that the next iteration will be in full flower about 30 years from now. I hope it’s sooner. But we need to get started as soon as possible. My grandchildren will live in America 3.0.
As an frequent reader and occasional commenter @ PJM, I also do not like the loss of the comment archives and the requirement to register. The comments @ Belmont Club were often as good or better than the original articles. Which is not put-down of Richard Fernandez/Wretchard, as he added to the comments himself.
I have seen the loss of comment archives at a number of blogs which make software changes where there has been no change in the tone of the articles posted. Wait and see.
Comments are closed.