Last month, during a London
School of Economics symposium on the European Union a student asked whether we
need fewer firefighters and more architects in positions of power. The
question sounded slightly rhetorical. The audience applauded.
Four Decembers ago, on either
side of the Atlantic, such an audience of political scientists would have
laughed.
Whether elected as
visionaries or as technocrats, leaders in Europe and North America were not
required to envision, but to act. It didn’t matter then whether they were
democrats or bullies, outgoing or shy, elected to office or one step removed
and running central banks. They didn’t have to define the problem; they just had
to fix it.
Thanks to four years of successful
firefighting, it shouldn’t be surprising that the public is less awed today by
can-do executive resumes and talk of imminent collapse. (Otherwise, in the US,
Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney would be President-elect, and Donald Trump would
be recognized as a builder and not as an arsonist.)
As people get used to breathing
more easily, they’re less easily impressed and are more open to new worries--new
problems that can’t be addressed by the emergency power leaders have been
relying on through the Great Recession.
Centrists in Washington
probably have enough votes to stabilize the public debt’s share of US GNP.
North Americans should also be able to stabilize and eventually reduce CO2
emissions, in absolute terms. A Canadian-style immigration policy should
eventually be adopted by the US.
Nevertheless, North American
and European leaders do not know how to stay ahead of China and the other
BRIC’s economically while meeting the frustrated expectations of their own
middle classes. Whatever they do domestically, they don’t know how to inspire
collective global action on the environment without being in charge anymore.
Firefighters have little to
offer. Technocrats may agree broadly that more continental integration and less
parochialism on both continents would offer the scale--and the
architecture--for greater success. However, big policy, on paper, is
cheap.
The leadership task now won’t
be solved literally by replacing today’s leaders with architects. However, the
ones we have need to master politics’ toughest job. They need to be able to be
persuasive, to convince us that we ought to try something new rather than
simply replace the smoke detectors.
No comments:
Post a Comment