Commonweal Institute Blog

I am particularly impressed by Ian Finseth’s Talking Points article in the Commonweal Institute’s newsletter this month. Excerpts:

The desire to advance human liberty is certainly laudable, but the problem is that the administration has emphasized freedom as a policy goal at the expense of clearly articulating another social value, justice, which is much more deeply rooted in Arab culture. The result has been to cloud our understanding of the conflict, to limit our options for dealing with it, and to distort badly our entire foreign policy in the Middle East.
[….]
If we’re serious about prevailing in “the decisive ideological struggle of our time,” as President Bush phrased it in his January 10 address, we can’t simply try to export our own values without a good understanding of the values of our would-be partners. The United States and even our moderate Arab friends have been talking past each other, speaking different languages, and that miscommunication makes it incredibly difficult for us to gain traction in the war of ideas.
[….]
It is probably too late for the current administration to understand any of this or to take any of it to heart, but in the years ahead the policy analysts and planners in the American government need start understanding and talking the language of the region they are dealing with. Few changes would have a more salutary effect on our relations with the Muslim and Arab worlds than explaining how our involvement in the region promotes justice there as much as freedom – assuming, of course, we don’t just talk the talk, but walk the walk. That means, above all, pushing hard for a just settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and, if it’s not too late, achieving a just allocation of resources and reconstruction monies in Iraq. Then we’ll see improvement in our relations with ordinary Arabs, increasing room for our ideas to take root, and some recovery of our squandered international prestige.

Visitors to the Indonesian island of Bali are often surprised to see farmers, herders, children - virtually anyone and everyone, making professional quality art. When asked about this, Balinese are often puzzled by the question - in their world there are no professional artists, everyone has some talent and everyone uses it for his or her own joy. While some artists are clearly better than others, and some artwork reaches a "professional level" in a commercial sense, everyone has access and everyone creates the art that inspires them. Art has not been "professionalized" in Bali as in the West- it is still democratic. Like art, politics and media have also been professionalized in the West - made undemocratic through the exclusion of ordinary citizens.

By Guy T. Saperstein

An organization has emerged in Washington, D.C., Third Way, which claims to be both centrist and progressive and which has gained a foothold of influence with some Democratic lawmakers. It is important to assess if Third Way's political strategy makes sense, and to examine whether Third Way is undermining progressives' efforts.

Third Way's seminal political philosophy is set forth in the "The Politics of Polarization," written by Bill Galston and Elaine Kamarck, which informs Third Way's perspective and direction. "The Politics of Polarization," which Third Way rolled out under the banner, "Third Way Releases Groundbreaking Report," is a long document, but it is predicated on one core premise -- a premise that I think is not only utterly fallacious, but one which attempts to lead Democrats in the wrong political direction. The core premise of "The Politics of Polarization" is that more people self-identify as "conservatives" (32%) than "liberals" (20%), so polarizing the electorate favors Republicans, not Democrats. Thus, Democrats must trend toward the center and/or conservative positions to attract the "moderates," and avoid supporting clear, but polarizing, "liberal" positions.