It would be
impossible to watch Congress today and not worry about the future of the great
American experiment. Can this generation
do as earlier Americans have done and respond to the challenges we face as one
nation, united around the idea that we can advance the general welfare by
protecting individual freedom? No sober
observer could avoid the conclusion that Americans face a multitude of serious
challenges, not the least of which is making government work again, finding
leaders who can make democracy work again.
The US is not alone.
China’s new leaders face at least as many, at least as daunting,
challenges. The ratio of workers to
retirees is, like the US, out of whack.
Corrupt leaders—in the public and private sector—appear willing to put
party (or individual gain) above nation.
Environmental degradation, resulting from unregulated
growth, threatens public health, economic vitality, and international
stability. Sounds familiar. A columnist, describing the impact of
the desertification of Northeast China on Japan, put it this way:
“The sand is
compliments of China’s boom. Thanks to deforestation and overgrazing, more and
more of the Gobi Desert’s grit, along with industrial pollution, is being
carried by prevailing winds to Japan….The geopolitics of pollution has the potential
to turn toxic. If you thought Asia’s territorial disputes were a barrier to
peace and cooperation, just wait until blackened skies dominate summit
meetings. And they will, as nationalists in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan use
pollution as a rallying point to gin up anti-China sentiment; business leaders
in Hong Kong express anger about having trouble recruiting foreign talent;
China lashes out at independent reports on health risks; and the world points
fingers at the Communist Party as climate change accelerates.”
If the Pacific Rim economies go into a tailspin, this will
almost certainly reverse our modest economic recovery, because we can no longer deny our interdependence (making cooperation more prudent than war as a default approach to foreign policy). If China's 'wild west' model of unconstrained economic development spreads, we may see already weakened democratic institutions atrophy worldwide as the negative impacts of an unregulated free market become even more difficult to manage.
“’Asia can
barely get along now, never mind when we throw air pollution into the mix,’
said Alistair Thornton, a Beijing-based economist at research company IHS Inc. Environmental disputes already abound….disputes
over water with Kazakhstan, India and the nations downstream on the Mekong
River; conflicts over illegal logging with Indonesia; and the lack of corporate
social responsibility by Chinese companies in Vietnam and Myanmar. Add to that
China’s shipments of acrid air to Japan….
Pollution is a
clear danger to the Communist Party’s legitimacy…. The U.S. Embassy in Beijing also refused to
stop issuing hourly air-quality updates.
The problem is
political will. Flush with $3.3 trillion of currency reserves, China has the
money to succeed. Yet almost any route it takes to go green requires slower
growth. China’s leaders for the next 10 years, President Xi Jinping and Premier
Li Keqiang, are under pressure to boost today’s 7.9 percent growth rate and
placate a populace seething over income inequality.”
Will our own environmental degradation and political
stalemate undermine the legitimacy of elites in both parties, or of a
corporate elite increasingly callous to the living conditions of ordinary
Americans? As our embassy (rightly)
pushes Beijing to reform, will other nations similarly exploit tensions over
the highest levels of inequality in the US since 1929? Do our leaders lack the political will
to do what is best for the nation? These
are not the usual types of questions we ask about ourselves. But when we read about very similar challenges
facing China these are the first questions that come to mind. Are we asking the wrong questions?
Closer to home, but on the same point, colleges and universities need to return to a faculty leadership structure. Rather than hiring over-paid bureaucrats from the private sector who are looking to ease into a comfortable campus retirement, return to the tradition of faculty leadership. This would be innovative and good for both our students and higher education. Hiring internally reduces costs, often significantly, and puts individuals in charge who actually understand where value is created on a university campus.
No comments:
Post a Comment