Nostalgia Politics Redux

Exiting the party conventions, the theme guiding both Republican and Democratic strategies aims to highlight past electoral glory.  Not surprisingly, how far back each party would have you selectively remember is variable requiring additional research for many of today’s young voters.   Still viewing the 2012 narratives through the nostalgia filter-reminding the public when they were strong and the people concurred with their leadership is the horse race, marketing campaign we’re watching through November.  

So it’s fair to say that the GOP, in an effort to garner credibility for its current flock of candidates and policy proposals, have attempted an 80’s nostalgia tour doubling as party platform.  Unwilling to rehash the achievements and legacies of the two most recent Republican Presidents for different reasons, we’re back congressing with the Republican party of the early 80’s in the hopes they might forget the space in between. 

Why so far back to find a narrative tune the American people could sing along with?
What about the Bush’s?  

Well, not surprisingly George W is easy, though not most importantly, because of the horrid mess he left behind and the hang over type symptoms he conjures up for the American people.  More importantly because the GW era operated with all the current major figures in the party, outside of Mr Romney himself, as footman. Add to that the clearly failed policies and ineffective management of the public purpose and deficit busting cronyism and you have the modern Republican party.  Four years ago it might have been said that’s not the lipstick they’ve decided to put on the pig.  Sorry George don’t wait for an invite to the big party in Florida.

Similarly, George HW’s whose policies were too reasonable and his time in office not filled with the winner take all, no compromises tinder that the base needs to get fired up.  Besides we didn't like what his lips ended up saying so rewind some more.

So when fear of national security threats will not do, we're left with rehashing Reagan’s iconic question to focus the mind.  So they declared: Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?  And with policies that similarly line up with Cold War priorities including tax cuts for high income earners and high levels of budget busting, inefficient military spending to boost the economy without it actually being defined as “stimulus”.  No doubt cover for the corporate socialism James K Galbraith has been highlighting for years.  Sprinkle in some social conservatism to keep the party together and most definitely continued profiteering from the mechanism established by the social safety net for the libertarians and you’ve got a party platform.

But of course this effort at nostalgia politics is not limited just to the Republicans.  Democrats too are keen to conjure up the past as cover to minimize the damage caused by a lack of progress on the still outstanding first term issues.  So looking back, not quite as far, to another set of policies that they claim as high water for budget surplus, job creating and balanced leadership.  Never mind the recession that ended it or the rising inequality and the financialisation of society that marked the dawn of the 2000's.  Instead evidence here the impassioned, hour long speech by democratic icon Bill Clinton whose legacy has proven considerably more useful to his party than the others.  Similarly, evidence the 2012 Democratic Party platform that while containing new elements of social progressivism not thought possible even in the heady 90’s are similarly balanced in the way the Clinton Administration managed the country. 

So for all the hype surrounding financial re-regulation the Obama Administration acts in much the same manner as that of Clinton’s, indeed utilizing many of the individuals that managed the deregulation and budgetary policies of his era.    Unfortunately, without the "New Economy" cheer leading Bubba & Co were so good at in whipping up fervour for the next big economic engine for the markets to become irrationally exuberant over.  Of course, we could have used that tact to provide the engine for investment to solve actual public policy concerns and to develop technologies while supporting an alternative recovery to strict monetary policy inducements we're currently stuck with.  Direct loan guarantees and the "picking winners" narrative substituted for high powered(and advertised) financial incentive to generate energy and aid in efforts toward energy independence.  This effort toward energy security has a secondary benefit in buffering against what is usually the likely precursor to the next dip, energy cost shocks.

Still the structural nature of this nostalgia tour effort for both parties is reasonable.  People are conservative by nature especially in times of crisis which we surely still suffer.   However, that doesn’t mean real leadership requiring sometimes comparative perspective and solutions on the crisis aren’t warranted or demanded by the public regardless of where they originate.  They might also serve to bulster the argument for your policy decisions in the face of domestic objections, fyi to anyone in the Obama administration because you've failed in this effort. 

But where should the two major political parties in the self-proclaimed greatest nation on earth look to for comparative solutions?  What do we mean by solutions?

The fact that governments pursue different paths or adjust at different times to the range of policy questions is the first stopping point.  In the same way that national priorities and historical social norms differ, so policy is addressed at different times and ways.  The opportunities surrounding all matters of public discourse, what works, what doesn't and crucially the best practices of public policy and purpose need to be properly understood by policy makers as a history of global development.  What's the most efficient and cost effective way of providing for steady long term stablility?

Fortunately, the financial crisis despite efforts to get everyone to walk in lock step with the banks provides some important comparative findings to prove historically significant.  For example, Icelands response to debt relative to Irelands.  Or the US vs European Union relative austerity vs stimulus in the midst of a depressed economy supporting member states.  German Labor Policy, South Korean & Chinese state support for infant industries and Scandinavian nations management of natural resources.
The opportunities surrounding all matters of public policy from equipping a work force for a globalized world to healthcare, energy independence and every space in between.  Our accumulated knowledge are the building blocks of humanity and continuing to harness that in the face of nostalgia politics will provide the real solutions that citizens require.