Here is the real Third Way in the non-Americanized/corporatized

[izzybeans]

DLCized form.

http://www.sociologyonline.co.uk/politics/Giddens_3way.shtml

the DLC has appropriated the language but not the practice suggested by Giddens. He was calling for a radical expansion of democratic dialog throughout all of society not just politics, which suggests its not purely the distinction of "well I'm social liberal but economically neo-liberal" as the DLC'ers tend to be. In fact, it's not a matter of compromise but democratic debate designed to quell fundamentalisms of all sorts. He suggested democratizing industry by expanding the public sector for one. Not such a DLC thing to do.

next time someone suggests the "third way" ask them if they've actually read the book.

critiques of the third way: http://www.sociologyonline.co.uk/politics/Giddens_3way_comments.shtml

[applegrove]

1. Thanks for this. I have been looking for criticism.

[izzybeans]

2. No problem. I've read other works of his on structuration theory

and Modernity. I guess its' time to see what the hubub about this particular idea was. I'm doing so now.

[applegrove]

3. What I get is that if you are against inequality and for lives being

saved you have to be for global trade. And the lowering of barriers to Africa & the like.

So they can get a chance at a middle class.

In no way does trade imply you cannot have regulations or universal health care across the board. You lower the barriers to trade and you set standards across the world.

The middle class in the West suffers - but prices do come down so even though wages are lower - they can buy the same bag of goods.

The problem in the US is the neocons are using the You are for world trade or against world trade to impose anti-regulations and diminishment of government powers. Plus - while the middle class & the poor in the US fight inflation with lower wages - this elites & rich do dick all. They do nothing to fight inflation and benefit from it by roaring markets.


Once you agree on freer trade - there is nothing stopping standards or allowing poorer countries from using monopoly power until they have a certain distribution of wealth that will allow the middle class in their country to grow.

Halliburton is not about free trade. If UN had gone in to Iraq - there would have been procurement laws that saw the contracts go to Iraqis of all sorts. Sunnis would have found a place to go. By cutting them out - US made the insurgency. And of course they lied to get in.

Yes - millions & millions of lives will be saved when world trade opens up and coops are as common as corporations.

[izzybeans]

5. I think that's why he advocated democratizing the economy

which means that on a global scale international governance would be imporant for regulating piratization (no pun intended). I still don't know what I think about the book yet. I do know what troubles me about the way global trade is currently structured. You've pinned it down very well. Ever read the book Development as Freedom by Amartya Sen? I picked it up while touring the UN in NYC. It was pretty interesting. The answer was very similar: democratization, which means the public governance, of corporate capitalism.

[applegrove]

6. Nope. Have not read much in the last while on economy. A few books.

Mostly just articles. I should go back to reading the Economist.

[izzybeans]

7. That book is a good one. It won Dr. Sen a Nobel Prize. nt

[applegrove]

8. Will keep it in mind. THanks.

[marbuc]

4. I read the Giddens Book

And it has helped shape my political philosophy. It's been a few years, I've been meaning to dig it out to read it again.