Random Variable

Musings on political science and sociology from Bloomsbury

Why Gordon Brown?

with one comment

Brad Delong laments why can’t America be run by people like Gordon Brown. The PM announced a plan last Wednesday and started implementing it today, and is now being praised as the world’s saviour. A number of theories:

  1. Ideology.
    • John Quiggin wonders if New Labour can at least remember their old-skool social democracy days. William Davies instead points out that New Labour has significant experience with PFI, which are like the proposed nationalisation plans in reverse. Also, the government is keen to point out that these are temporary measures, not a return to British socialism.
  2. State institutional design
    • Executive branch is too weak, and the legislature, in the form of Congress is too strong. Even so, Congress gave Paulson the power to emulate Brown’s approach even when he didn’t ask for it.
    • The US state is simply too ineffectual at dealing with disaster in a timely fashion, alá Katrina. Krugman suggests that perhaps the government’s all FEMA’d out.
    • If William Davies is right, then perhaps the federal government is too abstracted away from being knowledgeable about US PFI equivalents.
  3. No one had a solution any earlier
    • Unlikely, as Krugman, amongst others, had said that banks were undercapitalised at least as early as the third week of September.

The Register’s Andrew Orlowski tried to make the point that the initial failure of the Paulson Plan in Congress was a sign that democracy works, whilst also taking a snipe at the venerable OpenDemocracy. In retrospect, the article will be remembered for being typical of libertarian wingnuttery. However, there is something to be said about the way democracy worked in the US. In the UK, Brown didn’t need to pass emergency measures before parliament, but the US struggled to find a solution that would pass Congress. There was a wholesale failure of framing, and ideological blinkers clearly prevented the right plan coming about. How can we make democracy function better? In that it allows voters to account the government whilst also being informed about issues. Don’t think there’s an easy answer.

Finally, since the 42 days law was defeated in the House of Lords, there is hope about the health of the UK’s democracy.

Written by Naadir Jeewa

October 13th, 2008 at 11:00 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with ,

One Response to 'Why Gordon Brown?'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Why Gordon Brown?'.

  1. The fact that the US has checks and balances to stop stupid plans, does mean it cannot react quickly. That’s true. But if you look back at how hype turns everything into a ‘crisis’, I must admit, I prefer the US system, even when its shooting itself in the foot.

    Its not a matter of pride that ’saviour of the world ™’ can act without anyone actually looking at his plans. If the UK actually had a Budget Office, he would at least have to wait a bit for independent testing of how everything was going to work. Wether its the best thing at the moment, the US has Congress, Economic Councils, Budgetary offices, a proactive Audit department instructed by Senate….. lots of barriers. Ok, pork is added later, but at least the initial idea is vaguely coherent.

    The main reason GB and AD moved so quickly to be leading the fight, is that they had failed at any other sort of politics. The old school mixture of weak nationalism and strained social democracy perhaps could have worked, but Nicolas Sarkozy proved how to marry both together and actually seem charismatic. Both had to run to a home pitch of technocracy. The key success of Obama was too make technocracy seems like radicalism. It would be harsh to expect the same of Brown……

    Rant over… :D

    Matt Cole

    11 Dec 08 at 21:29

Leave a Reply