Robert Reich is in a tough spot. During our preparation for tonight's interview, he told me off camera that Barack Obama's candidacy was so inspiring, it reminded him of his days stumping the country for the late Robert F. Kennedy.
"So why don't you endorse him?" I asked.
"Because I've known Hillary and Bill Clinton for 35 years and it would just be too tough," he answered candidly.
Reich was Bill Clinton's labour secretary and is as emblematic as anyone of the pickle many Democratic party supporters find themselves in.
Obama is speaking to their soul. But the Clintons have a long history with the party and the experience of having done (in their view) a pretty good job from 1992-2000.
Reich's new book, Supercapitalism, is the topic for tonight's program.
It's an important read. Reich bemoans the fact that this continent's economy seems to care not much at all anymore about working conditions, progress for the middle class, etc.
We seem only to care whether our stocks are doing well, and whether our pensions are making an adequate return.
Reich concludes we are in the process of losing our democracy, our values around citizenship, to this "Supercapitalism" he describes.
Hope you'll check us out tonight at 8 or 11.
Interesting book Mr. Reich has written. I'm somewhat frustrated by it as I had this down on paper in 1997. I can't get published, perhaps because I don't were a bad suit and did not work in Washington. Don't know. www.declineandfallofthehumanrace.com
posted by peaceman on 04 February 2008 at 8:22 PM
I found Reich's presentation rather insipid and disappointing. His idea about the large corporations weakening democracy and overshadowing governments is neither new nor is it profound. Moreover, he is determined not to step on anyone's toes - not the rich, not the corporations, not governments, not the citizens. No one is to blame, only technology and competition. What a cop-out. Never once does he mention the word "globalization", and Steve never asked the question. If salaries and the quality of working conditions have been dropping since the 1970's and 80's along with the sovereignty of the nation state, it is in no small measure due to the growth of the globalized economy which began about the same time. First it was free trade, then NAFTA, and, since the 90's cut-throat competition with China and India. Within a couple of years, China will be selling its cars in North America, and this will sound the death knell for the North American car industry. It is the ever-increasing competition in the globalized market that will cause our resources, including water to be gobbled up by these great powers, and which is leading inexorably to ecological disaster due to global warming. This is the truth that Reich does not seem to want to talk about.
posted by Boris on 04 February 2008 at 9:15 PM
As an economist with over 40 years of experience, I have learned one thing (well, maybe more, but one really important thing): random events outweigh systematic effects.
As was pointed out in the program, economists tend to look at the past and then current trends and provide some kind of road map of where we are heading. This is systematic.
But, we don't know about things that come flying out of left field. Like ... the rapid dissolution of the former Soviet Union, the breakdown of the Berlin Wall, Katrina, the rapid rise of China and India as economic powers, the sub-prime mortgage meltdown. These are random events.
The lesson learned? Go ahead and make a forecast based on systematic factors. Then, find someone to have a look at it and poke all kinds of holes in in. [If it ain't broke, break it!] Take him or her seriously and pay them a lot of money. Then, figure out what you're going to do if things go goofy.
posted by High Parker on 04 February 2008 at 9:23 PM
Reich's book is largely a rehash of ideas that began with the writings of Karl Marx and were expanded upon by Joseph Schumpeter, by Reich's former Harvard colleague, John Kenneth Galbraith, and by numerous others including William Greider, John Ralston Saul, Noam Chomsky, Joel Bakan, and Jane Jacobs.
Those ideas and various issues surrounding the evolution and expansion of capitalism have been the subject of courses at many American and Canadian universities, including the university where I have been teaching them for nearly 20 years.
Peaceman, your situation is not unique. It is simply a reflection of a highly corporatized publishing industry has become. Reich is a known and marketable commodity. What he says is less significant than what he can contribute to the publisher's bottom line.
posted by atnoeno on 04 February 2008 at 9:26 PM
Is this the man that was pardoned by Bill Clinton just before he left office? I would say that the American public deserved more than someone looking to repay a debt when it comes to deciding who is best suited to govern a nation. I love Bill Clinton, but that does not mean Hillary is better suited to be President because she had eight years in the White House. What America needs especially now is someone who will give them back some self respect and Obama is the man to do so. I admire Hillary's guts and grit,but a few tears in public showing the people she has feelings cannot turn the U.S. around, not for the hole they have dug for themselves both at home and abroad. A fresh face,new ideas, one who can reach out to today's troubled youth, and take care of the elderly; someone who would try his best to help his people(all Americans)not just one who makes empty promises to get elected. But just in case a Clinton wins the nomination,I hope she will work with Obama. That having been said I still think he is the best person to govern. Rosemary E. Toronto
posted by password on 04 February 2008 at 9:36 PM
I am curious why you characterize Reich's book "an important read"? It isn't. If you are looking to present a truly enlightened and compelling discussion on the issue to capitalism and the consequences of its evolution, why not contact John Ralston Saul?
posted by atnoeno on 04 February 2008 at 9:36 PM
Sorry for the mistake in identity of Professor Reich;I did not actually see the show at 8:00p.m., but knowing someone for 35 years is no reason to vote for them in such an important job. A lot of bad things happened during the Clinton Presidency and I do not mean personal. The U.S. always paid low wages to the man in the street,especially in the southern states. R.E. Toronto
posted by password on 04 February 2008 at 11:16 PM
And to add to atnoeno's call, why not Bob Jessop, David Harvey, Alain Lipietz, Neil Brenner, etc. There are many living scholars who write specifically and directly on the topics covered tonight, and are notable in their respective fields.
Nevertheless, it is a pleasure to have this kind of dialogue back on the table again. It may be old news to many familiar with the long discourse on "post-fordism" or "Schumpeterian workfare", but it is desperately necessary for people who are not to begin a frank discussion on the idea of capitalism, whether we want to keep it or not. We all lose out when we shroud our public discussion in Thatcherite rhetoric.
As for the second portion of the show, again a pleasure to see a questioning of the one social science discipline that has the most power outside of academia. Good work in highlighting the self-fulfilling prophetic nature of economic predictions. People tend to forget that markets are not, in reality, abstract. Indeed, there is much more than a cursory linkage between the latter half of your show and Reich's analysis that I hope you will pursue in the near future.
Overall, a great show.
posted by Matthew Lymburner on 05 February 2008 at 12:02 AM
Yes, I would just like to second this suggestion, which I have made in the past a couple of times, to no avail. John Ralston Saul would be an interesting interviewee.
posted by Boris on 05 February 2008 at 6:56 AM
Somewhat blind you must be, knowing or having known nothing else but a comfy life, for you and the circles you inhabit, you seem to have, missed or ignored or ignorant about, of the greatest percentage of people. Those whose only main concern is survival itself. As long as there is; no taboo or laws, on/for profits exists on the essentials for life, clean water, food, shelter, health care, and education; individuals liberty to hoard and consume hundreds of lifetimes of resources/energy as they please while others have nothing, systems like this capatalism thatwe live in must/should be shelved. What we have allows individuals to be, consumers and investors, all of their lives, never having to get their hands or lungs dirty while others die way before their time.
posted by Project 10 Billion on 05 February 2008 at 8:05 AM
Thanks for the fantastic interview with Robert Reich. I've been a follower of him for years. I have read most of his books but as yet not the last one. I hope to get to it soonThere are a group of economists who make ultimate common sense in regard to social isues. Those who I've always found useful besides Reich are J K Galbraith, Jeffery Sachs and Joseph Stiglitz.
posted by bernie on 05 February 2008 at 10:29 AM
Reich - B .
Paikin - C- And it was that high just because he read so many pre-prepared questions using excerpts from Reich's book. .
As usual, there was no serious follow through on anything substantive. .
Wo-eee, a bit of superficial scoopy journalism in managing to get Reich to endorse Obama without doing it full on - with the explanation that his past association with Clinton prevented it. Such "scoops" are typical of "Supermarket Checkout" journalism. .
The real topic that Reich raised concerned the overwhelming of democracy by capitalism. That's what deserved some serious examination. We got superficialities. .
Reich was capable of giving more - and it looks like it wouldn't have taken much to get it. One only had to ask him to expand on some of his provocative remarks. .
But, characteristically, that wasn't done. .
Come to think of it: Paikin - a straight D.
posted by Charles on 05 February 2008 at 12:37 PM
From simple math one knows that Sophomore squared is far less than one.
posted by Charles on 05 February 2008 at 12:45 PM
Last night's discussion with Robert Reich was excellent.
I disagree with Reich that corporations cannot and should not be responsible members of our society. He seemed to say that in the past this was the case-where corporate leaders could maintain social responsibility while running a company. He then says that this is no longer possible in todays over competitive economy. I agree that for a corporation there is a trade off between being a socially responsible citizen and the bottom line. It's a fine balance, and ultimately we as consumers/investors/citizens have to make judgements on the value of both social responsibility and profits. As citizens/consumers/investors we're not aware of how powerful a force we can be to make corporations understand that we place a strong value on corporate responsibility. It's up to us all to put a check on supercapatlism!
posted by Wahed on 05 February 2008 at 2:56 PM
You let Robert Reich off the hook on solutions but got problems fairly well described. Perhaps he is worth a repeat with some of the others mentioned above who claim to have solutions. If he is right what are the solutions that citizens can ermploy before its too late?
posted by oldpat on 05 February 2008 at 4:07 PM
*You must have a FREE TVO account in order to comment on posts
Don't have an account?
*You must have a FREE TVO account in order to comment on posts
Throughout my years at TVO, viewers have stayed in touch with me through letters, cards, faxes, emails, and phone calls. Here's another option: my blog. Through this forum, I'll let you in on some of what goes on behind the scenes of The Agenda. And I hope you'll send me your thoughts and constructive criticism on how we're doing as well.
The Agenda with Steve Paikin Allan Gregg in Conversation Big Ideas
Think Again
Losing our democracy to supercapitalism?
An interesting idea, Steve. I'm looking forward.
posted by Boris on 04 February 2008 at 7:28 PM