Down with Economic Growth -- Long Live Equality!

In societies where the gap between the rich and poor is smaller, there is better health, more social mobility, less drug use, less imprisonment, lower teen pregnancy rates, less mental illness, less obesity, and on and on... It's uncanny -- as far as 'social science' goes, it's about as strong a 'rule' as you're going to get. So argues British professor and epidemiologist Richard Wilkinson on TVO's Big Ideas.

Across all key metrics that you'd care about, more equal societies (think Sweden, Norway, Japan), are winners. It's not about the overall wealth of a country, but the distribution of wealth within that country. The overall GDP of a country has no relationship with health indicators, whereas the gap between incomes in that same country will basically give you a 1:1 relationship.

So, for example, even though the US has the highest GDP, it is at the bottom of a lot of key metrics. On the social mobility issue, the joke goes like this: "for Americans wanting to live the American Dream -- move to Norway."

It is a serious argument against focusing on economic growth in policy-making. From a pragmatic point of view, it may turn out that better results are achieved by gearing policy towards relative economic equality rather than overall economic growth. 

It's a curious thing -- why is this particular indicator (inequality) so predictive? It seems to be something about the inherently social nature of the human being and the importance of social status. So, even if people have the basics (food, shelter), they don't thrive if their relative position in society is lower. The stress experienced by  inequality permeates everything -- from childhood development, through to adult relationships. It affects self-esteem and mental health, and it affects disease rates -- significantly.

I could have alternatively called this piece, "Wanna Live Longer and Be Healthier? Then Make Peace with Inequality" because so many of the ill-effects of inequality seem to be 'in the head'. Is it possible, if you are at the losing end of the status-race, to just sort of adjust your thinking about inequality? Get philosophical. Do cognitive therapy (adjust your habitual ways of thinking to relieve stress/depression). Or take up Buddhist meditation. How deeply ingrained is status-brain and the stresses associated with it?

Wilkinson, and people working at The Equality Trust would, based on their extensive research, argue that it is actual real-world change -- increasing real equality -- that is needed. Not self-help. Wikinson has researched and written extensively on his findings, both in academic journals and popular titles, such as, The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better. They have reports, videos, data and more at The Equality Trust website. 

In my previous post I was lamenting the decline of CBC Ideas. It seems the torch has been passed to another excellent public broadcaster TVO (Television Ontario). They produce in-depth talks with knowledgeable people on several shows, including Big Ideas, Allen Gregg in Conversation, and The Agenda.

CBC Ideas: The Death of the Big Idea, and a Brand

Remember this? Retro CBC Logo

The CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) has been watering down the content of Ideas, one of its premiere radio shows, for a long time. It's to a point, now, where it is not really Ideas anymore. To use a marketing term, they've forgotten their brand.

I grew up hearing Ideas on the radio -- it was a touchstone. It wasn't populist. A lot of people probably turned the dial when it was on, but for me, it was exhilarating.

As a kid, I'd daydream, not of being a hockey player, but of some day being the subject of a CBC Ideas broadcast. I'd be so knowledgeable, and insightful and well spoken that the producers would call me up and invite me to talk.

If you made it on Ideas, you were in the big leagues. Because, in order to be on the show, you had to have been studying some weighty subject for a decade or more. You were an expert, and an innovator. In short, you had stuff to say.

Nowadays, Ideas shows are a patchwork of moments both brilliant and silly, where all you need to do to get an Ideas spot is be a radio producer who just bought a Kindle. I'm referring to the most recent episode of CBC Ideas, "Closing the Book". Hey, this e-book phenomenon is really here to stay! It's changing things! Let's talk with a bunch of people in the publishing industry.

I'm not knocking the subject of "Closing the Book" -- actually I blogged about it months ago. It's one of those medium/message moments in history, to be sure. There is meat there. But, in the heyday of Ideas, you'd actually have Marshall McLuhan talking about the medium and the message. He'd be blowing your mind, not running around with a field recorder at a book trade show.

The Boy Who Played with Fire, and Kicked the Hornet's Nest

Julian Assange - Lisbeth Salander

Julian Assange has not been charged with any crime, and yet he sits in house arrest with a tracking device on his ankle.

The story is a lot like the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo:  lone figure with odd personal grooming habits (and a penchant for computer hacking) gets into the cross-hairs of powerful people determined to take him down.

Given the popularity of Lisbeth Salander, and the central plot in the series: the misuse of power and institutions to silence people, it's amazing how slow the mainstream media has been to champion his cause. In the long term, this will be a black mark on the press.

The Australian media has been a very quiet about countryman Julian Assange. But, the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) recently did a nice long piece on the attacks on Julian Assange on their Background Briefing radio show. They alluded to the connection between the Assange story and the Millenium Trilogy right in the title: Julian Assange: The Man Who Played with Fire. Here's the show description:

There's been no proven crime, no one has been brought to trial, but there are death threats, diplomatic panic, and trumped up scandals. Around the globe people are aghast at how their leaders have lied and connived. Wikileaks has all the bizarre stories and cast of a Hollywood spy thriller. Reporter Wendy Carlisle. (from ABC website)

More Salander Comparisons

Fresh Air's Terry Gross has a long interview with New York Times editor Bill Keller about the new e-book that the Times released on their experience with Assange.

Terry subtly puts Keller on the spot, bringing up the role that Wikileaks has played in recent uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt -- events which happened just days after their release of the Times' e-book on Assange (and which reveals the e-book's underestimating of Wikileaks importance). It's a bit of an egg-on-face moment.  

Keller is so 'establishment' and he does everything he can to distance himself from Assange, and to treat him as he would any other 'source'. He expresses concern about some of the legal maneuverings in the US to silence journalists, but otherwise doesn't come to Assange's defense.

As Terry works the interview (in her gracious way), it becomes clear that the Times is reeling a bit about what's happened in Tunisia and Egypt- and by fact that this huge news institution is being out-done by a small publisher who is having a real effect on the world.

Wikileaks is exposing the impotence of the press and what is possible when the veil of secrets is cracked. Just what is the NY Times around for, anyway, if not doing that kind of work?

Ipod Dissonance: The Death of the 'Liberal Class' and the Benevolent Global Elite

Sometimes the sequence of podcasts on your Ipod creates cognitive dissonance. A week ago this happened to me as I listened, back-to-back to:

1. Big Ideas Podcast -- Chris Hedges' lecture about The Death of the Liberal Class. The left has lost the battle -- game over -- and everyone, except the global elite is pretty much screwed. It's a grim account of politics, with dire predictions about our prospects in the near future for little things, like the good life, democracy and freedom. 
   >> next >>
2. The Economist Podcast -- Special Report on Global Leaders, by Robert Guest. Guest is the business editor of The Economist. He talks about the changing nature of the global elite and about growing inequality around the world. Guest's worldview is a happy place, where benevolent rich and powerful people continuously innovate and "increase the sum of human happiness". And, we should just let them do what they do best -- run things!

Ipod Dissonance

So, I've been holding these different perspectives in my mind for the week. They are so divergent -- how can both of these intellectuals look at the same political environment and see it so differently? Has the editor of The Economist consumed too much of the Koolaid? Is Chris Hedges some kind of self-serving alarmist? It hurts my brain.

The Economist account appeals to the optimist in me. Continual progress of science, and industry -- and the faith that these things will eventually just all pan-out:  in more choice, freedom, health, etc... It's a world view that believes in innovation and progress. It feels good to think this way. But are the global elites going to bring salvation?

The realistic side of me looks at systems that deeply shape our lives, like Wall Street, and worries that all of that innovation is really just spin to grab power and wealth away from the public. That plays into Chris Hedges' view -- that democracy doesn't even exist anymore, in any real sense.

But embedded right into the title of Hedges talk, The Death of the Liberal Class, (ideas from his book of the same name) is a kind of slight-of-hand.

Hedges argues that there are five pillars of the liberal establishment - the press, liberal religious institutions, labor unions, universities and the Democratic Party - but that these institutions have failed the constituents they purport to represent.  (from TVO website)

Was there ever really a liberal class? Isn't the whole point of 'class' that it is about wealth and power and who has it? Yeah, as soon as the Mr. Liberal gets power and money his interests change. He now has to protect what he has. No surprise there. Hedges is just really disappointed that people don't stand up for themselves. His book should probably be called "The Coming Class War, and Why You Should Participate".

What do you think?