Monthly Archives: September 2007

mark your calendars

At CIRCLE, we’re working on two reports whose contents are embargoed, but both contain a lot of interesting new findings about Americans’ demand for civic participation and their engagement in relatively impressive forms of civic work:

On October 4th in Washington, the National Conference on Citizenship will release a major national poll. It helps to reveal how many and which Americans are currently involved in deliberation and public work.

On November 7th in Washington, CIRCLE will release the results of a major national study based on our interviews with 386 college students on 12 four-year colleges and universities. Like the NCoC study, but in different ways, it probes deliberation and attitudes toward politics and civil society.

creative thinking

Just a few recent items from my inbox that reflect that creativity of the movement for civic renewal:

1. Warrior to Citizen: The Center for Democracy & Citizenship at the University of Minnesota has formally launched its effort to help returning veterans reintegrate into civilian life. The emphasis is not on services, therapy, or sympathy. Instead, the Warrior to Citizen campaign recognizes that veterans have skills and knowledge that they can use for the benefit of American communities, if they are treated as assets. The coalition includes military and veterans’ organizations, higher education, mayors, and 250 priests, among others.

2. Resident Leaders: The Jonathan M. Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service at Tufts University is placing experienced undergraduates in dorms specifically to help first-year students engage in their communities. They join the traditional residential assistants (RAs) who help with academic and personal matters.

3. The Whole Child: The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), which is a huge membership organization, has launched a campaign to fight the narrowing of the US curriculum and to defend arts, civics, service, and other crucial aspects of education that are at risk of disappearing from our schools.

or what you will

On reading Twelfth Night recently, I was moved by the ending. Feste the Fool is left standing alone to sing of the cold winter, when the rain it raineth every day. Twelfth Night marks the end of Christmas, an interlude from work. This particular Christmas in Illyria also seems a break from the weather, for no one speaks of cold even though most of the action is outdoors. A willow cabin seems sufficient shelter. These are perhaps the “Halcyon days” of the winter solstice, what we would call an “Indian summer” (cf. 1 Henry VI, I,ii,131).

This Christmas is also a break from war and–most strikingly–from family. Orsino, Olivia, Viola, and Sebastian, the romantic leads, are all orphaned and childless. There is no mention of any family, either, for the minor characters of Sir Andrew Aguecheeck, Sir Toby Belch, Malvolio, Antonio, Maria, and the Fool. Since these characters have no parents or children, they have no one to govern them and no responsibilities. Virtually any of these people could be paired with anyone else. Even gender is no bar, for Viola is dressed as a man and attracts Olivia’s love. Illyria is like summer camp or freshman year at college. The characters are not wanton, but for them, everything is undecided.

The marriages of Olivia and Sebastian, Viola and Orsino represent a happy ending, but also the end of the interlude. After their weddings, Illyria will have a governing structure; families will be created in separate households. Immediately before everyone leaves the Fool alone on the stage, Orsino carelessly addresses his fiancée by the name she has used in her guise as a man:

Cesario, come–

For so you shall be while you are a man,

But when in other habits you are seen,

Orsino’s mistress, and his fancy’s queen!

Orsino still sees Viola as “Cesario” and wants to postpone their marriage (and her transformation into a woman) until after the play ends. Maybe his slip of the tongue is homoerotic, but I think it is something else as well. Orsino wants to prolong the interlude, the time when he pines for a distant lover to the sound of “high fantastical” music, no one is attached to anyone, people drift freely from court to court, and you can do what you will. But the Fool is the most knowing character throughout the play, and once Orsino sweeps offstage with his retinue, the Fool sings of the winter that is adult life:

But when I came to man’s estate

With hey, ho, the wind and the rain

‘Gainst knaves and thieves men shut their gate

For the rain it raineth every day.

7 questions about the campaign

On the front page of Saturday’s Washington Post, in a “Campaign Memo” addressed “To: The Voters” about “The Seven Things You Need to Know about the 2008 Race,” Dan Balz addressed the following questions:

1. Is the Clinton campaign a true juggernaut — or is that just what she wants everyone to believe?

2. Is there a Republican front-runner?

3. Is anyone on either side positioned to break into the top tier?

4. Does the new, turbo-charged calendar make Iowa and New Hampshire more important — or less?

5. Is it too late for Al Gore or Newt Gingrich to get into the race?

6. Do ideas matter in this election?

7. When do I really need to start paying attention, and should I trust the polls?

These are questions for spectators who are considering following the 2008 campaign as they might follow the NFL season–as a contest among professional teams. The big underlying question is: Who’s going to win? But what if you follow the campaign as a citizen concerned about the country and the world? Then your questions would be quite different:

1. What are our problems as a country?

2. What are some leading diagnoses and interpretations of these problems?

3. What should we do about our problems?

4. What role do I have?

5. What role does the next president of the United States have?

6. What are the candidates saying about how they would play their roles if elected?

7. What does other evidence (such as the candidates’ records, behavior on the campaign trail, choice of advisers, and core constituencies) tell us about how they would play their roles?

Perhaps Dan Balz would say that he cannot address my questions without editorializing. But he can hardly claim that he merely provides “the facts,” since his memo is full of declarative judgments about the horse race. (In his magisterial opinion, it is too late for Gore and Gingrich. No candidate has proposed any significant big ideas yet. Etc.) Besides, I’m not asking the Post to tell us what our problems are and how to solve them. I’m asking them to give us the factual basis to help us make up our own minds–along with a sampling of interesting views quoted from a variety of experts and activists.

a thought for Labor Day

Nelson D. Schwartz, the New York Times, August 26:

Although corporate jets tend to use smaller airports in the New York area, it’s possible that a crowded 737 might have to wait for a tiny Gulfstream to take off in Miami or at Dulles, outside Washington.

The users of corporate jets defend this practice, saying they deserve equal takeoff rights. “On a business flight, you might have people going to Wall Street from companies who are creating jobs and generating billions of dollars in commerce,” Mr. [Steve] Brown [of the National Business Aviation Association] says. “People on a commercial flight might be going on vacation or going to New York to go to the theater.”

The old populist and socialist reply was: Workers make things of value. Those who boss them around or make profits from investments are just skimming off the top. In the words of Ralph Chaplin’s “Solidarity Forever” (1915):

It is we who plowed the prairies; built the cities where they trade;

Dug the mines and built the workshops, endless miles of railroad laid

* * *

All the world that’s owned by idle drones is ours and ours alone.

We have laid the wide foundations; built it skyward stone by stone.

It is ours, not to slave in, but to master and to own.

According to the labor theory of value, those people sitting in the Gulfstream jets are “idle drones.” The ones who wait in coach class (or those who cannot afford to fly at all) are the people who create all value. Pope John Paul II seemed to agree; see On Human Work (Laborem exercens) of 1981.

But the labor theory of value is problematic, because clearly the people in the Gulfstreams “work,” even if all they do is make decisions about where to invest. Their work can have an enormous influence on the products of the economy. If affecting output is a measure of how much they work, then it is they who build the cities and dig the mines.

And they are enormously well paid for their pains. Corporate executives take home about 400 times as much pay as average workers. They use some of that pay, as well as their leverage over corporate resources, to obtain conveniences, such as flying in corporate jets that use public runways. And they feel important and worthy, as Mr. Brown of the National Business Aviation Association implies.

If one’s work is to make decisions, there is no doubt that one’s impact is consequential. But the consequences can be negative instead of positive. To paraphrase Mr. Brown, those people on the Gulfstreams might be flying to Wall Street to make boneheaded decisions that cost jobs, or selfish decisions that benefit them at the expense of their workers. Their risk is very limited; their expected gain is enormous.

Further, we might wonder whether their salaries and perks are worth the cost. Imagine that a corporate executive adds $10 million to the company’s bottom line by making a good decision. Does that mean that the company needs to pay him $10 million to obtain his services? Not if the decision was basically determined by the facts, in which case anyone with appropriate technical skills could have made the same call. Not if the decision was basically lucky, in which case the company could have flipped a coin. And not if the decision was determined by many of his underlings’ input.

The theory of markets suggests that companies in a competitive environment will never overpay for decisions, any more than they will overpay for crude oil or real estate. But that ignores the possibility of very systematic bias among the whole class of decision-makers, who are likely to overestimate the impact of their own brains and underestimate the importance of the people who work for them. Labor Day is for the folks in coach, and those who never fly at all.