Page 76 - Culture Society and Economy

Robotham-04.qxd 1/31/2005 6:23 PM Page 69

GLOBALIZATION AND RISKS

developed societies. He no doubt has in mind the break-up of the old
European industrial working-class communities on which the social
democratic parties had traditionally been based. Such communities are
gone for good. New social strata have emerged, both at the levels of the
working and middle classes. Therefore, ‘social solidarity can effectively
be renewed only if it acknowledges autonomy and democratization –
as well as the intrinsic influence of social reflexivity’. 12 However, for
Giddens, this fragmentation is precisely what generates anxiety and a
sense of ‘risk’. These new sources of instability have to be addressed on
a modern basis. One cannot simply succumb to the Thatcherite recipe of
a free market in the economy constrained by Victorian values in social
life which, in any event, does not work. This is ‘the old pomp and cir-
cumstance of the past’ and is completely outdated and ineffectual in the
world of today – an example of non-rationalistic, as distinct from ratio-
nalistic tradition. This Thatcherite ‘first way’ is too archaic and leads to
social fragmentation, alienation and ultimately social and political insta-
bility. 13 More meaningful concessions to democracy and to the aspira-
tions of these new social strata are needed. The Eastern European
socialist ‘third way’ of ‘plan and market’ is ruled out by its failure in real
life. But there is a British ‘Third Way’. Although economic policy is basi-
cally a given and the State must leave the economy alone, it can and must
actively intervene in society.
But the interesting question is how and where? The answer is that, in
the new phase, State intervention is needed in the national, regional and
14
global lifeworlds, especially at the level of community. This is, the argu-
ment goes, because it is above all in the sphere of civil society – in the
family and the community – that liberalization and information technol-
ogy have wrought the deepest changes. There is no going back to the days
(which never existed) of the stable nuclear family and full employment.
What is needed is ‘positive welfare’ to encourage a new code of ‘respon-
sibility’; investment in education, in order to enhance productivity and a
new alliance between the State and community organizations or the
development of an entirely new sector of ‘civil labour’. 15
This approach differs from the approach which sought the extension
of quasi-markets in the health service and the educational system. That
16
Thatcherite programme is not the programme of New Labour. Public pro-
vision of social services is acceptable but not public provision in any of
the main sectors of the economy. This must have a predictable result: if
monopoly economic power remains intact, indeed, is strengthened, as
has happened under the Blair regime, then monopoly political and social
power must be strengthened as well. The devolution of power and the

69