Many Americans today are worried
about our country. In recent years,
there has been a strong turn toward nationalism, a tendency that runs counter
to the internationalism that has increasingly marked much of American public
policy—and, more recently, the national economy—since World War II. A
backward-looking nationalism has been a counter-current in our political life
for some time, dating back to the Tea Party Republicans and the anti-Obama
“birther” movement. However, it has blossomed
since the election of Donald Trump. We
can see it in the trade wars that he has started, in his eagerness to put
distance between the U.S. and its long-time economic, cultural, and military
allies, and in his treatment of immigrant families and minority citizens
(witness the lack of support for rebuilding Puerto Rico).
Internationally,
we also have multiple examples of right-wing nationalists being elected in
Europe; increasing backlash over refugees migrating to Europe from the Middle
East and Africa; England’s withdrawal from the European Union; and so forth. One political driver both in the U.S. and
Europe is that a large segment of the workforce finds (1) that their skills are
no longer in need and (2) that they are unprepared to develop the skills needed
for emerging industries. All these
things combine to create a very broad, deep culture shock for a generation of
working people, both here in the U.S. and around the world.
In
his 2016 book, Thank You for Being Late,
Tom Friedman writes that we are living in an era of accelerations on several
levels and that most people are not able to change at the same rate as the
changes in technologies, work environment, and natural environment that mark
this new era. It is one reason why we
are experiencing the current nationalistic backlash—a kind of nostalgia for a
time that is not long past but that is nevertheless totally out of reach. The industries and mines that employed many
Americans are not likely to be rebuilt in this new era. The
challenge is to create a new social and economic environment in which American
workers can thrive. We can’t “Make
America Great Again” by looking backward.
What we must do is “Make America New Again” by looking forward. We do this not by rejuvenating old industries,
but by preparing ourselves and our communities to succeed in the new
environment. Most importantly, we cannot do this by
continuing the ideological division that has overtaken American politics;
instead, we must, as a community, define the problem and build consensus on how
to solve it.
I
emphasize community because one of
the symptoms of the current malaise is the disruption of our sense of
community. We have reverted to a kind of
economic and social tribalism that has made it very difficult to find common
ground. I see that as a symptom of our “accelerations”
problem. There is a model of human
development—the expanding communities
model—that offers both an illustration of the problem and a path toward
solution. The model says that, as we grow
as individuals, our sense of belonging to a community expands. As toddlers, our public identity is our
immediate family. As we get older and
enter school, we increasingly see our family as part of our private identity
and publicly identify ourselves as members of a broader community that may
include neighbors, more distant relatives, school mates, etc. Eventually, those relationships become integrated
into our private identity, while our public identity expands to include the
local community. We identify with our
town and, later, with our state and country.
As we age, we join professional communities, avocational communities,
etc. With each expansion, we take on a
new public identity and privatize the previous identities.
As
globalization creates the prospect of a new kind of public identity—that of
global citizen, perhaps—we find it difficult to maintain our older identity as
citizens of a country or state or region.
Some of us, feeling left behind by this new culture, hold on to our
older identities, which are no longer as widely shared. You can see the result in our national
political identities. In the two
generations since the end of World War II, Americans have tended to see
themselves as one culture. Democrats and
Republicans have had major differences, but they shared a common commitment to
a national cultural vision. We were,
essentially, a centrist nation, that survived even the culture wars of the
Sixties. Today, Democrats and
Republicans have trouble finding common ground on almost any topic, but we must
not allow that to make us see members of other communities as enemies. Republicans and Democrats are Americans
first. So are Social Democrats. So are Tea Party members. And, by extension, America itself is now part
of a global community of democracies.
The
challenge for us is to find a new common ground that will allow us to solve the
problems of some of us—those workers who are being left behind, for instance—to
the benefit of all of us. We must acknowledge that it is very unlikely that the
old industries—coal, for instance—on which many small communities were built
will ever reprise. This is not just the
problem of coal miners. It is critical
both to the individual workers, to the communities that they call home, and to
our broader community. The solution lies
in two things: (1) preparing workers to develop new, more employable skills, and
(2) preparing the communities themselves to support new industries that need
those skills. This requires a commitment
to lifelong learning in order to arm workers with the new skills they will
need. That commitment must include a
commitment by the community to the employers to help in the continuous
education of local workers as needs evolve.
A New Mandate for Public Education
In
the 19th century, education at all levels was revolutionized as well
to help communities adjust to the accelerating changes brought about by the
Industrial Revolution. Teacher education
colleges—normal schools—were established in all states to prepare teachers so
that the children of immigrants could learn to become American citizens. Public schools increased the expectation that
students would complete 12 years before they moved into the workforce or on for
more education. Universities established
research as a core mission and, to ensure future generations of professionals
for the industrial economy, created new disciplines, from Engineering to
Business to a range of social sciences, such as Social Psychology. The national Agricultural Extension Service
model was created to help farmers be more productive so that the country could
support simultaneous immigration and urbanization.
The
global information revolution also needs new kinds of educational support. Some examples:
·
There is already a movement toward a K-14
curriculum, which will guarantee that young people graduate with the skills
needed for their first jobs. This
approach to schooling would help struggling old-industry workers and their
communities develop their ability to compete for jobs in the new economy. A K-14 model would stimulate fresh
innovation and collaboration between public schools and higher education, from
re-thinking the curriculum to encouraging sharing of open educational resources
to dual enrollment. It would also open
the door to new kinds of collaboration between educational institutions and
local employers.
·
At the same time, colleges and universities must
recognize that students must be prepared to function effectively in the new
international economy. Students need the
experience of working with peers from other cultures. This might take the form of a more universal
study abroad program or by partnering with international institutions to use
online technology to share courses, giving students at all participating
institutions experience with students from other cultures. The Worldwide University Network is an
example of this at the graduate/research level.
·
We are also seeing the development of new
programs of study and research foci in disciplines related to STEM—Science,
Technology, Engineering, Mathematics.
These must begin in the public schools and carry students through their
college degrees.
·
Finally, we need to create an Information
Revolution counterpart to the Agricultural Extension Service to help workers
and communities become more competitive in the new economy. This might include training programs for
recent high school graduates to prepare them for entry level jobs in technical
fields, as well as undergraduate specializations in STEM majors. Beyond that, however, the “Information
Extension Service” must work closely with communities to create lifelong
learning options that will help prepare citizens for new jobs, while helping to
attract new employers to the community.
In addition, institutions must become prepared to work with employers to
help educate current and prospective employees adapt to workplace
innovation—something that will be critical to keeping new employers in a
community. At Penn State, the
Pennsylvania Technical Assistance Program (PennTAP) has a long history of
helping organizations innovate in technical areas. It may serve as a model for an Information
Innovation Extension Service.
These innovations will cost taxpayers
money, but we need to see that as an investment in our common good. It is time for America to find a new common
vision.
