This book argues that John Dewey should be read as a philosopher of globalization rather than as a 'local' American philosopher. Although Dewey's political philosophy was rooted in late nineteenth and early twentieth century America, it was more importantly about the role of America in a globalized world. The book highlights how Dewey's defence of democracy in the context of what he denotes as the Great Society leads him to confront the problems of globalization and global democracy. Then, it explores how Dewey's conception of creative democracy had global connotations. The book examines how Dewey problematized his own conception of democracy through arguing that the public within modern nation states was 'eclipsed' under the regime he called 'bourgeois democracy'. Then, it shifts the terrain of Dewey's global focus to ideas of global justice and equality. The book demonstrates that Dewey's idea of global democracy was linked with an idea of global equality, which would secure social intelligence on a global scale. It outlines the key Deweyan lessons about the problem of global democracy. The book shows how Dewey sets out an evolutionary form of global and national democracy in his work. Finally, it also outlines how Dewey believed liberal capitalism was unable to support social intelligence and needed replacing with a form of democratic socialism.
in the midst of a liberal-capitalist order that stunted the intelligence of
its citizens. Moreover, I want to focus on Dewey’s ideas about how the
Great Society and its regime of bourgeois democracy needed to shift
to a form of democraticsocialism to achieve the goal of becoming a
Great Community. These economic reforms not only seemingly laid
the grounds for all of Dewey’s other reforms but were also based on the
need to provide the ethical commitment at the heart of democracy as
a way of life and the grounds for an expanded social intelligence
death grants for funeral expenses and widows’ benefit. In other words,
benefits for all kinds of need which may occur within a family.
These are more difficult to establish than a clear definition. This is because
different political movements in Britain after World War II, while agreeing to
the establishment of the Welfare State, presented differing attitudes to welfare.
Here we shall examine three political traditions: Liberalism, Conservatism and
DemocraticSocialism (i.e. Labour).
It was Liberal thinkers from the nineteenth and
) fraction in the Reichstag to form the Independent
Social Democratic Party (USPD). The new party voted against war credits
and opposed Germany’s continuing prosecution of the war. Social democrats also highlighted the systematic way in which the infant Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics was depriving trade unions of independent civil
rights and citizens of political freedom. The reality of the dictatorship of the
proletariat, they insisted, was a travesty of democraticsocialism.3
The presumption of a polarity between communism and social democracy
survived in a diluted
In his critical reading of ‘the new
communitarianism’, Prideaux 66 accuses Etzioni of coaxing the
reader to accept a congenial view of American society in the 1950s,
and then attempting to restore social cohesiveness through the
application of social controls, and, in a manner consistent with his
own organisational theory. 67 ‘In reality the favourable bias
- CALLAGHAN TEXT.indd 131
Responses to the crisis
embraced the mixed market economy on the basis of Keynesian economic
To achieve a socially just society, the SPD advocated mildly redistributive income policies to allow everyone a fair stake in socially produced
wealth, but refrained from demanding equality of outcome. Widening
educational access in order to attain more equality of opportunity became
a prime policy instrument to achieve greater social justice. The programme
demoted democraticsocialism to being an ‘enduring task’ (SPD 1959: 3
of power is related also to popular participation in that political parties
may not be so successful at the national level but may have a strong
regional base which may reduce potential centrifugal pressures from frustrated supporters. An example for Germany would be the Greens in the
1980s and the PDS (Party of DemocraticSocialism) and some right-wing
parties in the 1990s. That these considerations may be completely irrelevant for another federation is one indication of the variety of federations.
While perhaps not consciously proposed reasons for forming a
) PD (Luxembourg) see: DP/PD PDC (Switzerland) see: CDV–PDC PdCI Party of Italian Communists/Partito dei Comunisti
Italiani PDS Democratic Party of the Left (Italy)/Partito Democratico
della Sinistra PDS Party of DemocraticSocialism (Germany)/Partei der
Demokratischen Sozialismus PEV Ecologist Party – The Greens (Portugal)/Partido
Ecologista Os Verdes PL Right-wing alliance (Italy)/Polo della
The crisis of British social democratic political economy
Future for DemocraticSocialism
Hayek, F. A. (1944) The Road to Serfdom (London: Routledge).
Helleiner, E. (1994) States and the Emergence of Global Finance: from Bretton Woods
to the 1990s (Ithaca: Cornell University Press).
Hickson, K. (2005) The IMF Crisis of 1976 and British Politics (London: I. B. Tauris).
Holland, S. (1975) The Socialist Challenge (London: Quartet).
Holland, S. (1983) Out of Crisis: a Programme for European Recovery (Nottingham:
Holland, S. and Coates, K. (1995) Full Employment for Europe (Nottingham
of the local community was only possible, Dewey suggested, on the
back of a national form of democraticsocialism and social intelligence.
Furthermore, democracy beyond the state also depended on the vitality
of creative democracy within the nation state:
Our first defence is to realize that democracy can be served only
by the slow day by day adoption and contagious diffusion in every
phase of our common life of methods that are identical with the ends
to be reached and that recourse to monistic, wholesale, absolutist
procedures is a betrayal of human freedom no