“I proceed … to inquire what mode of education we shall adopt so as to secure to the state all of the advantages that are to be derived from the proper instruction of the youth; and here I beg leave to remark that the only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid on the foundation of religion. … Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments. But the religion I mean to recommend in this place is that of the New Testament” – Dr. Benjamin Rush
“Collectivism holds that the individual has no rights, that his life and work belong to the group (to ‘society,’ to the tribe, the state, the nation) and that the group may sacrifice him at its own whim to its own interests. The only way to implement a doctrine of that kind is by means of brute force – and statism has always been the political corollary of collectivism.” – Ayn Rand (1905-1982)
Post-modernism has created a throwaway society which squanders nonrenewable resources. In attempt to alleviate this, society turned to recycling. However, this attempt has not proven cost-effective and has led to dumping recyclables on nations such as China and the Philippines who have now started to refuse more waste product. Recycling as an overriding paradigm needs to change to building durable repairable goods; this can be accomplished through collaboration between national, state, and local governments in tandem with the private sector; doing so helps the environment and the economic health of America.
Recycling is largely broken as a constructive paradigm. Cross-contamination of potentially recyclable products and products that simply cannot be recycled combined with the costs of mining raw resources being less than recycling has resulted in this being less desirable than once thought. For example, China’s 2018 Sword Policy has banned plastics and other less than pure waste product. In those that will accept this waste, 20 to 70 percent of the intended recyclables are discarded, contributing to pollution and health risk. A tremendous amount of waste is being wasted (Cho, 2020).
Developing a domestic program of recycling is one best bad idea. But another better idea is a combination of environmental and economic policy relying on the cooperative federalism in which national and state governments collaborate mixing responsibilities to incubate free market innovation with the necessity of meeting a new standard in environmental protection (Kraft & Furlong, 2018). This era’s increased polarization makes it hard to lock in on the tools of cooperation and policy gridlock is more the norm than the exception (Kraft & Furlong, 2018). Yet, despite all of the errors of Marxism, Karl Marx was insightful of at least the dynamic innovation that drives the capitalist engine (Roth, 2018). In this lies an answer that aids in reducing the consumption of non-renewables while stimulating the economy as well. This is to return to higher standards with respect to quality of goods manufactured which are then more easily repairable rather than disposed of after the planned obsolescence period expires.
The right to repair is an issue that is being fought for at least in the United States and the European Union. In many instances be it automobiles, electronics and other equipment products, corporations are claiming proprietary rights as a vehicle of controlling access to repairs. This in turn impacts the secondary used markets and results from the wrong interpretation of copyright law. Legislation in the EU and America’s national and state levels seeks equal access to repair documentation, diagnostics, tools, service parts and firmware. This keeps these components and equipment serviceable longer. This reduces natural resource consumption and the carbon emissions used in manufacturing and transporting these items from source point to consumers. This touches on economic policy, energy policy, environmental policy and foreign policy simultaneously.
Three factors shape public policy in support of manufacturing more durable components and products that are more readily repairable. Political factors shaping this public policy include the desirability of returning manufacturing back to American shores and the governance of contractual law on international, national and local levels are important to forming the right to repair protections. Other political factors are conceptions of governmental mandates (Kraft & Furlong, 2018, p. 240) and consumer privacy (Cleland & Hauenschild, 2017). Among the social factors right to repair policy is the right to tinker and resulting innovation (Masayuki, 2020). A significant economic factor shaping this policy is the rising cost of living causing difficulty for many to meet their daily basic requirements (Montello, 2020). Durable goods with an uncontested right to repair would increase opportunities for increasing the savings rate. This is particularly pertinent in that the federal poverty line purportedly inadequately reflects the cost of living in America (Kraft & Furlong, 2018, p. 174).
The move in support of the right to repair has substantial support. It is not seeking a new right but the restoration of what was fundamental in society. It is supported in over half the states in the United States and by the European Union as a basic economic and social right with deeply positive implications for the environment. This sense of taking back the collaboration between international, nation, state and localities for the benefit of the involved citizens is right and just.
With recycling increasingly failing to live up to its conception and no longer viable, what part do you think returning to producing more durable, long lasting and repairable products on every level should play in creating and developing a sustainable future for the United States and the world?
Masayuki H. (2020). The Right to Repair, the Right to Tinker, and the Right to Innovate. Annals of Business Administrative Science, 19(4), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.7880/abas.0200604a
Montello, S. K. (2020). The Right to Repair and the Corporate Stranglehold over the Consumer: Profits over People. Tulane Journal of Technology & Intellectual Property, 22, 165–184.
“It is not titles that make men illustrious, but men who make titles illustrious.” -Niccolo Machiavelli, political philosopher and author (3 May 1469-1527)
“[America’s] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice.” – John Quincy Adams, Speech on Independence Day to the House of Representatives, 1821
Thoughts on Understanding Civics and Citizenship – Michael Doyle
Results from Taking the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Practice Test:
The practice test was taken three times to see what types of questions were asked and how much these changed with each test. It seems a well-rounded test that covers geography, political methodologies, rights, responsibilities and history. It is interesting to note that there are two versions of the test, 2008 and 2020, and that the test is going back to the 2008 format. The test does seem to gauge how well future citizens understand the reasonable expectations of what to expect from the American government (Kraft & Furlong, 2018). The broad range of questions also seems geared toward encouraging these potential citizens to become more involved in government to the degree these might wish (Kraft & Furlong, 2018).
Content to Include Within the Practice Test to Help Citizens Understand Their Role in Public Policy:
After taking three practice tests and noting that there is a separate test for English proficiency, it appears that the content included within the citizenship test is carefully crafted to help future citizens understand the role of citizenship within public policy (Loring, 2013). Not only are these potential citizens tested as to general civic knowledge but also generalized standard English. With these skills, these future citizens not only demonstrate more knowledge than some American citizens have demonstrated having but also show the language capacity to engage in assisting in the formulation of public policy. There is some need to move beyond memorized bits of knowledge, however, if these citizens are truly to understand their rights and duties. It is also suggested that ESL instructors and others might emphasize critical thinking skills as well (Loring, 2013). That, however, seems as though the academic involved in the study is seemingly wanting to make the citizenship far more complex than necessary. It also begs the question of how such instruction might be less than objective and unduly dive into political under and overtones that are not useful for becoming a citizen with these individuals allowed their own diverse opinions. It actually seems a bit Orwellian on the cusp of a brave new world. As such that seems overly intrusive. Leaving the ESL and basic format as it is seems more than adequate for the function of the citizenship test.
How Understanding U.S. Civics Helps Citizens to Vote and Engage In Public Policy is:
Understanding the fundamental nuts and bolts of civics pertinent to the United States is a first step in understanding the complexities of American public policy. Understanding to at least some degree is necessary to approach voting and engagement with some requisite skills and knowledge of practical matters along side a smattering of history, geographic information and how the mechanics of the American system works. The ability to go beyond these measures and develop their critical thinking civic matters may help Americans learn to think more carefully and deeply on fundamental rights and responsibilities (Cantil-Sakauye & Luna, 2019). Understanding civil engagement in the American political system may well be at least part of the way out of the increasing hostility and polarization that seems prevalent in society today. This in turn may foster the civic virtue and civility that too many have seemingly forgotten. This in itself is a fundamental of the incremental policy making that constitutes so much of how America’s politics and public policy is formulated best (Kraft & Furlong, 2018).
References:
Cantil-Sakauye, T.G. & Luna, C. (2019). Keynote Address at the Institute for Civil Civic Engagement’s Eighth Annual Conference on Restoring Civility to Civic Dialogue: Restoring Respect. San Diego Law Review, 56(3), 521–530.
Kraft, M & Furlong, S (2018) Public Policy: Politics, Analysis, and Alternatives. (6th Edition.)
Loring, A. (2013). The Meaning of “Citizenship”: Tests, Policy, and English Proficiency. CATESOL Journal, 24(1), 198–219.
“People who dwell on grievances are going to dwell on grievances for the rest of their lives. People who advocate a racially based curriculum are not teaching peace but a long line of complaints that can only increase hostility among the citizenry.” – R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr.
“There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.” – Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)
“But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.“ – James Madison
“Three grand essentials to happiness in this life are something to do, something to love, and something to hope for.” – Joseph Addison, writer (1672-1719)
Heading out of Australia to escape this Aussie winter. First stop Japan, then UK/Ireland and if work doesn't call me back, onto Chicago. I will make it up as I go along
