| |
 also on this site:
| |
| also in this section: | |
| opinions index
most popular pages
| |
 search:
| |
|
Like this site? Your donation is welcome! |
|
The current political scene in most western nations is dismal. Forget the usual whine - I am referring to the ineffectiveness of national-level politics in our new global world.
International organisations, whether they be al-Qaeda, the CIA, or Sony BMG, can run rings around all the national governments by virtue of the countless nooks and crannies into which an international organisation can spring. This fact is well-known by businesses, and is why all of the largest businesses are indeed multi-national corporations. If they could be more effective on a national level, that's where they would be.
If politics wants to stay relevant in the globalised civilisation we have become, it too must adopt an international scope.
What this means in reality is a series of national-level offices - franchises - of new, globally active political parties. It means, for example, we'd have the UK Liberal Democrats, the US Liberal Democrats, the Australian Liberal Democrats, and so on. Each of these parties would be active at its own national level, as they are presently. However they would also be part of a larger organisation - Earth Democrats, for example - which facilitates activities in each of its member parties, and yes, guides policy, at a global level.
This would allow a global political response to the global trends we are seeing today. The current approach means each development is interpreted in isolation, in a somewhat parochial manner, and potentially conflicting policy decisions are made. A global approach would allow the interchange of synergies between nations, and create a global pool of knowledge, from which policy templates and management strategies can be drawn.
A global political party would surely pack severe clout against even the largest national-level party.
The current national approach is reminiscient of the corporate landscape before the emergence of global brands. In these times, say, around 1950, each country had its own market-dominating brands. They were different from country to country, with each having its own flavours and quirks. This description sounds very much like the national political parties we have today in 2006.
They are quaint, and to a large extent obsolete. Scaling them up to match the global trends they are meant to be dealing with is long overdue.