Bring back big government

Despite widespread claims of its demise, the national state is the scale of the state institution best able to marshal the political, discursive and material resources necessary to achieve goals of social justice, defined as a decrease in income inequality, at local, national and global scales. The appearance of the withering away of the state is deceptive, since it is the state itself that is enacting the distribution of functions that some observers interpret as a reduction in state power. The arguments for a return of big government are both strategic and tactical. Strategically, central government has been responsible for every major social policy advance in the United States in the twentieth century. Tactically, the institutions comprising decentralized governance, including local governments, non-profit foundations and community-based organizations, are inadequate to the task. The role of big government in pursuit of social justice entails discursive and regulatory functions, each in turn suggesting an attendant political project for academics and activists. What is at stake is not a quantitative redistribution of state power but a qualitative redirection of the purposes to which that power is applied. Uncritical insistence on the end of the nation state may create a self-defeating self-fulfilling prophecy that conceals important opportunities for political realignment. Copyright Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2002.

[1]  Randy Stoecker,et al.  THE CDC MODEL OF URBAN REDEVELOPMENT: A Critique and an Alternative , 1997 .

[2]  R. Lake,et al.  POLITICAL DECENTRALIZATION AND CAPITAL MOBILITY IN PLANNED AND MARKET SOCIETIES: LOCAL AUTONOMY IN POLAND AND THE UNITED STATES1 , 1990 .

[3]  P. Hirst The global economy—myths and realities , 1997 .

[4]  Kenneth R. Mayer,et al.  The Price for Federalism , 1995 .

[5]  P. Schuck,et al.  The Reagan Record: An Assessment of America's Changing Domestic Priorities , 1984 .

[6]  H. Leitner,et al.  THE LIMITS OF LOCAL INITIATIVES: A REASSESSMENT OF URBAN ENTREPRENEURIALISM FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT , 1993 .

[7]  B. Jessop Post‐Fordism and the State , 1996 .

[8]  Timothy J. Conlan From New Federalism to Devolution: Twenty-Five Years of Intergovernmental Reform , 1998 .

[9]  G. Mohan The disappointments of civil society: the politics of NGO intervention in northern Ghana , 2002 .

[10]  Lisa J. Servon,et al.  By the Numbers: Measuring Community Development Corporations' Capacity , 2003 .

[11]  J. Peck Neoliberalizing states: thin policies/hard outcomes , 2001 .

[12]  P. Kelly The geographies and politics of globalization , 1999 .

[13]  State devolution in America : implications for a diverse society , 1999 .

[14]  D. Harvey Spaces of Hope , 2000 .

[15]  Kenichi Ohmae,et al.  End of the Nation State , 1995 .

[16]  R. Lake What urban policy , 1994 .

[17]  D. Caraley Washington Abandons the Cities , 1992 .

[18]  Susan S. Fainstein,et al.  Promoting Economic Development Urban Planning in the United States and Great Britain , 1991 .

[19]  Antonio Gramsci Selections from the prison notebooks , 2020, The Applied Theatre Reader.