Stephen Harper 此時此刻 顛覆時代的政治與領導力

就在此時此刻：顛覆時代的政治與領導力

斯蒂芬·J·哈珀 2018年10月9日 頁數：240
https://www.indigo.ca/en-ca/right-here-right-now-politics-and-leadership-in-the-age-of-disruption/9780771038624.html

在這本適時而富有洞察力的新書中，加拿大第22任總理斯蒂芬·J·哈珀借鑒其十年擔任七國集團領導人的經驗，幫助商界和政界的領導者理解、適應並在這個前所未有的顛覆時代蓬勃發展。

世界瞬息萬變。顛覆性的技術、理念和政客正在挑戰世界各地的商業模式、規範和政治慣例。作為商界和政界的領導者，我們如何應對至關重要。一些人拒絕承認任何變革的必要性，而另一些人則主張徹底的調整。但這兩種立場都無法持續解決心懷不滿的公民的合理關切。

《此時此刻》通過分析經濟、社會和公共政策趨勢（包括資本、商品和服務以及勞動力的全球化流動）如何影響我們的經濟、社區和政府，為商界和政界領袖提出了務實且具有前瞻性的願景。

哈珀認為，唐納德·特朗普出人意料的選舉和執政議程清楚地表明，政治、經濟和社會機構必須更加積極地回應公眾對公共政策、市場監管、移民和技術的合理擔憂。

哈珀敦促讀者不要隻關注風格和莊重，而是深入探討了唐納德·特朗普能夠接替巴拉克·奧巴馬成為美國總統的實質性基礎，以及這些力量在其他西方民主國家是如何體現的。

通過分析國際貿易、市場監管、移民、技術以及政府在數字經濟中的作用，哈珀闡述了務實領導力作為解決當今企業和政府麵臨的不確定性和風險的有效解決方案的案例。

獨家：斯蒂芬·哈珀在新書中稱，在這個動蕩的時代，民粹主義是未來

摘錄：在《就在此時此刻：動蕩時代的政治與領導力》一書中，這位前總理認為，“可悲之人”有一些重要的事情要告訴我們

斯蒂芬·哈珀，《國家郵報》特約撰稿人，2018年10月5日

民粹主義的興起——無論是在北美大陸還是其他地區——都招致了來自各個政界的譴責。但正如前總理斯蒂芬·J·哈珀在其新書《就在此時此刻：動蕩時代的政治與領導力》的獨家摘錄中所言，那些投票罷免建製派人物的所謂“可悲之人”的聲音值得認真傾聽。他們的擔憂指向了全球化的深層問題——而且這些問題不會消失。

如果你對政治感興趣，你會記得2016年11月8日你在哪裏。當時我正在地下室的客廳裏觀看美國總統選舉。我的（臨時）繼任者、加拿大保守黨領袖羅娜·安布羅斯閣下和我在一起。阿爾伯塔聯合保守黨領袖傑森·肯尼閣下也在場。那天晚上，我沒想到唐納德·J·特朗普會當選總統。

但與大多數觀察家不同，我確實認為這至少是可能的。我花了很長時間才意識到這一點。但特朗普贏得了共和黨提名，現在他正在贏得總統大選。於是，我問自己：發生了什麽？我可能得出了大多數評論員得出的結論。他們預測特朗普贏不了——他永遠贏不了——因為他是個傻瓜，是個偏執狂。因此，他們推測，選民也一定是傻瓜，是個偏執狂。那些抱有愚蠢和先入為主觀念的人，才是真正犯下大錯的人。現在是時候重新審視我們的假設了。

簡而言之，這就是我的重新審視。很大一部分美國人，包括許多美國保守派，投票支持特朗普，是因為他們自己的日子過得並不好。簡而言之，全球化的世界對我們許多人來說並不好。我們可以假裝這是一種錯誤的認知，但事實並非如此。我們現在有一個選擇。我們可以繼續試圖讓人們相信他們誤解了自己的生活，或者我們可以試著理解他們在說什麽。然後我們才能決定該怎麽做。

2018年10月2日，特朗普的支持者在密西西比州南黑文的集會上祈禱。有些人認為特朗普“讓美國再次偉大”的號召純粹是沙文主義，但哈珀寫道，輕視他反全球化言論的本能反應，就忽略了其更深層次的意義。 （美聯社/Evan Vucci）
2018年10月2日，特朗普的支持者在密西西比州南黑文的集會上祈禱。一些人將特朗普“讓美國再次偉大”的號召斥為純粹的沙文主義，但哈珀寫道，輕視特朗普反全球化言論的本能反應，就忽略了其更深層次的意義。（美聯社/Evan Vucci）
文章內容
保守派贏得了冷戰。羅納德·裏根、瑪格麗特·撒切爾和他們那一代人反對國外的共產主義，反對國內的社會主義。他們在很大程度上取得了成功。我們的價值觀——自由社會、自由市場、自由貿易、自由流動——已傳播到世界各地。問題在於：全球化對世界上許多人來說非常成功，但對我們自己來說卻並非如此。全球十億人——主要來自亞洲新興經濟體——已經擺脫了貧困。然而，在許多西方國家，勞動人民的收入在過去的四分之一世紀裏停滯不前，甚至有所下降。在美國尤其如此。特朗普顯然深諳此道。

一些人將特朗普總統“讓美國再次偉大”的號召斥為純粹的沙文主義，但輕視他反全球主義言論的本能反應，就忽略了其更深層次的意義。這番言論引起了民主黨核心成員的共鳴，他們曾支持羅納德·裏根和喬治·W·布什，以及他們堅定的國際主義立場。他的言論也引起了相當一部分傳統民主黨選民的共鳴，其中許多人轉而支持他，讓他當選總統。

在我看來，這或許是特朗普現象中最容易理解的部分。美國經曆了十五年的外交政策，為“美國優先”的方針奠定了基礎。

首先是阿富汗和伊拉克戰爭。坦白說：我支持這兩項倡議，現在仍然支持關於阿富汗的決定。然而，“國家建設”付出了巨大的人力和財力代價，卻收效甚微。在此過程中，在海外推廣美國理念的想法遭受了沉重打擊。隨後，新政府決心避免過度擴張。然而，全球安全形勢卻進一步惡化。因此，近期的記錄與現任美國政府的取向幾乎如出一轍。然而，這隻是故事的一部分，無法完全解釋人們本能的反應。

對特朗普政府的“美國優先”傾向來說，這既有積極的一麵，也有消極的一麵。

就在此時此地：顛覆時代的政治與領導力

https://quillandquire.com/review/right-here-right-now-politics-and-leadership-in-the-age-of-disruption/

作者：斯蒂芬·J·哈珀

“我不希望這本書過多地關注唐納德·特朗普，”前總理斯蒂芬·哈珀在他關於21世紀保守主義以及他所期望的公共政策未來的新書開篇寫道。但2016年美國大選引發的強烈餘震或多或少確保了任何試圖為當前形勢製定政策方案的人都必須與賓夕法尼亞大道1600號的現任總統抗衡。哈珀也不例外。盡管有人反對，但唐納德·特朗普在“就在此時此地”已經無處不在。

在哈珀看來，特朗普“並非真正的保守派，甚至算不上共和黨人”。他之所以贏得總統大選，是因為他能夠利用龐大的（且大多未被意識到的）工薪階層和中產階級選民群體中民粹主義的不滿情緒，而這些選民被全球化的飛速發展拋在身後。哈珀認為，推動特朗普上台的民粹主義力量高漲，為保守派提供了機會，隻要他們願意抓住這個機會。

作為一名公開反對凱恩斯主義的經濟學家，哈珀摒棄了維持現狀的保守主義，即提倡降低富人的稅收並大量接收非技術移民，這主要是因為他認為推行這種政策組合會將政治權力拱手讓給左翼。他也反對盲目地奉行民粹主義，部分原因是這會導致產生一些無法當選的候選人。 （哈珀以失敗的阿拉巴馬州參議員候選人羅伊·摩爾為例；在哈珀看來，摩爾最大的罪過並非針對他的那些可信的性行為不端和性侵犯指控，而是他對共和黨造成的“品牌損害”。）

哈珀倡導的正是他所謂的“民粹保守主義”。他將其定義為“並非植根於抽象的‘基本原則’，而是根植於應用於勞動人民需求的現實世界經驗”。這聽起來很有道理，但人們會意識到這個定義實際上是多麽模糊和不精確。

事實證明，這正是哈珀這本書的一個關鍵敗筆：作者一次又一次地陷入泛泛而談，而具體的例子才是更好的選擇。“保守派真正有機會捍衛廣大勞動人民，尤其是有償工作，”哈珀寫道。 “然而，這要求我們在監管、稅收、教育和環境保護等政策領域，在自由市場教條主義和純粹的政治權宜之計之間找到一個平衡點。” 這個平衡點究竟如何，誰也說不準。

列舉哈珀未能為緊迫問題提供解決方案的具體領域並不難。氣候變化——當今人類麵臨的真正生存危機——隻被寥寥幾頁的篇幅所提及，並且被企業在經濟增長方麵的迫切需求所取代。哈珀沾沾自喜地向加拿大原住民就寄宿學校製度的恐怖行徑道歉，卻拒絕承認他的保守黨政府未能為保護區提供清潔飲用水，也未能解決原住民普遍存在的過度監禁和自殺問題。等等。

這在很大程度上是意料之中的。更令人驚訝的是，哈珀總體上不願清晰地描繪出他的保守主義願景在實踐中將如何發揮作用。他首先提出要回答唐納德·特朗普最喜歡問的一個問題：“到底發生了什麽？”讀完哈珀的書後，讀者仍然沒有找到答案。

Right Here, Right Now: Politics And Leadership In The Age Of Disruption

Stephen J. Harper Oct 09, 2018 Pages 240
https://www.indigo.ca/en-ca/right-here-right-now-politics-and-leadership-in-the-age-of-disruption/9780771038624.html

In this timely and insightful new book, Stephen J. Harper, Canada's 22nd Prime Minister, draws on a decade of experience as a G-7 leader to help leaders in business and government understand, adapt, and thrive in an age of unprecedented disruption.

The world is in flux. Disruptive technologies, ideas, and politicians are challenging business models, norms, and political conventions everywhere. How we, as leaders in business and politics, choose to respond matters greatly. Some voices refuse to concede the need for any change, while others advocate for radical realignment. But neither of these positions can sustainably address the legitimate concerns of disaffected citizens.

Right Here, Right Now sets out a pragmatic, forward-looking vision for leaders in business and politics by analyzing how economic, social, and public policy trends--including globalized movements of capital, goods and services, and labour--have affected our economies, communities, and governments.

Harper contends that Donald Trump's surprise election and governing agenda clearly signal that political, economic, and social institutions must be more responsive to legitimate concerns about public policy, market regulation, immigration, and technology.       

Urging readers to look past questions of style and gravitas, Harper thoughtfully examines the substantive underpinnings of how and why Donald Trump was able to succeed Barack Obama as President of the United States, and how these forces are manifesting themselves in other western democracies.  

Analyzing international trade, market regulation, immigration, technology, and the role of government in the digital economy, Harper lays out the case for pragmatic leadership as a proven solution to the uncertainty and risk that businesses and governments face today.

Exclusive: The future is populist in this age of disruption, Stephen Harper says in new book

Excerpt: In Right Here, Right Now: Politics and Leadership in the Age of Disruption, the former PM argues the ‘deplorables’ have something important to tell us

By Stephen Harper, Special to National Post Oct 05, 2018

 

The rise of populism — on this continent and beyond — has drawn condemnation from across the political spectrum. But as former prime minister Stephen J. Harper argues in this exclusive excerpt from his new book, Right Here, Right Now: Politics and Leadership in the Age of Disruption, the so-called “deplorables” who have voted establishment figures out of office deserve a careful hearing. Their concerns point to deep problems with globalization — and they aren’t going away. 

 

If you are interested in politics, you will remember where you were on November 8, 2016. I was watching the U.S. presidential vote in my basement living room. My (interim) successor as leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, the Hon. Rona Ambrose, was with me. So was the leader of the United Conservative Party of Alberta, the Hon. Jason Kenney. I did not expect Donald J. Trump to be elected president that evening.

 

But unlike most observers, I did think it was at least possible. It had taken me a long time to even get there. But Trump won the Republican nomination, and now he was win­ning the presidential election. So, I asked myself: What happened? I could have concluded what most commentators concluded. They had predicted Trump could not win — that he could never win — because he is a fool and a bigot. Therefore, they surmised, the voters must be fools and bigots as well. The ones with the foolish and preconceived notions were those who got it so wrong. It is time to re-examine our assumptions.

 

So here is my re-examination in a nutshell. A large proportion of Americans, including many American conservatives, voted for Trump because they are really not doing very well. In short, the world of globalization is not working for many of our own people. We can pretend that this is a false perception, but it is not. We now have a choice. We can keep trying to convince people that they misunderstand their own lives, or we can try to understand what they are saying. Then we can decide what to do about it.

 

Trump supporters pray at a rally in Southhaven, Miss., on Oct. 2, 2018. Some dismiss Trumpâ??s clarion call to Make America Great Again as sheer jingoism, but to minimize the visceral embrace of his anti-globalist message is to miss its larger significance, Harper writes. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Article content

Conservatives won the Cold War. Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and their generation stood against communism abroad and socialism at home. And they were largely successful. Our values — free societies, free markets, free trade, free movement — have spread around the world. The problem is this: globalization has been very successful for many of the world’s people, but not so much for many of our own. A billion people worldwide — mostly in the emerging economies of Asia — have moved out of poverty. Yet, in many Western countries, the incomes of working people have stagnated or even declined over the past quarter-century. This is especially true in the United States. Trump clearly understood this.

Some dismiss President Trump’s clarion call to “Make America Great Again” as sheer jingoism, but to minimize the visceral embrace of his anti-globalist message is to miss its larger significance. It resonated with the core of the party that supported Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush and their robust internationalism. His message also had resonance with a considerable body of traditionally Democratic voters, many of whom crossed over to give him the presidency.

 

 

To my mind, this is perhaps the most easily understood part of the Trump phenomenon. America has been through a decade and a half of foreign-policy experiences that laid the groundwork for an America First approach.

 

To start with, there were the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Full disclosure: I supported both initiatives and still support the decision on Afghanistan. Nonetheless, enormous human and financial costs have been incurred through “nation-building,” with very limited success. In the process, the idea of promoting America’s ideals abroad was dealt a terrible blow. Then came a new administration determined to avoid over-extension. However, global security deteriorated further. Thus, the record of the recent past draws a pretty straight line to the orientation of the current U.S. administration. Still, it is only part of the story. It cannot fully explain the gut-level responses, both positive and negative, to the America First bent of the Trump administration.

 

Right Here, Right Now: Politics and Leadership in the Age of Disruption

 

https://quillandquire.com/review/right-here-right-now-politics-and-leadership-in-the-age-of-disruption/

by Stephen J. Harper

“I do not want this book to focus too much on Donald Trump,” writes former prime minister Stephen Harper at the outset of his new volume on conservatism in the 21st century and the future of public policy as he would like to see it unfold. But the seismic aftershocks emanating from the 2016 U.S. election more or less ensure that anyone attempting to craft policy prescriptions for the current moment must contend with the present occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And Harper is no exception. Protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, Donald Trump is all over Right Here, Right Now.

Trump, who in Harper’s own estimation is “not really a conservative and not even a Republican,” won the presidency because he was able to tap into a populist vein of discontent among a large (and largely unacknowledged) group of working-class and middle-class voters left behind by the galloping speed of globalization. The surging populist forces that brought Trump to power provide an opportunity for conservatives, Harper suggests, if only they are willing to take it.

As an avowed anti-Keynesian economist, Harper discards status-quo conservatism promoting lower taxes for the very rich and high levels of unskilled immigration, largely because he believes that pursuing this policy mix would cede political power to the left. He also dismisses an adherence to unbridled populism, in part because it would produce candidates who are unelectable. (Harper uses as an example failed Alabama Senatorial candidate Roy Moore; in Harper’s conception, Moore’s greatest sin was not the credible allegations of sexual misconduct and assault levied against him but the “brand damage” he inflicted on the Republican party.)

What Harper advocates instead is what he calls “populist conservatism.” He defines this as being “rooted not in abstract ‘first principles’ but in real-world experience applied to the needs of working people.” Which sounds perfectly worthwhile until one realizes how vague and imprecise this definition really is.

This proves to be one of the key failings of Harper’s book: time and again the author retreats into generalities where specific examples would be preferable. “Conservatives have a real opportunity to champion working people in general and paid work in particular,” Harper writes. “However, it will require that, in policy areas like regulation, taxation, education, and environmental protection, we find a space somewhere between free-market dogmatism and pure political expediency.” What that space might look like is anybody’s guess.

It would be easy to enumerate specific areas in which Harper neglects to provide solutions to pressing problems. Climate change – the one truly existential crisis facing humanity today – is afforded a scant few pages and takes a back seat to the exigencies of business in growing the economy. Harper congratulates himself on apologizing to Indigenous people in Canada for the horrors of the residential school system but declines to acknowledge that his Conservative government failed to provide reserves with clean drinking water or address the rampant problems of over-incarceration and suicide among Indigenous people. And so on.

This is largely to be expected. What is more surprising is Harper’s general unwillingness to sketch a clear picture of how his conservative vision might work in practice. He begins by suggesting he will address one of his favourite questions from Donald Trump: “What the hell is going on?” By the end of Harper’s book, a reader is no closer to an answer.