lemonde.fr
French Economists Propose Hyper-Decentralization to Counter Economic Decline
Frédéric Salat-Baroux and Eric Hazan's "Revolution by Territories" blames 'economism' for Europe's economic decline since the 1980s, proposing hyper-decentralization as a solution to counter deindustrialization, inequality, and climate change, improving France's economic standing.
- How do Salat-Baroux and Hazan propose to address France's economic and moral crisis, and what are the key elements of their proposed solution?
- The authors attribute Europe's decline to missed opportunities in digital technology and AI, warning of potential "third-world-ization" without change. Their proposed solution is hyper-decentralization of political decision-making and production/innovation infrastructure, balancing power between territories, government, president, and Europe.
- What are the main consequences of the 'economism' paradigm described in "Revolution by Territories", and how has it affected Europe's global economic standing?
- Revolution by Territories" by Salat-Baroux and Hazan argues that since the 1980s, 'economism'—reducing all aspects of life to market logic—has caused deindustrialization, increased inequality, and climate change in the West. Europe's economic share of the global economy fell from 29% in 1980 to 17% today, overtaken by China and the US.
- What are the potential long-term implications of the authors' proposed territorial revolution for France, Europe, and other nations facing similar economic and political challenges?
- The book advocates for a territorial revolution to counter economic decline and moral crisis in France. This approach, if successful, could reshape power dynamics in Europe and offer a unique model for other nations facing similar challenges. However, the feasibility of such deep-seated change remains questionable.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the negative consequences of 'economism' and the urgency of the proposed territorial revolution. The choice of words like 'asséchante' (drying up), 'martyre' (martyrdom), and 'tiers-mondisation' (third-worldisation) contributes to a sense of crisis and reinforces the authors' proposed solution. The positive aspects of globalization or other economic models are not highlighted.
Language Bias
The language used in the review reflects the authors' concerns. Words like 'asséchante', 'martyre', and 'tiers-mondisation' are emotionally charged and contribute to a negative portrayal of the current situation. More neutral alternatives could include 'restrictive', 'suffering', and 'gradual decline' respectively. The overall tone is alarmist.
Bias by Omission
The review focuses heavily on the authors' central argument regarding 'economism' and its negative consequences, potentially overlooking alternative perspectives or counterarguments that could offer a more nuanced understanding of the economic shifts discussed. The review does not mention any criticisms of the book or alternative solutions proposed by other scholars.
False Dichotomy
The review presents a somewhat simplistic eitheor scenario: either Europe embraces AI and decentralization, or it faces a 'third-worldisation'. This framing neglects the complexity of potential solutions and the possibility of alternative paths to economic prosperity.
Sustainable Development Goals
The authors argue that the "economism" paradigm, dominant since the 1980s, has led to increased inequality in the West, particularly impacting the middle classes. The resulting deindustrialization and job losses contribute to this widening gap. The decline of Europe's economic share globally further exacerbates this issue.