The follow up to Empire (outlined below) - Ferguson applies the same model he used to evaluate the impact of the British Empire - and now examines the limits and magnitude of American influence in the post cold war world.
No one - including Ferguson - can argue that there is another power even remotely as wide ranging as that demonstrated by America. Culturally, economically, politically, militarily - America is currently without peer. Given that level of influence, Ferguson makes the case that this hegemony is both necessary and beneficial to the world.
Ferguson's argument is not that the U.S. should try to copy the British Imperial model - but instead that America should learn from their predecessors and in effect quit trying to rationalize the fact that the US is not an empire (as both politicians and the media are inclined to cite) but rather to exert that influence effectively and benevolently.
Ferguson argues that despite the ability of the United States to be a force for good in the world, the American "empire," demonstrates serious weaknesses due to its three "deficits" - its financial deficit, its manpower deficit, and its attention deficit.
The financial deficit comes not from military spending, but from the estimated $45 trillion in unfunded liabilities from Medicare/Medicaid and, to a lesser extent, Social Security. The manpower deficit comes not from a lack of population, but from an unwillingness of Americans to serve abroad, either in the military or in civilian positions. The attention deficit derives from the American desire for instant solutions - and the lack of "stomach" for long difficult jobs including national rehabilitation of regions with NO history of democratic or even civil rule.
His argument in the end is subtle but I think accurate. We do have a model for "nation building" in places like Sudan and Iraq - but not a willingness to make the long term commitment necessary to overcome those three fundamental deficits - and to act as a true leader of nations.
Ferguson's book seeks to outline and explain - not to create solutions for US policy makers. It provides a perspective lost on most Americans and is thus very much worth reading - especially as a counterpoint to his work on the British Empire.
Monday, October 8, 2007
Thursday, October 4, 2007
books ......
I am not for a moment going to pretend that there was a chorus of angst at the thought of this blog ending - but I did hear from a couple of folks... and I am not sure that they were being completely sarcastic.
One in particular suggested that since I was always passing him books to read - that I might want to post links to some recent "reads" for those like me whose tastes lean towards history / politics or to some epic craptacular book involving special ops troops or a darn good "whacking".......
In that light - I invite you (one of my 7 readers) to take a look at a couple of rather fantastic books by Niall Ferguson - now a professor at Yale who writes these fascinating economic histories.
The first - EMPIRE - is an analysis of the effects of the British Empire. He asks candidly if the empire was overall a force for good or ill in the world and what its lasting impact has been on the current global balance both militarily, politically and economically. His convincing argument is that while NO empire is by definition universally benificent, that never the less the overall impact of Britain's overseas empire was largely positive.
Ferguson points to the significant benefit that has come to those who are now part of the Commonwealth - in particualr the rule of law and a tendency towards largely stable parliamentary democracies and federal systems. Interestingly, his economic analsysis demonstrates that investment and "profit" from the empire largely went in the direction of the imperial possessions (colonies having become something of a bad word) not the "mother country"..... England's investments IN the new world, India etc were substancially greater than the direct economic benefit at home.
A crucial section of the book looks for example at the tax rates within Great Britain, and the costs of Empire bourn by those tax payers, versus the security benefits and the real tax levels in the colonies. The supposedly "crippling" levels of taxation in the American colonies was actually significantly smaller than the tax levies of the voters in England itself!
The link to Amazon is at the right - I really recommend this one.....
A quick review and link to the follow up book Collosus will be posted in the next day or so.
One in particular suggested that since I was always passing him books to read - that I might want to post links to some recent "reads" for those like me whose tastes lean towards history / politics or to some epic craptacular book involving special ops troops or a darn good "whacking".......
In that light - I invite you (one of my 7 readers) to take a look at a couple of rather fantastic books by Niall Ferguson - now a professor at Yale who writes these fascinating economic histories.
The first - EMPIRE - is an analysis of the effects of the British Empire. He asks candidly if the empire was overall a force for good or ill in the world and what its lasting impact has been on the current global balance both militarily, politically and economically. His convincing argument is that while NO empire is by definition universally benificent, that never the less the overall impact of Britain's overseas empire was largely positive.
Ferguson points to the significant benefit that has come to those who are now part of the Commonwealth - in particualr the rule of law and a tendency towards largely stable parliamentary democracies and federal systems. Interestingly, his economic analsysis demonstrates that investment and "profit" from the empire largely went in the direction of the imperial possessions (colonies having become something of a bad word) not the "mother country"..... England's investments IN the new world, India etc were substancially greater than the direct economic benefit at home.
A crucial section of the book looks for example at the tax rates within Great Britain, and the costs of Empire bourn by those tax payers, versus the security benefits and the real tax levels in the colonies. The supposedly "crippling" levels of taxation in the American colonies was actually significantly smaller than the tax levies of the voters in England itself!
The link to Amazon is at the right - I really recommend this one.....
A quick review and link to the follow up book Collosus will be posted in the next day or so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)