Book Review/Thoughts: The Post-American World

The Post-American World by Fareed Zakaria

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Thought-provoking book, which is again my standard for the non-fiction that I read. I want a book that will force me to think, critically examine my ideas and the ideas of the author, and give me an opportunity to reflect on those thoughts. This book accomplishes this. Zakaria's thesis is summed up really in the first pages of the book, which kind of undercuts the title - the book really isn't about the decline of the United States, but the rise of everybody else. Reading this 8 years after it was published also provides some opportunity to see how Zakaria's thoughts and thesis have been played out in those years. A couple random reflections on the book....

1. Zakaria's point, again, is the rest of the world is catching up to America. Primarily, he discusses how fast India and China's economies are growing and at what point they each may overtake the U.S. as the world's largest economy. For Zakaria, it seems that what makes the superpower is economic strength, not necessarily military strength. He draws upon the historical example of Great Britain, the last single world power, and the fall of the Soviet Union, as examples. He also points to the fact that Germany and Japan are major players on the world stage despite being small military powers, having the 2nd and 3rd largest economies. While this is convincing in certain respects, I am curious how Zakaria accounts for class issues when discussing economic realities of these growing countries. The U.S. has a growing inequality that is probably not sustainable, and typically, what brings civilizations down throughout history is either external forces (in the form of conquering armies) or domestic discontent (usually because of class issues) that grow and grow into political revolution. In addition, Zakaria seemingly divorces the U.S.'s standing as the largest economy from having the largest military. There is little to no discussion of prior colonialism by the Western powers throughout the last 500 years, and its impact on current realities in global economics. I'm not sure this changes Zakaria's analysis, but it feels like the book is missing something potentially significant by not discussing it.

2. Zakaria spends some time discussing how America's foreign policy is significant in determining how the country is viewed abroad, and thus impacts future relationships with the growing countries (not just China and India, but also Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa, among others). Zakaria hammers the country's foreign policy since 9/11, stating that the taking of unilateral action without building consensus has ruined America's reputation that it built in the post-WWII world, via the Marshall Plan. The weakness here, to me, is that such seems to focus on the U.S.'s standing in "western" countries. While America was a very positive force in Europe following WWII, the puppet wars of the Cold War with the Soviet Union in southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America left very conflicted opinions of the U.S. well before 9/11. I'm not one to agree with the unilateral action taken by the U.S. since 9/11, but I think Zakaria may overstate his case here.

3. Yet, U.S. foreign policy is not the biggest weakness and concern Zakaria sees for the U.S. Rather, its America's domestic politics, which now consists of extreme special interests, increasingly partisan politics and the inability to compromise, and thus leading to many policies based on fear and misunderstanding. Zakaria feels prescient in discussing these realities, in 2007, as such has seemingly gotten worse in the past 8 years. I tend to agree with Zakaria here, and wished this would have gotten a bit more play in the book. America's domestic politics are increasingly fractured, leading to more and more people checking out of the political process, either by the design of others are due to a feeling of helplessness and ambivalence. History tends to show that if you disenfranchise larger and larger portions of your population, society breaks down. In any event, too much of our politics is based on fear of others - be it fear of people of other political persuasions and their policies or fear of people living in other countries. In a world of increasing globalization, that will be problematic for continued growth.

4. Final thought has to deal with Zakaria's underlying history. Specifically, Zakaria only seems to account for the last 500-1000ish years of history in establishing his theories - particularly those that have to deal with the balance of power between the "West" and the "East." In that time frame, there certainly is a trend with more power in the "West," but truly not because of sheer economics, as opposed to culture (Christianity promotes evangelism, Hinduism and Confucianism do not) and military force (that colonialism that Zakaria doesn't really discuss). But even if accounting for the last 1,000 years, that discounts approximately 80% of "civilized" history. Perhaps the empires of Egypt, Persia, Mongolia, pre-1300s China, the Vedics in Indiana (not to mention Rome or Greece) aren't relevant to his analysis due to changes in the world. But without him discussing it, it is hard to know. Someone can make a plausible argument that with the early civilizations in India and China prior to the Age of Exploration, along with the breadth of the Persian Empire, that the last several hundred years are a blip in that power balance, and that things are now normalizing appropriately. It is easy to forget about the great histories of India and China and Persia (Iran, Iraq) in studying western History, and forget the roles culture and religion play in the development of civilizations, governments, and economies.


These are thoughts I had, and while they may appear to be critical, it was further questions I had upon finishing the book; and a desire for Zakaria to have discussed them in writing the book, because he was a clear writer and very cogent in the presentation of his ideas. I would have liked to know his thoughts more thoroughly on these matters. Yet, the book was informative and makes one think. That's a good book.



View all my reviews