Posts
Obama is enjoying a book on the campaign trail. His choice is telling:
This is the book that Obama should be reading:
Maybe it's just me
Tonight’s #Top20Posts: Biden-Harris FEMA still ignoring storm victims in
North Carolina
-
*Sponsored by directorblue.substack.com. Follow us on Twitter @directorblue*
.
20
https://t.co/8yEHVMkeQo pic.twitter.com/4p2Xr6jBm0
— 🏛 Aristophanes ...
14 hours ago
Before one jumps to conclusions based on the limited post above on this site, here's the summary of the book. Not sure why Obama's reading choice is such a big deal considering that America does need to break out of partisan gridlock and restore a nation focused on its growth and the prosperity of its people.
ReplyDelete------------------------
From The Washington Post's Book World/washingtonpost.com
After the Iraq war, Fareed Zakaria argued in his Newsweek column that the world's new organizing principle was pro- or anti-Americanism. But as the Iraq muddle drags on and China rises, the larger story of the post-Cold War era has come into sharp relief: We are not the center of the universe. It matters less that particular countries are pro- or anti-American than that the world is increasingly non-American. We need to get over ourselves.
Zakaria's The Post-American World is about the "rise of the rest," a catchy phrase from one of the most widely cited writers on foreign affairs. His prism is correct: We should focus more on the "rest," even if America is still the premier superpower. But within this broad approach, Zakaria leaves policy-makers to figure out how to rank challenges and restore U.S. legitimacy.
Zakaria zooms in on Asia, especially India and China, which he uses as proxies for "the rest." The first third of the book sets out his thesis -- "For the first time ever, we are witnessing genuinely global growth" -- and the next third describes how China's economy has doubled every eight years and how India may have the world's third largest economy by 2040.
This year has brought a flood of books on Asia's rise, including Bill Emmott's Rivals and Kishore Mahbubani's The New Asian Hemisphere. For the most part, they embody the "world is flat" thesis -- lots of economic statistics, little geography. But geopolitics is about more than growth rates. It matters that China borders a dozen more countries than India does, isn't hemmed in by a vast ocean and the world's tallest mountains, has a loyal diaspora twice the size of India's and enjoys a head start in Asian and African marketplaces. Zakaria's chapters on China and India, though of equal length, should not connote equivalency, and all "the rest" cannot be happily lumped together. Does China's example tell us what has gone wrong in Venezuela and Pakistan, and could go wrong in Egypt and Indonesia?
Ironically, the final third of The Post-American World, which focuses on us rather than on "the rest," is the strongest. Zakaria argues that America's world-beating economic vibrancy co-exists with a dysfunctional political system. "A 'can-do' country is now saddled with a 'do-nothing' political process, designed for partisan battle rather than problem solving," he writes. That makes it hard to devise a grand strategy, and Zakaria offers just a few "simple guidelines" on the need to set priorities, build global rules and be flexible. But in this non-American world, it may be too late to restore U.S. leadership. "The rest" is moving on.
Copyright 2008, The Washington Post. All Rights Reserved.
Exactly. How is Obama's reading choice 'telling'? I for one will not vote for Obama because of his wanting to throw more money at social programs, and his frank desire to raise taxes, but the fact that he is evidently reading Zakaria gives me a glimmer of hope that his foreign policy would be well grounded.
ReplyDeleteMore importantly, Obama and McCain should be reading both. As a high school English teacher, I recommend a book every day to my students. On the first day, I recommend Rush Limbaugh's "The Way Things Ought to Be." The day after that I offer them Franken's "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot." Next I mention Limbaugh's "See I Told You So," and I follow that with James Carville's "We're Right; They're Wrong." My argument to students is that as an "educated electorate," they must seek to objectively understand both sides of the issues, and then they should critically draw a conclusion.
ReplyDeleteHaving been a registered Republican and a registered Democrat, I am now unaffiliated, having really lost faith in both parties and ideologies. As both groups like to wage battles over the primacy of the Reagan and Clinton eras, and candidates seek to inherit the legacies, it seems they've forgotten that our best and most popular presidents were basically our most practical negotiators. Reagan opposed tax hikes, but he raised taxes four times between 1982 and 1986. He challenged the "evil empire" and helped bring it down, but he did it as much by dialogue and engagement, as he did by confrontation.
Unlike many who criticize Zakaria's book, I've read it, and I can objectively assert that it's an insightful analysis of the contemporary world. Rationally, his book should be required reading for anyone who seeks to shape U.S. policies, both foreign and domestic. While "Party of Defeat" is an engaging read, it should be balanced by books such as "Leaderless Jihad" and "Winning the Un-War." All these books should be read and analyzed, as no one should be afraid of information.
Shocking! A Candidate who reads! A candidate who wished to be well informed! A candidate who wants a variety of opinions on the state of the world!
ReplyDelete