The Post-American World
Author:
Fareed Zakaria
ISBN:
978-0-393-34038-9
By:
Marc O’Bryan
Overview:
In
The Post-American World, Fareed
Zakaria offers a thought-provoking analysis of America’s new role in a world
that is experiencing a change in its global power structure. He examines the
emergence of rising non-Western global players, particularly China and India,
and argues how this will affect America’s dominant economic and political
influence in the world. He refers to this new global atmosphere as a “post-American
world” where the global distribution of power is “defined and directed from
many places and by many people” (p. 4).
He attributes this great shift away from American dominance to what he
calls, “the rise of the rest” (p. 2). Zakaria sheds light on a reality that
many Americans refuse to accept because it conflicts with their ethnocentric
perception of America as matter-of-factly superior. According to Zakaria, the
last thirty years have seen astonishing economic growth among many developing countries
that were previously viewed as non-threats to America’s economic and industrial
superiority (p. 2). He argues that we are experiencing a “genuinely global
growth” that is causing significant reductions in global poverty, increased
nationalism among “rising” countries, and a United States that is losing its
global power and influence (p. 4).
The
primary purpose of this book is not to describe America’s decline or an
increasingly anti-American world. In fact, Zakaria even admits that America will
most likely continue to retain its military, economic, and social dominance for
decades to come, but at a lower level. He is simply illuminating the fact that
rising countries like China and India are becoming more empowered and less
subordinate to American dominance. These rising countries have taken advantage
of an open global economy created out of a more freely flowing movement of
capital, widespread control over inflation, and a technological “flattening” of
the world (pp. 24, 26, 27). By “entering the Western order” on their own terms,
these rising countries are reshaping the global power structure by defining and
pursuing their own interests in a more confident and defiant manner. America is
losing its hegemonic hold over the world as its dominance over economic,
military, and social influence wanes in the shadow of independently growing
global competitors. Steering away from the classical imperialistic approach to
gaining power and status, rising countries like China and India will continue
to assert their influence in defining world issues and setting global agendas
in a way that quietly best serves their own interests. This means America must
be ready to take on a new role that recognizes these rising tactful countries
as influential actors rather than mistaking them as submissive bystanders. If
America wants to retain its authoritative position in this new post-American
world, it must learn to adroitly assert its influence with a new sense of
subtlety (p. 258).
Contribution
to Knowledge:
Zakaria
offers a practical evaluation of America’s changing relationship with the rest
of the world that forces Americans to reevaluate their perceived status. As
globalization further increases the economic interdependence of nations, it
becomes necessary to track the evolving nature of these international
relations. Zakaria’s foreign policy analysis achieves this by shedding light on
the extraordinary economic progress and strengthened political influence of new
rising global powers. He offers insight into how countries like China and India
are modernizing and adopting more capitalist forms of economic development in
order to grow. It is important to note that this global power shift is being
viewed as a long-term event that shows no signs of lessening in magnitude.
Zakaria makes the excellent point that China and India are starting at very low
average base incomes among enormously high populations, which creates a recipe
for a sustained period of large scale economic and industrial growth (p. 23).
This diffusion of global power to growing countries like China and India
translates into a more egalitarian relationship structure between a less
hegemonic United States and a rising class of new global players. This will
have an enormous affect on how these countries interact in terms of economics,
politics, and culture.
This
is a must-read for any foreign policymaker or anyone in a managerial position.
Understanding this new power shift is now vital to the success of any business
or government operating on a global level. As new global powers like China and
India continue to grow more independent and defiant of the United States,
American foreign policymakers must learn to accept progress no longer as
dominance, but rather as compromise (p. 56). Multinational corporations based
in the U.S. are beginning to understand that they must submit and adapt to a
post-American world in which they no longer wield an overwhelming advantage.
With annual revenue growth of 10-15 percent abroad, the majority of these
U.S.-based corporations are reporting their growth as becoming increasingly
reliant on penetrating new foreign markets (p. 57). In order to penetrate these
foreign markets, they must first be understood. Zakaria does an excellent job
of explaining the consequences of this new global paradigm, and revealing how
Americans must adapt their worldview in order to remain a viable competitor.
Zakaria’s
Strengths:
Zakaria
focuses primarily on India and China, two highly relevant and prominent rising
global competitors, in order to illustrate the development of a post-American
world. He identifies the similarities between these two rising nations and
early America regarding their respective paths to developing into modern
capitalist societies. Additionally, insightful thought is given as to why
America’s economic and political dominance is waning, and how rising nations
may face similar issues in the future.
Zakaria
reveals the path being taken by India and China to become a modern capitalist
society, capable of competing in a highly competitive globalized economy.
Rather than simply focusing on the driving economic forces behind the growth of
these two countries, Zakaria also provides a cultural and spiritual
justification for their adoption of a capitalist society. This underlying
justification provides the reader with a unique cultural understanding of how
their development was not solely the result of economic incentives. By
providing the reader with this more fundamental understanding of non-Western
development, American readers can gain valuable and even applicable insight
into how China and India have modernized on their own terms.
It
is important to first note that China and India are not the only societies that
have based their particular path to capitalism on spiritual and cultural
justification. In The Protestant Ethic
and the Spirit of Capitalism, Max Weber argues that early American
capitalism was fueled by Puritan ethics, which promoted hard work, delayed
gratification, and strategic planning. It is a common misperception that the development
of capitalism in America is rooted in purely economic motivators. Zakaria
demystifies this illusion by exposing the cultural and spiritual influences
that guided and sustained the economic development of America. In doing so, he
provides an indirect lesson on the Marxian perspective of how a society’s
particular economic development is determined by its praxis, which is the way
that society’s theories and action cyclically reinforce each other. It may be
true that China, India, and the U.S. have all allowed capitalism to shape their
current societies in similar ways. For example, all three nations are driven by
a consumer society that is characterized by an instrumental rationality
centered on monetary gain. All three societies have allowed external capitalist
goals to replace freely chosen goals when it comes to understanding one’s life
aspirations. However, the particular path to capitalism that each society chose
was uniquely shaped by a set of underlying values related to different cultural
beliefs and spiritualism. This particular aspect of Zakaria’s analysis mirrors
Weber’s analysis of the relationship between religious ideologies and
economics. It provides a fundamental understanding of how a society defines and
justifies its purpose as a capitalist society. In the case of America, early
capitalists used certain ideological aspects of Protestantism to justify and
promote activities that established a capitalist environment. By associating
moral and spiritual importance to capitalist behavior, early Americans
established a social structure that has sustained a capitalist society. Zakaria
points out that a reason for America’s decline is because it has transformed
from “a country that once adhered to a Puritan ethic of delayed gratification”
to a nation that “revels in instant pleasures” (p. 204). The implication behind
this statement is that America’s insatiable consumerism and growing demand for
instant gratification has allowed this nation to lose its competitive edge. Our
country no longer possesses the same strong Puritan work ethic that enabled it
to thrive for so long. Zakaria shows how China and India have also let
spiritually based values dictate how capitalism developed in their respective
societies.
Zakaria
claims that China’s form of capitalism is based on a combination of the values
espoused in Confucianism and modern Western influences. Confucianism is rooted
in rationality and practicality rather than in divine abstract notions of
morality (p. 122). This spiritual teaching established guidelines for obtaining
knowledge, maintaining order, and establishing social stability. Perhaps this
explains the business practices of modern Chinese capitalism. China’s form of
capitalism can be described as “state capitalism,” in which the state still
retains a strong influence over the economic development of the country. This
is intended to maintain economic stability and social order by mitigating the
likelihood of the potential crises inherent in a free market economy. Zakaria
makes it clear that China does not solely rely on a “Confucian way to generate
economic growth” (p. 127). China has clearly adopted some aspects of “Western rationalism,” as it attempts
to replicate the successful economic model that America has exemplified over
the years (p. 127). The main point here is to show that China’s current
economic system emerged, and is indeed still being sustained, by a set of ancient
spiritual values. The question is how will these values hold up against an
increasingly consumer-based society, which is an inevitable issue that China
will face as its capitalist system develops.
Zakaria
applies the values of Hinduism to the current state of India’s capitalist
system. He describes Hinduism as a philosophy containing intentionally
ambiguous guiding principles. (p. 171). Consequently, Hindus have incorporated
this ambiguous attitude into the development of India’s particular form of
capitalism. The Hindu value of ambiguity has translated into a highly adaptable
workforce that can readily accommodate change (p. 172). This is an extremely
valuable characteristic that is serving India well in a globalized economy that
is constantly changing due to developments in technology and political power
shifts. There ability to adapt to the needs of the job makes them a highly
sought after source of labor, which Zakaria recognizes when he says, “the world
is courting India like never before” (p. 146). The ambiguous nature of Hinduism
may also account for India’s democratic social structure through which economic
development is taking place in a totally unplanned and chaotic manner (p. 150).
Just as Hindus follow the guiding principles of their faith, Indian citizens
are also allowed to live by a set of guiding principles rather than strict
rules. Unlike China, Indian companies have no restrictions regarding how
capital is used. This has led to a more efficient and innovative use of capital
in India, through which the “private sector has become the backbone of growth”
(p. 151). This bottom-up method of economic development clearly demonstrates
that Indians are much more at peace with economic uncertainty than most other
nations. It is this attitude that allowed them to develop into a highly
innovative society. Over the past five years, Indian companies have received
the most Deming Prizes, an award offered by Japan to companies demonstrating
exceptional managerial innovation (p 152). While India’s social and economic
structure is to some extent adopting Western ideals, its cultural and spiritual
history will continue to “pull it away from a purely American view of the
world” (p. 168). India’s society has already become one in which “the consumer
is king” (p. 152). This raises the question of whether or not India’s form of
capitalism is better designed to withstand this increased consumerism and
tendency toward immediate gratification.
Zakaria’s
in-depth analysis of the cultural and spiritual influences on these various
developments of capitalism offer a much clearer understanding of how these
rising nations will interact in the coming years of global economic growth.
Simply examining the economic forces behind the development of a nation’s
particular social structure is inadequate when trying to form a comprehensive
understanding of how that country will operate in an increasingly globalized
economy. Deciphering the underlying values that influence the economic goals of
a nation is an essential task when it comes to forming sustained relations with
that nation. Zakaria’s insight into the source of each nation’s worldview is an
extra step taken to provide a well-rounded understanding of the post-American
world.
Zakaria’s
Weaknesses:
The way Zakaria describes nationalism’s
affect on rising global competitors is Zakaria’s assessment of the development
of nationalism in rising nations challenges Ernest Gellner’s theory of
nationalism in some respects. Zakaria does not thoroughly explain his
justification or logic behind why he believes “sub-nationalism” is developing
in these rising nations like India and China. He also provides indecisive
reasoning behind what he defines as the consequences of increased nationalism.
These argumentative flaws will be addressed through a comparison with Gellner’s
take on nationalism.
Zakaria
and Gellner agree that nationalism is strongly tied to politics. Zakaria is
correct in his assertion that “political power remains firmly tethered to the
nation-state” despite the development of a globalized environment of economic
interdependence and cultural sharing. This is due to the fact that these new
rising global powers now have the ability to assert their influence when it
comes to setting global agendas that serve their own interests. One might think
that globalization and modernization would lead to a more cooperative global
environment, but it makes sense that these once powerless nations now feel
entitled to assert their political dominance in a way that might conflict with
the interests of other nations. Consequently, the surge of nationalism within
rising countries has the potential to create “global disorder and
disintegration,” according to Zakaria (p 34). He is claiming that increasingly
confident and self-interested nations like China and India are overtly
threatening the global order due to nationalistic worldviews. However, he later
claims, “Beijing has more recently toned down its support of nationalism, more
fully embracing a quieter approach to diplomacy and politics” (p. 135). This
statement coincides more with Zakaria’s recognition that China still views America
as a dominant superpower, and recognizes the need to remain diplomatic rather
than become defiant. Zakaria later addresses how India plans to handle its
rising levels of nationalism. He links China’s foreign policy strategy to that
of India, articulated clearly by its Prime Minister, which is “peace and
stability to allow for development” (p. 169). Here, he portrays these
increasingly nationalistic nations as less overtly assertive and more
cooperative, when just prior, he claimed that these types of nations were
allowing their increased nationalism to cause them to behave with an empowered
sense of defiance and self-interest. In my opinion, Zakaria leaves the reader
with an ambiguous analysis of how he thinks the relationship among powerful
nation-states will play out. He contradicts himself when he claims that
increased nationalism will lead to global disorder, but then later claims that
two rising global superpowers, China and India, are pursuing a foreign policy
strategy of “peace and stability.” While these countries may feel more
empowered due to their economic progress, they realize that tactful diplomacy
is still required to remain a global competitor, especially in a world of
increasing economic interdependence. Although this does allow the reader to
make up his or her own mind about the subject, Zakaria’s indecisive depiction
of the matter somewhat delegitimizes his arguments.
Zakaria
makes another contradictory statement when he claims that “sub-nationalism” is
occurring alongside the development of nationalism in rising nations. He argues
that within each of these rising nations, segmented groups are independently forming
a strengthened identity parallel to the overall country’s nationalized
identity. As a consequence, they gain greater power, but at the same time, “it
makes purposeful national action far more difficult” (p. 41). For example,
Zakaria claims national parties in India are losing power to regional parties
(p. 41). Gellner would disagree with Zakaria’s thoughts on the development of
“sub-nationalism” in these increasingly nationalistic countries. While Zakaria
claims that nationalism leads to within-country disorder, Gellner argued that
nationalism actually accounted for the stability of modern societies. As a
developing country adopts capitalism and becomes more modernized, cultural
barriers become less salient. Society within that country becomes less
stratified and culturally marked. Zakaria indirectly admits this early on when
he states, “poverty is falling in countries housing 80 percent of the world’s
population,” which means there is less socioeconomic inequality. As these
societies become more socioeconomically egalitarian, sub-cultural distinctions,
once marked by differences in wealth and status, begin to fade away. According
to Gellner, this homogenizing effect on society occurs in response to the
country’s necessity to modernize and prepare its population for a capitalistic
environment in which constant technological change creates an unstable
occupational structure. These societies must develop a common language and set
of generalized values and customs in order to compensate for the affects of
this unstable economic environment. Zakaria mentions how the rising global
powers are placing more emphasis on widespread education in order to meet the
capitalistic demands of a modernized society. This general education and
training allows a society to be more occupationally mobile, which serves as an
advantage in a modern society characterized by job switching. Gellner argues
that the whole idea behind nationalism is to mask the antiquated social
divisions in society that hinder economic progress in a modern capitalistic
nation. For Zakaria to claim that “sub-national” groups are becoming stronger
alongside increased nationalism is to say that these increasingly independent
sub-groups are intentionally inhibiting themselves from succeeding in a modern
globalized society. It is in their best interest to collectively unite their
country in order to make it a more competitive global player. It makes no sense
for these groups to work against each other or the state in order to achieve
separate self-interests. As these rising countries become more capitalistic,
the groups within each country become increasingly interdependent as their
society becomes more characterized by organic solidarity. Emile Durkheim
understood that the division and interchangeability of labor that followed
modernized capitalism created a need for society to become more cohesive
through generalized values and goals. Talcott Parsons also saw nationalism as a
cultural medium capable of integrating complex capitalistic societies. It is
this social bonding element that allows for the stabilization and continued
existence of an increasingly capitalist modern society. Taking all of this into
account, Zakaria’s claim of a growing “sub-nationalism” discredits his
explanation of how rising nations are experiencing nationalism. As capitalism
leads to nationalism, the resulting formation of a homogenized modern society supports
a country’s economic progress. The insertion of a “sub-national” culture
disrupts the perpetual flow of this model, and seems like a counter-intuitive
response to nationalism. It’s hard to believe that sub-national groups are
growing in size and power when they are operating in an increasingly
competitive and changing environment that requires cooperation to succeed.
Overall
Impression:
My
overall impression of The Post-American
World is that it’s a highly relevant and well-written source for understanding
how our world is changing. Before reading this book, I was fairly ignorant of
America’s changing role in relation to other global competitors. This book has
provided interesting and applicable insight into how other nations are changing
the proverbial global playing field. All current and destined business managers
should study the eye-opening concepts offered in this book in order to
understand how international relations are transforming.
This
book does an amazing job of exposing the reader to all of the new opportunities
being created around the world. If you are thinking about working in another
country, this book is a great source of applicable knowledge in terms of
understanding the pros and cons of working in different regions of the world.
Zakaria makes you realize that an entirely new post-American world is
developing before our eyes, and that for those who fail to see this, they will
be left behind in the illusion of a “unipolar” world.