Rating: 
Summary: Smoke and Mirrors from French Nationalist Propagandist
Review: Todd's books contains some valuable insights on the current
state of the American economy and, under the Bush administration,
the recent shift toward an aggressive, irrational foreign policy.
Unfortunately, Todd generalizes, no, 'universalizes' and describes the malevolent attitudes and policies of two Bush administrations as general characteristics of "Anglo-Saxon" (ie. American) society. The handful of fabulous points that he does make are woven together around specious descriptions of contemporary American society,a factitious idealization of the contemporary Russian State, a simple-minded distinction between "universalism" and "differentialism," grotesque exaggerations, and crude fabrications. The unconditional support that "W." has given to Israel under Sharon is irrational, abusive, and unjust. However, to state, as Todd does, that American foreign policy is evolving in pursuit of an "anti-Arab option" and that "mistreats Arabs" is propagandistic hogwash. The equivalent would be to claim that French foreign policy is similarly anti-Arab or anti-Islam due to its military interventions in Algeria in the 1990s, or anti-African due to its immensely inept handling of events in Rwanda shortly before the genocide there. His analysis of recent American policy on the Isreali-Palestinian conflict completely ignores the extent to which it has been driven by electoral politics. Todd's claim that "anglo-saxon" feminism is somehow behind the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq is simply laughable, and his description of America as a "country of castrating women" sounds like the complaint of the typical sexist, machist intellectual French male who did not quite get everything he wanted during his time at Cambridge or Harvard or (insert elite university of your choice). His structural analysis of various national political cultures verges on racist ideology, spouting inanities like,"anglo-saxon uncertainty about the status of the other is not a product of modernity, but ... arises from a certain anthropological primitiveness", and he displays a profound misunderstanding of the pluralist nature of contemporary American political culture. Reading Todd, one is perpetually reminded how certain members of the French intellectual and political elite claim a monopoly on the ability to formulate and possess "certainty about the status of the other." It is a wonderful insight that the invasion of Iraq was motivated by the American ruling elite's discomfort with their nation's increasing economic dependence on the rest of the world; however, this solid insight is constantly overshadowed by Todd's continual indulgence in a nationalist political polemic and aversion to historical evidence and detail. The fact is that most of the nations and regions of the world are evolving in terms of increasing economic inter-dependency; Todd engages in irresponsible rhetoric when, rather than exposing and attacking specific decisions and aspects of recent U.S. foreign and economic policy within their proper historical context, he castigates American political culture in simultaneously vague and sweeping anthropological terms (with a residual structuralism that tends to de-historicize these contemporary political conflicts) and advocates isolating America from some future Franco-Russian directed "Euro-Asian" order. This fantasy has as little to do with current political realities as the recent French policy of recognizing the United States as an important ally while acting autonomously to extend its sphere of influence even to the detriment of the United States--a policy that does not date to the recent unjustified American aggression in Iraq but to the fall of the Communist bloc. Todd's book is essentially a rationalization of that policy. Curiously, Todd's narrow euro-centric viewpoint speaks of economically driven American military aggression as if it only recently appeared, or as if it only recently appeared unjustified--effectively ignoring or tacitly approving the brutal and largely unnecessary American military interventions in Latin America from the 1960s through the 1980s. Finally, Todd's important-- though unoriginal-- observation that some of the more recent U.S. foreign and military policy is to a significant extent driven by America's excessive commercial debt becomes detrimentally obscured not only by all his anthropological mumbo-jumbo, but especially by his hyperbolic insistence that the American economy is no longer productive, a flimsy claim based solely on the comparison to the figure of TOTAL European industrial production--and on the eroneous premise that the nation is NOT productive only because its deficitary consumption surpasses its production. It would be more convincing if Todd had included more astute analysis of the commercial deficit and its effects rather than essentially polemical prognostics condemning the U.S. economy and American political culture alternating with over-glowing promotional rhetoric for a hypothetical Russian-"protected" European economy. If Todd is so anxious to have the protection of Russia's "democratic" leadership for himself and "douce France," perhaps they will make him an offer he can't refuse. This is an over-rated book whose popularity depends entirely on the utter stupidity of the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq.
Rating: 
Summary: Problem with the neoliberal reviews of this book
Review: While I have not yet read this book, it is important to point out the misinformation that is being provided by the readers of this book. It is now common knowledge in most academic communities (outside of ideological-driven economics departments) that the United States is hardly able to match the economic performance of the EU and Japan. The US is unable to adequately compete with these two conglomerates because in our "post-industrial" society, most US investment in sustainable markets is foreign rather than domestic, while most of our domestic investment is in non-sustainable/flexible markets; i.e., service industries. Since the US as a whole cannot compete with the EU or Japan (and since TNC's have little allegiance to any countries), the US must function in a war economy (what we have had during the Cold War, the War on Drugs, and now the supposed War on Terrorism) since war and the military are the only areas where the US reigns supreme. Whereas the EU and Japan economies are diverse and actively engaged in sustainable R&D, our economy's foundation is reliant on the performance of industries that contribute to the MIIC (military-industrial-intelligence complex; i.e., Boeing, ADM, GE, Microsoft, Exxon/Esso-Mobil, and a plethora of others). This precisely explains why we have a trade deficit: little to no domestic investment in sustainable industry to the point where we must import manufacturing products from abroad. This precisely explains that while per-capita income has increased, the distribution of income is more skewed than ever before (1980: CEO made 50 times lowest paid worker; 2001: CEO made 572 times lowest paid worker, source Department of Labor Statistics 2001 annual report), which any person with an elementary notion of criticism would see that per-capita income would then be skewed if distribution was extremely uneven as we have in the US. It is important to understand that these are the dynamics of capitalism in the strictest sense: trade deficits and social inequality and stratification. Don't be fooled by these economic posers who try to use highly contestable per-capita income statistics to claim that the US economy is actually dynamic. Of course, Europe is heading down the same path of social inequality: exploitation of the Eastern European labor surplus for cheap labor, privatization of previous state-owned industries, and the decline of the welfare state... all in the vain of attempting to compete in a globalized world.
Rating:
Summary: Good Short-term Analysis
Review: While many reviewers of Todd's book seem to fault what they call his failure to point out long-term demographic changes in the EU zone, they themselves fail to see that Todd is writing about what will occur within the next 10-20 years. On page 189, Todd admits "birth rates are now low everywhere [in Europe]. This weakness causes its own specific problems, but it does have the advantage of rendering this part of the world more tranquil almost automatically." This demographic stabilization, Todd believes, is what allows for continued European integration in what Robert Kagan has characterized as Kantian Europe. It is the prerequisite for this Kantian transformation. However, Todd worries, "If the low birth rates persist for too long, Europe will experience a true demographic crisis that could jeopardize the continent's propsertity." America, however, is also going through major demographic changes of its own. It has solved the problem of its low birth rates through the influx of immigrants from Latin America. This is discussed in Samuel Huntingon's latest release, a summary of which is availible in an article published in the March / April 2004 edition of Foreign Policy Magazine. He claims this is changing the basic characteristics of America. In Europe, an influx of Muslim immigrants may halt the long-term population decline; however, it would alter the basic characteristics of Europe as well. By citing European demographic problems, without mentioning that similiar problems are occuring in America, is a cheap shot at Todd. Todd's numbers are correct during the time he is attempting to describe. In the end, the two major faults in Todd are his reliance upon a democratic Russia for the success of any attempts by the EU at balancing the US and the almost total absence of China. Todd admits that Russia may not remain democratic, and as time goes by Russia does appear to be reverting to some sort of non-democratic rule. Under Putin, Russia has continued to clamp down on the media - restricting political coverage. The oligarchs are coming under increasing attack, and any attempts to enter politics by them have been stopped - the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky this fall being an example (although charges of fraud may be legitimate, this is a selective prosecution with political motives). At the same time, the war in Chechnya has continued and Putin refuses to negotiate with the Chechens. This has required actions anti-thetical to democracy - from media censorship to military rule in Chechnya itself. As to China, with a GDP of almost $6 trillion it is the country that is most like to balance against the US in the future. It is true that the EU is capable of doing so today, and if it is able to get its act togther do so long in the future against both the US and China, the absence of China is just mind boggling. With China becoming the new power in the Pacific, it is likely the US and Japan will continue to grow closer to one another - not move apart. Recent reforms allowing for Japanese remilitarization - being pushed by the US - are centered around an integration into the US imperial system - not to balance or compete against it. Todd's book, however, is good on the whole. The European Union is at a crossroads today - Todd is advising it to choose an independent path against the economically dependent US. This is, I believe as does Todd, in the best interest of Europe and the world. A system with the US and China balancing against one another will not be beneficial as both have no respect for international norms. At the same time, the US economic system is weakening and the country is being overtaken by a group of oligarchs. (John Kerry's networth, with his wife, is in excess of $700 million. For George W. Bush, see Kevin Phillips' American Dynasty.) As the US continues to over-extend itself, conflict becomes more likely. The European Union, if unified, can serve to stabilize and re-affirm international norms, the ones established but now being violated by the US. As a revisionist power, the US poses the largest threat to international stability today as it continues its decline from economic dominance.
|
