Rating: 
Summary: Fine book, but...
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed reading World on Fire. I learned a lot about the backgrounds of various ethnicities and indeed saw a pattern in market-dominant minority behavior throughout the world. I applaud Ms. Chua for her specific critiques of various authors (Friedman,esp.). That said, this book doesn't pass the test I put books like this through, which is the "So what?" test.
Just as I have finished hearing her arguments about why markets and majority-rule democracy are such a combustible combination when thrust upon a country as a package by the west (and indeed she is very right that western countries did not go through market and democratic reform overnight like we ask developing countries to do)I am ready for the final thrust, the "what can be done" part. I know she doesn't explicitly set out to cure the ills she discusses, but she does try, and if she is going to try, I want something realistic. What she recommends is that the empowered minority elite more or less become better philanthropists. I know it's short-sighted of the wealthy and the powerful not to contribute to a healthy economy in general, but these guys aren't saints. As Chua would say, national identities haven't equated with nation-state identities and instead have remained ethnocentric. Among other things, the fact that Africa and the Middle East are largely artificial with respect to national boundaries doesn't help. But this is where the rule of law comes in. I expected a thorough discussion of how local and international law can help, or how it can be better applied, or SOMETHING, considering the author's background. The aftermath of the war in Iraq, which happened well after this book was published, has supported her views with respect to a market-dominant minority, but have made abundantly clear that without law and order, neither markets nor democracy can have the desired effects. If you want an interesting counterpoint to globalization's enthusiasts, this is as good a book as any. But the underlying legal mess is better addressed in Hernando de Soto's "The Mystery of Capital."
Rating: 
Summary: Who We Are
Review: While some readers may thoroughly disagree with Ms. Chua about the nature of globalization and the world today, as well as faulting her for not offering solutions to current 'problems' of market-dominant minorities, it would be useful to note that the author made no claim of being able to offer remedies to the problems posed by these groups vis-a-vis the poor ethnic majorities. In fact Ms. Chua did offer any number of steps that could be taken to help alleviate this imbalance in wealth and who controls it. Whatever is to come of this, and this is by no means the only problem of serious concern in the world today, it was never meant to fit it all in one nice neat package and say that this kind of economic and global dominance over limited regions or globally accounted for every imbalance of power and trust. Much of the problem seems to occur in the realm of 'crony capitalism' that results in the sellout of peoples by those of their own in political power. As long as this persists, any thought of justice for the downtrodden will be forever waiting in the wings. Moreover, remember reader, it is very likely that you are one of the market-dominant minorities.
Rating:
Summary: World on Fire: Crucial Guidance for U.S. Foreign Policy
Review: This book is successful in
o developing a powerful thesis about the dangers of too rapid advance of markets and democracy in the developing world This thesis is supported by
o a factual, extensive, and highly interesting review of major sources of ethnic conflict in many developing countries The book goes on to draw extremely important foreign policy conclusions that are of enormous importance now, as the United States attempts to deal with the reconstruction of both the political and economic institutions in Iraq (and potentially other Middle Eastern Countries. It is essential that the U.S. foreign policy community become familiar with Professor Chua's ideas and analysis.
Rating:
Summary: Man doesn't live by bread alone
Review: How did a book written by a heretofore little known law professor on the topic of globalization of all things receive so much acclaim? The answer is that the book is clearly and poignantly written unlike many books on globalization by economists and sociologists. But its clarity and simplicity also subtly and superficially reduces globalization to an oversimplified and hackneyed version of Marxist materialsm. Amy chua is on to something big - really big - in her book: that in nearly every third world nation the transition to a capitalist economy has brought about the rise of a "market dominant majority" that is able to capture most of the wealth and power resulting in ethnic hatred and a viscious circle of violence. Chua starts out the book by writing about the tragic and gripping story of the murder in the Philippines of her ethnic Chinese wealthy aunt at the hands of her chauffer. She then enlarges her story to discuss the economic dominance of Chinese in Asia, Crotians over Serbs in the former Yugoslavia, Europeans in South American and South Africa, Jews in post communist Russia, and the resulting spiral of ethnic conflict. Her overworked thesis is the paradox that "free market democracy" breeds ethnic hatred, genocide, terrorism, and ethnic wars. All of the praise for the book by scholars on the back book cover and elsewhere misses the obvious -- this is an old thesis originally addressed by Marx and Engels over 150 years ago. Substitute the word "bourgeoise" for Chua's "market dominant minority," "the proletariat" for "the poor," and "control over the modes of production" for "market dominance," and you have a new lexicon of Marxism. The words "market" and "laissez faire" are also used in a biased fashion as misnomers to mean their opposite: cartels, monopolies, and elites. Chua says that poverty doesn't make people kill - indignity, grievances, and hopelessness does. But then she proceeds to prove otherwise in case study after case study. But man doesn't live by bread alone. This what social scientists call "legitimation" - which means that society is held together not simply by material needs and interests but also by beliefs and religious theodicies that justify the prevailing social order. What Chua misses is the even bigger issue of not why there is so much ethnic hatred, but why there isn't more or revolution? Chua says that third world globalization invariably ends up with a small ethnic elite subjugating the mass of poor people. She fails to mention that totalitarian government does the same only with a class of muggers instead of a commercial class. Some of her solutions such as stock ownership are naive; others such as creating legal property rights are more promising. For a deeper understanding of the issues I would suggest reading:
1. Peter Berger, The Capitalist Revolution: 50 Propositions about Prosperity, Equality, and Liberty.
2. Peter Berger, Pyramids of Sacrifice: Political Ethics and Social Change.
3. Peter Berger and Samuel Huntington, eds., Many Globalizations.
Rating:
Summary: Jackson the First Southern President?
Review: I can't believe anyone ever said anything so wrong. What about Washington? Jefferson? Martin Van Buren was a Northerner? Plus I don't see how an inaccurate recap of US history proved any point at all.
This book is an excellent response to the Utopian Vision of a free world united by mutual economic ties. Ms. Chua noticed a few things, because different populations, often within the same territory, have different beliefs and behaviors, they may act differently. Differences in culture and history can lead to differences in economic outcome.
Not all groups like each other. This is evidenced by so many expamples, I don't feel the need to list any.
Ethnic tensions,if they are coupled with economic tensions, are exceptionally explosive. That is the World on Fire.
Since some differences in outcome are the result of differences in begginings, when majorities rise up, they are not better off, witness Blacks in Africa after colonialism, or Blacks in the Inner Cities when they scare off Jews and Koreans.
The unfortunate legacy of colonialism, is that primitive peoples see the wonders of the modern world become envious without any way to reach the same level. Like Pacific Cargo Cults, they wait for riches to fall from the gods.
Rating:
Summary: TIMELY
Review: Amy Chua's "World On Fire" is concise, helpful, and timely. Ms. Chua, coming from a market-dominant ethnic minority, shares a rare and valuable perspective on the phenomenon of such groups, areas where they wield influence, problems there, and dangers inherent in attempting to overlay those areas with "instant democracy". She then shows readers how much of the world today views the USA as a market-dominant ethnic minority. For global economics, history, and politics students, a "must read".
Rating: 
Summary: World On Fire - problems with facts
Review: I was impressed with Ms. Chua from her C-SPAN booknotes interview and that caused me to buy the book. I am retired from the US Foreign Service and have lived/worked/visited over seventy countries and am very familar with various market dominate minorities that Ms. Chua described, including having lived in Manila as did her aunt who was murdered about the time we lived in Manila. Sadly, from my experience I found far too many factual errors in the book (some of which I shared with Ms. Chua by E-mail). While most of the factual errors were not significant to the message of the book, their large volume caused me to doubt everything else presented that I did not know myself to be true. Also, my sense was that the "research" of Ms. Chua was largely a number of vacations and other short trips to several third world countries where she collected impressions, rather than any serious attempt at actually researching the subject. Additionally, I sensed a large measure of "white guilt" (I guess a Chinese American who spent her entire life in and around American universities can suffer white guilt regardless of her skin color)in her writings that got in the way of her message. I believe that this is an important subject and in most Third World countries there is some minority that runs most of the free market and produces most of the wealth, be it Indians, Chinese, Jews, whites, Hindu Tamils, or Lebanonese. And when those without wealth chose to liberate the wealth of those producing it and/or "encourage" them to leave, far too often the result is a collapse of their economy as have happened in Uganda, Angola, Mozambique, Spain (after 1492 AD), and Zimbabwe.
Rating: 
Summary: very innacurate
Review: First of all, i would like to recognize the fact that i was influenced to buy this book because of its thought-provoking title, which i thought it would offer serious and objective analysis about globalization. However the book ended up not being too different from that of Noreena Hertz "The Silent Takeover." or the more-critical "Globalization and its discontents" by Joseph Stiglitz. Amy assures in her books that corporate globalization is threatening democracy in the third world, a factor that is true, but she suggest that said crisis is due to the fact that natives of those lands are not prepared for such benevolence as free markets. She exemplifies the cases of Peru's Toledo and Venezuela's Chavez as an argument for populist ethnicity being a threat to democracy. She failed to explain that Toledo is probably one of the leading neoliberal head of states in latin America, and that in fact many of his policies have been strongly objected by the indians majority, which represent most of the poor in Peru. As in Chavez case, the venezuelan have come out as an alternative for destructive neoliberal policies during the 90's which had started a period of handing over state-owned companies to transnational corporations. The book, if taken a closer look, it shows no more than apologetics that people in the IMF or the World Bank would come up with once their policies have shown discrepancies and failures, like the argentinean case for example, so Amy, like these people, would want us to believe that there is nothing wrong with corporate globalization, but instead, the blame for its failure is shifted toward the people that is forcefully subjected to said policies mainly through austerity plans and recommendations for so-called economic recovery. The positive outcome that could be sensed on these kind of books is that their authors at least recognized the fact that corporate globalization is one of the reasons of world's crises nowadays, although they point fingers at the wrong people, failing to explain the neocolonial agenda that is kept within the efforts of multinational corporations to expropriate other countries' riches through "agreements" and "austerity plans"
Rating:
Summary: No understanding of role of ideas in Man's life
Review: In the C-SPAN interview there was hardly a hint of ideology. This woman is a law professor at Yale and she uttered hardly a word on philosophy or law. Her interview was confined to the emotions of the majority populace and how they reacted to "conspicuous consumption" by the minority, if I may drag out a phrase from the economic past. It was only in the last few minutes of the interview that she revealed her views. American Capitalism benefited the world. She was for the advance of free markets throughout the world but not of the "bare knuckled" (her phrase) kind. We didn't have it and we shouldn't foist it on others. Unfortunately, I was not able to get much more from the interview as to where she was going with this. She apparently thinks only semi-free markets should be expanded. She doesn't mention the widespread ideas of Marx that poison the mind to Capitalism. She doesn't understand that Americans don't buy Marxism for the most part and are not envious of the rich, they want to be the rich and think they can, which is true. I would say, "Read Atlas Shrugged instead."
Rating:
Summary: World on Fire- Amy Chua
Review: Amy Chua- "World on fire" truely exposes the continuing injustices face by indigenous people from the African continent to Latin American. Amy Chua story reflects my opinion about how few groups of people control the world resources, not by hard working, but through past colonization, present corrupt regimes, and neo-colonization. I believe that privatization and free-market have exacerbate the disparity between the "have-nots"- majority of the Indigenous and the "haves" few-"outsiders". I am originally from Ghana in West Africa, and I will say that to some extent, I do agree with Chua that there is a strong Lebanese influence in Ghana. Their influence is limited to some extent and it is not profound compared with that in Sierra Leone. I do agree with Chua that Indians and Lebanese do dominate most important economy aspect in Southern Africa. This is a personal experience that I observed when I went to Kenya and Tanzania in 1995. It was my first time visiting a country in the Southern Africa. When I was in Tanzania, I was surprise to see that all the major retail business in Tanzania were dominated by Indians. In Ghana, when you go to the market, you see Ghanaians, predominately women who dominate the retail market, but in Tanzania, the Indians own the retail markets to most of the best night clubs in the country. This was an incident that happened to one of my friends from Liberia who went with me to Tanzania. His host family was Tanzanian-Indian. Of course, they called themselves Tanzanians or Africans, but they stongly believe in their Indian culture than the African culture. To make story short, my friend and his Indian host family went to a Jewellery store in Dar Salem( Capital City in Tanzania). He was physically thrown out of the Jewellery store by the Indian Owner. My friend was shocked because, he had never been mistreated in such a way. The owner of the store explained to him that he could not allow him into the store because, "these black people only come to his store to steal". It was only when the host family intervened before, he was allowed into the store. My first reaction was, if my friend could be treated that way with an Indian host family, what about the black Tanzanians.? How could a black Tazanian be treated by the minority Indian community in their own country. I was not surprise as to why "Idi Amin" kicked the Indians out and decided to nationalize most of the companies - not because he believed in socialism, but because, there was a general resentment to the Indian domination in Uganda. The "World on fire" by Amy Chua talks in depth about free markets being promoted by IMF and the World bank, which end up benefiting only the foreign investors and the elite minority, leaving behind the majority indigenous people. I recommend everyone to read this book. It will enlighten you about the "hoax' about free-market that suppose to benefit everyone, but it ends up benefiting a few elite minority.
|
