World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability

Rating:
Summary: Of Firebugs and Market-Dominant Minorities
Review: Enthusiasts of globalization believe that all the world's ills can be cured by the application of free markets and democracy. These two systems working hand in hand will bring about, not only prosperity and individual liberty, but will eradicate war and ethnic violence. We can still recall Thomas Friedman claiming in his best-selling book, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, that no two countries that both have MacDonalds have ever fought a war against each other. Since then American aircraft have bombed numerous golden arches in Belgrade.

In World on Fire, Yale law professor, Amy Chua shatters some of our most cherished Wilsonian ideals. To have multiethnic, pluralistic, free-market democracies is the end goal of, not only American foreign policy, but of Western and international institutions as well. However, there have been unintended consequences. The main thesis of this book is that "the global spread of markets and democracy is a principal, aggravating cause of group hatred and ethnic violence throughout the non-Western world." In many of the world's developing countries wealth is concentrated in the hands of "market-dominant minorities." The best examples of this are the Chinese in Southeast Asia, the Jews in Russia, whites in Zimbabwe and South Africa and whites in Latin America. Her other examples of Jews in the Middle East and Americans as the global market-dominant minority are problematic and do not fit her theory as neatly.

Chua's most convincing case is of the ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia, a market-dominant minority of which she is a member. She gives a personal account of how her Aunt Leona, part of the economically powerful Chinese minority in the Philippines, was stabbed to death by her chauffer. Other servants, all ethnic Filipinos, were eyewitnesses; however, the police, also ethnic Filipinos, never tracked down the killer. They showed little interest in solving the crime and wrote it off as simply an act of "revenge." Not surprising since the Chinese are just 1 percent of the population and control about 60 percent of the private sector wealth, while two-thirds of the eighty million ethnic Filipinos live on less than 2 dollars a day. A disproportionate amount of wealth is concentrated in the hands of the ethnic Chinese minority in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and other countries in Southeast Asia. The majorities largly view them as thieves who have ingratiated themselves with dictators while prospering at the expense of the indigenous population (two examples are Suharto in Indonesia, Marcos in the Philippines). With the advent of democracy the ethnic Chinese were put in danger of the larger populations. After the Suharto dictatorship, demagogues emerged, inciting violence aginst the Chinese. As a result more than 5,000 Chinese shops and houses were looted and burned in Indonesia.

Chua describes the pattern: "When free markets are pursued in the presence of a market-dominant minority, the almost invariable result is backlash. This backlash typically takes one of three forms. The first is a backlash against markets, targeting the market-dominant minority's wealth. The second is backlash against democracy by forces favorable to the market-dominant minority. The third is violence, sometimes genocidal, directed against the market-dominant minority itself."

Chua is not an anti-globalist, nor is she against free markets and democracy. Countries such as China, Taiwan, and South Korea, all ethnically homogeneous, have done well with gobalization. Democracy and free markets also work well were inequality of wealth and income are not too great. Chua proposes that market-dominant minorities should spread their wealth, stop funding corruption and contribute to charities, and that governments should increase educational opportunities, create social safety nets, ensure property rights, and increase equity ownership in local business. All of this sounds reasonable and commendable but will probably never happen.

Inspite of some of the shortcomings of this book it alerts us to the dangers of encouraging laissez-faire markets and rapid democratization in countries with market-dominant minorities. Anyone reading this book can see more clearly the highly combustible situation the US faces in trying to impose democracy in Iraq. The market-dominant and power-dominant Sunnis will undoubtedly loose their position to the Shia majority if elections are held. The result could be sectarian strife or civil war. However, not having free markets and democracy would probably be worse. The solutin is make haste slowly.

Rating:
Summary: So-so
Review: I feel that World on Fire is an excellent book if one where trying to observe some of the social problems that affect the third world today. However, the book only focuses on the issue of a foreign minority being hated by an indigenous majority. It does not focus on the other economic problems of the region like massive corruption, huge ineffective government bureaucracies, and complete lack of infrastructure in these countries, or on the other social problems that appear in these countries like lack of education available to the masses, constant warfare, etc.. Moreover, of the problems the author does discuss, she does not explain how to fix them. Her only solution is that the rich minorities should be less pretentious, and that athletics will somehow mend hatreds. Furthermore, she unfairly criticizes Thomas Friedman in her book and displays the work of Economist Paul Krugman hardly an objective source. Thomas Friedman may be idealistic or quixotic, but at least he offers a solution, though not a great one, to these very complex problems that the author presents. Moreover, Paul Krugman is quoted on how real household income for the middle-class has changed little over the decades in America, and how the top income households received an unjust share of the prosperity during this time period. The problem is that the size of the average household has been decreasing dramatically lately because of the increase incidence of divorce, people having less children, and children moving out earlier from their parents homes. This all translates to having less possible people in a household able to earn income. Moreover, most people move from one economic class to another over the course of their lives. Furthermore, the author exaggerated the ethnic struggles of South America a bit.

Now, on the bright spot I felt that this book was very enlightening. If one is interested in learning about ethnic conflicts confronting third world nations this is the book for you. I was especially intrigued about the author's discussion on Russia. I recommend this book.


Rating:
Summary: Informative and Explanatory
Review: It explains why things are the way they are throughout the world. The author describes how markets and democracy are not meant to be implemented at the same time in certain nations and regions. She approves the implentation of one of the above systems at a time.