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

Rating:
Summary: Important Observations and Conclusions
Review: "World on Fire" is a penetrating look at the "exported" bundle of free-market capitalism and democracy to third world countries in the post-war era amidst socialism's defeat along with the USSR. The book analyzes these new independant states systems, their circumstances and the successes or failures of those states, with a penchant towards each country's internal ethnic struggles.

Chua has a wide array of personable stories to demonstrate her arguments. At first these seems exhausting and sometimes irrelevant, but they provide a strong foundation for her foreign policy arguments and observations later on in the book.

The book's primary success is the analysis of free-market democracy on various countries: how they were implemented, and why they were successful or not. She uncovers the interesting "tension" of this prescribed system in that free-market capitalism favors the minority of the population, and democracy favors the majority of the population. She explains why this system succeeded in the west, Japan, and Brazil, and then inspects its failures in Africa, Latin America, and Southeastern Asia. Lastly, she applies her analysis to the Israeli-Arab conflict with some convincing arguments, and even makes some global observations of the United States and its role in the Middle East. All of these observations are logical, and some of the conclusions are important.

The book has a weak thesis. Most of the book focuses on how free-market democracy inflames ethnic hatred in ethnic-partisan countries. It is easy to assume (like the a previous reviewer) that Chua is attributing these racial faults in the democratic foundation to the system itself, and by proxy, the United States. This is simply untrue. Chua is charitable and fair with her assessment of the USA's role in foreign policy. Granted, "World on Fire" does not make the observation that free-market democracy is to blame but admits 19th century colonialism and failing economic infrastructure is the culprit; this observation is belated and should be an early focus of the book, rather the later one it is. The ethnic conflict is a product of this broader issue, and therefore the objective analysis of the political/economic package should not receive a backseat to the ethnic issues. The hardly acknowledged truth (as it would undermine a great portion of the book's thesis) is that most--if not all--of these structural collapses would not happen if the country had stabilized its racial, tribal, and economic foundations prior to implementation. Chua also neglects to follow the reasons why the west has been so careless in their prescriptions of free-market democracy. My hypothesis is that the governments are primarily concerned with foreign investment oppurtunities rather than a humanitarian familiarization of the countries cultural adaption to the system. But this is simply speculation on my part, and the topic is a sorely missed topic in the book.

Regardless, Chua provides a comprehendable and powerful description of political globalization today. Despite qualms with the organization of the book and emphasis on particular theses, it is a recommended read.

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: 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: 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: interesting to say the least
Review: if you have any sort of interest dealing with world economics and it influences on culture and ethnic hatred, this book is for you..... gives great examples, and the author does not shy away from lending her personal experiences. overall, well-written and keeps u interested through-out the whole book....the only downfall is some information tends to be repetitive....but still, its thought provoking

Rating:
Summary: Unintended Consequences and the Tyranny of the Majority
Review: In World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability, Amy Chua takes the bold step by re-inventing bringing ethnicity to the center of the argument. Chua's point of commencement is that in several developing nations a small "market dominant" ethnic minority holds economic dominance in a nation. Oftentimes, the same economic disparity is glaring. Based on this visible disparity, such "market dominant" ethnic minorities, Chua argues, attract resentment. Where the visibility is really glaring and the conditions are right, the resentment can result in very violent outcomes. At times, to borrow from Chua, the disparity has grows more acute with western-inspired globalization. Chua posits, and I wholeheartedly agree, that UNREFLECTIVE foisting of free market capitalism and liberal democracy by the west can cause UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES (293). What begins to come to presence is that in the vast portion of the developing world, economic power is concentrated in what Chua calls "market dominant" ethnic minorities often with ties to the government - a government at can at any time conjure up the demons of ethno nationalist resentment. Chua suggests that in an effort to quell this resentment a set of relief valve mechanism can and perhaps should be considered. One of the more compelling arguments Chua makes is that this chasm that has formed between the elite outsider group and the local indigenous group forms a deep fissure that only results in political instability. As a digression, Chua's range is so broad that reading this book one's mind is boggled at the breadth and depth of coverage. Back to the issue of political instability, as an example of this breadth and depth, she examines cases from reaction to Chinese in Southeast Asia to the mass killing of Tutsis by the Hutus in Rwanda and the resentment felt and subsequent disaster resulting from the same by Serbs towards Croats in the Balkans.

In the west, the hypothesis is that: democracy leads to a more open-minded and non-judgmental society, but in cases where the social order is distinct by an intense ethnic divide, the opposite may be more reflective of reality on the ground. Chua writes: "Societies with a market-dominant minority face a specially formidable problem: class conflict and ethnic conflict overlap in a particularly explosive way. The rich are not just rich, but members of a hated outsider ethnic group. In societies with no market-dominant minority, the division between the few who are rich and the many who are poorer is unlikely to be ethnicized - but it remains, at least potentially, a source of conflict. Wherever democracy and capitalism are joined together, mass political movements directed against the rich become a possibility, fueled by resentments and demagogic manipulation similar to (but usually less murderous than) that which arises in the presence o market-dominant minorities" (190-191). Which lends itself to the possibility that the issue is not ethnic/racial but class and if the change is too sudden then the resentment that has been waiting to express itself is suddenly given vent and results in "unintended consequences" (293) oftentimes, as is evidenced by Chua's vast array of case studies - often violently.

Towards the end of the book, Chua shifts from an almost limited country based examination to a more regional and global discussion when she takes her thesis of "market dominant" ethnic groups to the cases of Israel and the United States. If Israel is seen as a regional "market dominant" ethnic minority in the middle-east and the United States is seen as "market dominant" ethnic minority country in the world - than all the forces meted out to those who situate themselves in that space consequently meet predictably with the same resentments meted out to the countries already examined. Is it naïve of Chua to think that the same sorts of relief valve mechanism that she suggest to countries in Southeast Asia and Africa - and which have been proven to work in such places as Canada - to Israel and the United States? Is it naive to ask for a relief of the resentment meted out against Israel and United States by such productions as "spreading the wealth" and holding a "greater stake" which might work on a more limited country level? Would not Israel and the US be subject to a sort of 'double-bind' where security in the Middle East and the world are so pegged to the perception of economic and military dominance of the same? Who knows? Perhaps that is the very thing that Chua is warning us about. Not to suggest that Chua is trying to find easy solutions to difficult problems but she is making a clear, sustained, and courageous attempt to break things down to their component parts and add complexity. Nonetheless, the strength of the argument relating to the ethnic component and the racialization of the same that Chua brings, and the way she works it, is compelling and should not be ignored.

Miguel Llora

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.

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.

Rating:
Summary: A sobering view of capitalism & democracy
Review: Prof Amy Chua's 'World on Fire' is an alarming and depressing read. She lists the intra-ethnic barbarisms that have arisen over the past century or so, from the Holocaust to Rwanda to Serbia, taking in Indonesia's anti-Chinese riots and the Los Angeles anti-Korean riots, and highlighting the common features they share: an aggrieved majority, stirred up to hatred by demogagues against a market-dominant minority. In many countries, some of the minority (Jews in Russia, Chinese in SE Asia, Asians in Kenya, Lebanese in Sierra Leone) have disproportionately benefited from crony capitalism, supporting corrupt political leaders who enable them to become rich while the majority of the populace remains in poverty - until there is a violent explosion. Prof Chua points out that the US' enthusiasm for encouraging unfettered 19th century capitalism in these evolving and unstable countries with no social safety-nets while simultaneously promoting democracy is a recipe for instability. (Her thesis helps to explain the current argument in Iraq between the majority Shia who seek immediate direct elections, and the market-dominant Iraqi exiles and Kurds, who prefer a more gradual transition to raw democracy.)

More alarmingly, she encourages us to see the USA as the market-dominant minority in the world, infinitely richer than most of its citizens, and increasingly seen by many as the reason for their poverty and humiliation. Her prescription for the market-dominent majority in unstable nations is that they should make conspicuous contributions to the well-being of the majority in order to stave-off violence. Considering the current US administration's tendency to unilateralism, protectionism, and its low level of international humanitarian aid, advice to apply the same prescription to the US may be timely.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting examples, unnecessary and poorly written thesis
Review: The problem with Chua's book is that the thesis can't really be tied to anything. The fact that whites are an upper class in South Africa isn't the result of globalization; it's the result of a lasting legacy of colonialism and apartheid. Her examples are good, but they don't really fit her thesis. The idea that free markets somehow lead to ethnic instability in any way which is more significant than other factors do isn't valid, and certainly can't be proven across borders. As in every situation where ethnic hatred against a powerful minority exists, economics is an issue.

Chua also seems to be bandwagoning on the phenomnenon of "globalization." It's not necessarily globalization that economically empowers these market-dominant minorities.

I would cautiously recommend Chua's book, but not if you're interested in globalization. It provides a fine outline for an understanding of some lesser-known ethnic problems, especially in the developing world. (Her chapters on Jews in Russia and Israel in the Middle East are absolutely ridiculous, as far as I'm concerned. As someone with a lot of experience in the Middle East, I'm never going to be convinced that Israeli Jews' wealth is the main reason for the conflict.) If you don't read it, you're not really missing out. If you do read it, take it with a grain of salt, and don't be afraid to laugh. Some of the examples are really a stretch, and the thesis comes together poorly.