Rating: 
Summary: Much more than McWorld-ization - A political perspective
Review: This is a very well written book that brings out a political perspective on Globalization, Free Trade and its impact/consequences. Unlike most books which run into conspiracy theories of Capitalism running amok and corporations driving covert agendas, this book instead takes a look at the political scenarios existing in various key countries & the complex interplay between the political history of the state & the impact of capitalism & hence the very role of the State. After dissecting Britain & the US, the author goes on to give very well researched examples from Russia and East Asian States - he covers the political history of each of these places & clearly outlines how Capitalism morphs into a regional variant under different political systems and the consequences of this morphing. The author powerfully argues how Capitalism & Globalization are not delinked from the role of the State ... and debunks the myth of a single universal culture. The book ends on a dark note where it raises serious questions about the presence & effectiveness of a Global governing body to handle the inadequacies of capitalism, driven by technological globalization. Its not an easy book to read, and requires a good knowledge of political history (US/UK/Russia/Singapore/China/Japan) & basic economics; but once finished, it is a definitive eye opener from a political perspective, on how the situation today has developed and what the future holds out.
Rating: 
Summary: False Impressions.
Review: Written by a Britisher, America is lambasted in this little treatise but, in a way, we are noted as a leader of the 'new civilization' with all its faults. It is villified in odd ways.
America persists in identifying modernity throughout the world in relation to itself. The prophet of today's America is not Thomas Jefferson or James Madison. Still less Edmund Burke, though we do like to quote him on occasion. In his long ramblings about the Cold War and the Soviet collapse, he calls Newt Gingrich a radical from The Right. Ronald Reagan, when U. S. President, was not, he says, any kind of liberal and could not foresee the economic counter-revolution which occurred. During his presidency,much of American industry was kept afloat by subsidies, condoning economic inequality. So, what else is new? He calls it a 'deregulated' economy.
He quotes Henry Kissinger about our national interest, calling it military-led and 'protectionistic.' His understanding of 'the American Creed' and the founding of the Constitution is an 'embodiment of universal truths whose future is assured by history.' The cover of this hedonistic British slap at USA has the "all-seeing eye" on a dollar bill (US currency) used in the film, NATIONAL TREASURE. That's all they have in common.
He dwells on free market and 'laissez-faire,' saying that "liberalism is dominant in the U.S. only in the sense that genuine conservative philosophy no longer exists." I disagree. Then, he goes on to say that "to be perceived as a liberal is a political liability."
This British John Gray called former U.S. President Bill Clinton a political shaman, causing an underclass which has no hope and an overclass who denies civic obligations. "Remolding American society to suit the imperatives of free market has involved the use of corporate power and federal government to bring about levels of economic inequality unknown since the 1920s."
He accuses America as an arrogant 'utopian' place where its faith in being a unique country, 'the model for a universal civilization' which all societies are fated to emulate. According to him, "America persists in identifying modernity throughout the world in relation to itself."
He points out the tragedy of family breakdown and the lack of extended family support. He blames it on deregulated labor markets, divorce, and the incarceration rates where he compared Britian's "fewer than one in a thousand" to America's "one in a hundred" being behind bars. His thesis that over a million people would be seeking work if American penal policies resembled those of any other western country. My question is "where are the jobs?" Should we create another Australia and empty the prisons?
The high rate of crime and incarceration in the U. S. are on a par with large numbers of lawyers and the huge levels of litigation. America's incarceration rates run parallel with its rates of violent crime, which this author blames on the U.S. abundant gun culture. Throughout human history, wars have arisen from territorial conflicts and economic interests.
Again, where are the jobs? Many U.S. factories continue to use other countries to manufacture deficient products by using cheap labor elsewhere, causing unemployment to skyrocket. Huge conglomerates like Wal-Mart (with their cheap merchandise) force smaller chains to fold or merge, and so they profit by using other places at the expense of the willing workers of America.
John Gray is a professor of European thought at the London School of Economics. He is considered one of Britain's leading public intellectuals and an important conservative thinker. His far-fetched opinions that 'the movement toward free markets, goods and ideas is not a naturally occurring process but rather a political project that rests on American power" is just passing the buck.
After all his 'put downs' no way would I believe that he feels America is a 'flagship of the new civilization.' We can learn by studying the failures of the old civilizations, and not place blame.
| 
