http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b0/Grand_Fleet_sails.jpg
Fareed begins this chapter by looking back at Great Britain. Near the end of the 19th century, the British Empire controlled approximately a quarter of all the land and associated population. They created the first truly global market and thanks to their massive navy, they were able to hold that control for centuries. The English language became the dominant language spoken in the world, as well as the English values. At the same time, the Spanish also tried to export there ideas and values, however Britain's ideas proved more universal. To the rest of the world Great Britain seemed invincible and unassailable until history repeated itself and their peak finally declined.
Fareed raised the question, will the same story happen to America? He explains that no analogy is exact, but Great Britain in its heyday is the closest any nation in the modern age has come to the American position today. America shows many echoes and symptoms of Britain's dilemmas. The one slight difference may be that as Britain tried to maintain its superpower status, the largest challenge was economics rather than politics. In the United States, it is the other way around.
Fareed raised the question, will the same story happen to America? He explains that no analogy is exact, but Great Britain in its heyday is the closest any nation in the modern age has come to the American position today. America shows many echoes and symptoms of Britain's dilemmas. The one slight difference may be that as Britain tried to maintain its superpower status, the largest challenge was economics rather than politics. In the United States, it is the other way around.
Boers in action (1881).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Boers_1881.gif
Some believe that the British war against the Boers in South Africa was the start of their decline. To gain better access to the South African gold, under the excuse of protection the English speaking people, the British started a war in 1899. The Boers however launched a preemptive strike to protect their land and then had the support of most white people in South Africa. The British had a disadvantage, because the Boers knew the land well and adopted successful guerilla tactics. The British in return resorted to brutal tactics, such as burning down villages and moving the people into concentration camps. The British military was ten times larger in terms of men, and they eventually won the war but at the high cost. They suffered heavy casualties and spent nearly half a million pounds and lost many of their supporters. Many friendly nations opposed their actions and left Britain "friendless."
Fast forward to today, where we see another superpower with a strong military, and losing its influence slowly. The American war has become unpopular even at home, and many countries, once U.S. allies, are now turning their back and condemning the U.S. actions. Just like the British war against the Boers, American expected the war in Iraq would be a quick military victory. The war has lasted for over seven years, thousands of American and Iraqi casualties, cost the American tax payers billions of dollars, nothing significant has been achieved and Iraq is more chaotic that before the war started. America's outcome in Iraq looks bleak and it's been met with heavy international opposition.
March opposing the Iraq occupation, 15 Sep 2007, Washington, DC.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1002/1393440869_96e38b6291.jpg
Fast forward to today, where we see another superpower with a strong military, and losing its influence slowly. The American war has become unpopular even at home, and many countries, once U.S. allies, are now turning their back and condemning the U.S. actions. Just like the British war against the Boers, American expected the war in Iraq would be a quick military victory. The war has lasted for over seven years, thousands of American and Iraqi casualties, cost the American tax payers billions of dollars, nothing significant has been achieved and Iraq is more chaotic that before the war started. America's outcome in Iraq looks bleak and it's been met with heavy international opposition.
March opposing the Iraq occupation, 15 Sep 2007, Washington, DC.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1002/1393440869_96e38b6291.jpg
Britain has been a rich country for centuries, but it only became an economic superpower a few decades ago. London has become the most influential city during the Great War, and the British acquired an empire before the onset of nationalism. Its sea power was unrivaled for over a century. As a result of the empire, the British remained dominant in banking, insurance, shipping, and investments. In reality though the British economy was sliding. Many scholars have debated the causes of Britain's decline. Some focused on geopolitics, and some others on economic factors like low investments in new plants, poor labor relations, and loss of marketing skills.
Fareed argues that perhaps none of these failings were crucial. Paul Kennedy points out that Britain's dominance in the 19th century could have been a product of a series of highly unusual circumstances. Fareed tells the story about when the British statesman Leo Amery saw this clearly in 1905. "How can these little islands hold their own in the long run against such great and rich empires as the United States and Germany are rapidly becoming?" he asked. "How can we with forty million people compete with states nearly double our size?" It is a question that many Americans are now asking about the United States in the face of China's ascent."
After World War I, Britain gained a lot of new land. However, unlike before this was not profitable anymore and had become a drain on the Royal treasury. World War I had left Britain tens of billions of dollars in debt and the interest was growing. World War II was the last nail on the British economy's coffin. They still remained remarkably influential, but their economy was suffering and they were near bankruptcy. The United States loaned money to Britain, but in return they took many of the British bases around the world.
Sir Winston Churchill inspecting air raid damage in Battersea in September 1940
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1397/955841778_5635cb136d.jpg
London east end 1943 American WACs (Women's Army Corps)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2434/3600439148_15e7b72608.jpg
Fareed argues that perhaps none of these failings were crucial. Paul Kennedy points out that Britain's dominance in the 19th century could have been a product of a series of highly unusual circumstances. Fareed tells the story about when the British statesman Leo Amery saw this clearly in 1905. "How can these little islands hold their own in the long run against such great and rich empires as the United States and Germany are rapidly becoming?" he asked. "How can we with forty million people compete with states nearly double our size?" It is a question that many Americans are now asking about the United States in the face of China's ascent."
After World War I, Britain gained a lot of new land. However, unlike before this was not profitable anymore and had become a drain on the Royal treasury. World War I had left Britain tens of billions of dollars in debt and the interest was growing. World War II was the last nail on the British economy's coffin. They still remained remarkably influential, but their economy was suffering and they were near bankruptcy. The United States loaned money to Britain, but in return they took many of the British bases around the world.
Sir Winston Churchill inspecting air raid damage in Battersea in September 1940
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1397/955841778_5635cb136d.jpg
London east end 1943 American WACs (Women's Army Corps)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2434/3600439148_15e7b72608.jpg
When talking about the British decline relative to the American decline, Fareed point out one major difference. The key concept he is pointing out is that the central feature of Britain's decline,"irreversible economic deterioration", does not really apply to the United States today. Britain's economic status lasted only a few decades, whereas America's has lasted for over a century. It has been the world's largest economy since the late 1800 and still remains to this day. The difference can also be seen in their military. The British rules the seas but never the land, and the Americans, in contrast, dominate at every level. Their military power is not the cause of their strength, but a consequence of it.
Back to the original argument, America's advantages are rapidly eroding. Americans are losing interest in sciences and China and India are graduating far more engineers than the United States (however another argument is that a large fraction of those graduates move to North America for work anyways, and this also does not address the issue of the quality of the foreign education). Higher education has become America's best industry. Eight of the top ten universities are in the United States. Even if we looked at the top fifty universities, most of them are in the United States, and America has a competitive advantage in that field. They spend much more than any country in R&D and hence produce a much better environment as well as opportunities for the university students in America. I mention "university student" above, so the readers will not confuse that with the American school system. American school system is a mess and ironically the students do very poorly in math and science. The do things differently in American schools and do not force the students to memorize and do vigorous exams. On another hand one might even argue that while in other countries they teach you to memorize and take exams, the American way teaches you to think.
Harvard University, a very prestigious American University
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/179/398103862_3e0263dabe.jpg
Back to the original argument, America's advantages are rapidly eroding. Americans are losing interest in sciences and China and India are graduating far more engineers than the United States (however another argument is that a large fraction of those graduates move to North America for work anyways, and this also does not address the issue of the quality of the foreign education). Higher education has become America's best industry. Eight of the top ten universities are in the United States. Even if we looked at the top fifty universities, most of them are in the United States, and America has a competitive advantage in that field. They spend much more than any country in R&D and hence produce a much better environment as well as opportunities for the university students in America. I mention "university student" above, so the readers will not confuse that with the American school system. American school system is a mess and ironically the students do very poorly in math and science. The do things differently in American schools and do not force the students to memorize and do vigorous exams. On another hand one might even argue that while in other countries they teach you to memorize and take exams, the American way teaches you to think.
Harvard University, a very prestigious American University
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/179/398103862_3e0263dabe.jpg
Fareed adds one that another advantage America has to Europe is its population. America is vibrant with a growing population, where Europe stays "virtually stagnant." In the U.S. children are outnumbering the elders, but in Europe it is the opposite, which means more workers for the United States. The Europeans have almost stopped replacing themselves and their population is on the decline and the only way is to take in more immigrants. However, unlike North America, European do not seem as welcoming to strangers. There are far more opportunities available to an immigrant to North America that there are for immigrants to Europe, especially Muslim immigrants. The same story also applies to many Asian countries, where they simply do not produce enough children to replace their work force. Fareed estimates that they will face a major problem in the next half century due to their aging work force. The effects of an aging population are quite considerable. There is the pension problem - fewer workers paying into the program- , fewer workers also mean fewer scientific breakthroughs. The last issue is as workers age they seem to spend and not save, which can really lower the investment rate in a country. Immigration has mostly offset this problem in the U.S., foreign students account for half of the scientific researcher in the United States, and are enrolled in more PHD programs than American students. Immigration has given America an advantage to constantly revitalize itself by people who can work long hours and are looking for a better life. America has been able to tap this energy and diversity, and assimilate the newcomers, people who are hungry for success and are willing to work hard to achieve that for themselves and their children, I believe that is America's secret weapon.
Ellis Island, NY - My mum's uncle walked through those gates in 1904
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/ellis-island/ellis-island-entry.jpg
Ellis Island, NY - My mum's uncle walked through those gates in 1904
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/ellis-island/ellis-island-entry.jpg
The author, once again, mentions that the United States as well as it has done in the past, but could be worse. It works as it always has, except that other nations are doing better than they did before. Americans rarely ever refer to global standards, mostly because the global standard has been the American standard for at least a few generations now. Even in business they never bother find out how other nations do business mainly because they were the ones teaching the world how to conduct business and be capitalistic. Now, however, everyone is playing America's game, and they are in it to win. America used to have the lowest corporate tax rates in the world, but now they have the second highest. They did not increase the rates; others watched American example and lowered theirs. Even in regulating the markets, America used to be more flexible than any other country, and it is no longer the case. Regulators in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East are working hard to make their system more attractive and simpler to investors and manufacturers all over the world. One advantage the foreign nations gain is that they are familiar with the American system. That allows them to penetrate their own local markets, as well as the North American (English speaking markets), and America by contrast lacks that competitive advantage and ability to move into other people's world.
One example of the American disadvantage is their auto industry. For decades most American cars were made in Michigan, however it is being replaced by Ontario. The single reason for that transfer is health care costs. In the U.S. a car manufacturer has to pay over $6000 in health care cost, whereas in Canada because of the government system, the cost is just over $800 per worker. This situation brings with it a significant disadvantage to hiring American workers.
To solve this problem they used to go abroad and bring with them the much needed capital for a country, and used their abundant labor. But when they go abroad now, they discover that natives already have money and know-how and there is not really a third world anymore. So one might ask, what can they bring to those countries now? Fareed's answer is that the United States has been and can be the world's most important, continuing source of new ideas, big and small, economic and political. But to do that, they need to make some significant changes. The American economy and society, are capable of responding to the economic pressures and competition they face by others. They can adjust and preserve, as they have had before. The real test is their politics. Can Washington adapt to a world in which others have moved up? Can Washington truly embrace a world with diversity of voices and viewpoints? and most importantly, can it thrive in a world in cannot dominate?
The following link is a CNN video on you tube that shows a brief history of mass production of vehicle in America by Henry Ford, and how is has change to the shape it is in right now;
One example of the American disadvantage is their auto industry. For decades most American cars were made in Michigan, however it is being replaced by Ontario. The single reason for that transfer is health care costs. In the U.S. a car manufacturer has to pay over $6000 in health care cost, whereas in Canada because of the government system, the cost is just over $800 per worker. This situation brings with it a significant disadvantage to hiring American workers.
To solve this problem they used to go abroad and bring with them the much needed capital for a country, and used their abundant labor. But when they go abroad now, they discover that natives already have money and know-how and there is not really a third world anymore. So one might ask, what can they bring to those countries now? Fareed's answer is that the United States has been and can be the world's most important, continuing source of new ideas, big and small, economic and political. But to do that, they need to make some significant changes. The American economy and society, are capable of responding to the economic pressures and competition they face by others. They can adjust and preserve, as they have had before. The real test is their politics. Can Washington adapt to a world in which others have moved up? Can Washington truly embrace a world with diversity of voices and viewpoints? and most importantly, can it thrive in a world in cannot dominate?
The following link is a CNN video on you tube that shows a brief history of mass production of vehicle in America by Henry Ford, and how is has change to the shape it is in right now;
Picture was taken at the plant in Brampton, Ontario Canada
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3107/2588620993_bb1917e027.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3107/2588620993_bb1917e027.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment