Customer Reviews

After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order (European Perspectives: A Series in Social Thought and Cultural Criticism)

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

For Americans used to reading narcissitic volumes from either the right or the left, this book is fantastic. I don't pretend to know the economic trajectories of Russia, or the politcal contours of Japan, or other such wide-ranging topics; so I can't say whether his interpretation of the global picture is correct or not.

But what I can say is that many of his characterizations of America ring true. He calls the US the "arsonist-fireman" of the globe, stirring up trouble in little countries just so we (well, Bechtel and Halliburton really, but close enough) can then ride in on the white horse and fix everything that we broke. His description of our foreign policy since the end of the Cold War as "drunken-sailor diplomacy" (a kind of clumsy, non-unified staggering about the planet) is a refreshing antidote to the usual elite conspiracy theories of the American left.

But maybe most importantly, and probably what offends many of the reviewers here, is that Todd doesn't take America all that seriously. He certainly DOES acknowledge our military might (save the Army) and relative economic security at the moment, inegalitarian as it may be. But he feels that the general policy direction that American leaders have taken (both Democrats and Republicans) will render the United States increasingly superfluous. And I would have to agree. The end of the Cold War provided an opportunity to dismantle most of our military and turn our focus back inwards, towards self-sufficiency and ecological sustainability. But instead, we have preserved our Cold War global military reach (over 700 acknowledged military bases in over 130 countries), fudged around both openly and covertly in countries everywhere, morphed the evil communism threat into an evil network of satanic terrorists, and allowed a regal corporate plutocracy to emerge at home.

As American citizens, it's our job to throw out the bozos, both Republicans and Democrats, who are leading this country into irrelevance. Rising per capita income and American corporate competitiveness doesn't help the US if all the rewards are reaped by the elite, leaving the rabble with obese bodies, swollen prisons, 4-hour daily commutes, and negative net worth (all realities right now for many Americans).

Be brave! Buy this book, read it, and pass it on. It's a new perspective worth considering. Besides, all those Germans and Frenchmen can't be wrong.

I have feared the great dependence of the U.S. on purchases of our Treasury Bills by the very nations that support our overindulgences as a nation. It has been obvious that they must loan money to the U.S. in the form of treasury bills in order for us to purchase their goods. My fear has revolved around what happens when these nations stop buying the treasuries or even worse when they start selling them. While the author does not address the treasury problem directly, he develops a thesis that supports my fears. He spends a lot of time developing a thesis of the world becoming fed up with U.S. militarism being used to protect us from our economic weaknesses. As a result, he foresees an eventual Europe, Russia, and Japan axis of world power. Russia is part of the axis as an oil and gas producer, but most important of all because it will be the nuclear deterrent against the U.S. He acknowledges China's growing strength, but does not address how they will fit into the puzzle. While the author's conclusions may appear somewhat farfetched, one cannot come away with a feeling after reading this book that something of the order of what he proposes could come true.

The fact that this book was a bestseller in France and Germany is reason enough for Americans to read this book.

Similarly to Todd himself, I found myself over the years the sole defender of America to most of my friends throughout Europe and Australasia. There was a time when I hoped that my country, the UK, would join with the US and abandon any moves towards Europe. However, as Todd points out, much has changed. America the once semi-democratic nation that defended the 'free-world' has now become a problem itself. As some of the American reviewers here demonstrate admirably, the mass of American people are woefully ignorant of most things outside their sphere of day to day life. Flying to the UK just a few weeks ago, the Canadian man sitting next to me explained how being able to receive both US and Canadian news channels he could see how little information the American people were actually getting from their networks. America is rapidly turning into a neo-fascist monolith full of frightened, ignorant and corpulent individuals.

What is clearly needed is a complete restructuring of the American media so that at least the people will be able to make informed decisions based on fact and not propaganda. If America wishes to be the 'hyperpower' that many in the current administration already believe it to be - it must earn this right from the rest of the world because, contrary to popular neo-conservative belief, the rest of the world will not allow a militant America to stormtroop across the globe at whim.

Todd's book admirably provides us with the alternative scenario if America is unable to change. It's well worth reading - particularly if you are an American because your great nation has produced so many wonderful individuals in the past who have helped to make the world a much better place, and it would be a veritable tragedy to throw all this away with abandon. The heart and soul of America appears to be under intense internal threat from a fusion of the Straussian ideologues in the White House, and the right-wing fundamentalist Christians of the Dominionism heresy. It's imperative that mainstream Americans grab their country back with urgency so that we can welcome them with open arms back into the international arena. Hopefully Todd's book will help to urge them on.

An advantage of a late review is that you can read the newspapers. As I read about the Ukraine election, UK and France questions about the Euro and the EU constitution I feel this book is more relevant than ever.

As a book it is readable, even for a non-intellectual like myself. However there is the feeling that one is listening in on a conversation. The book is, in a sense, a reply. It is by reading the reviews on here that I have begun to appreciate what M. Todd might be replying to. The leadership role that was occupied by the US has been frittered away. Americans who think their lifestlye is unassailable and who do not understand why it might be questioned will understand this book after the gas is dearer and after their pensions start to fall.

This book is worth reading to understand that history is on the move even though the nightly news might want you to think otherwise. This book is about raising questions, not about preaching a gospel. Perhaps this is why some reviewers are made uncomfortable by it. Many of the questions raised have been continued to be raised, even in the mass media. It is a relevent book, and because the questions and attitudes will continue to be voiced by influential people around the world it is a worthwhile and relevant read.

According to the hype, Emmanuel Todd is a leftist anti-American writer predicting the doom of the United States, with readers responding yea or nay according to their politics. In point of fact, Todd has a reputation as an Americanist and explicitly prefers Francis Fukuyama to Noam Chomsky. He also expresses great admiration for America in the Cold War. As with Fukuyama, Todd argues that nations follow a common course in modernization. As a nation modernizes and it's population grows more literate, population first grows rapidly and then levels off as birth rates drop (he notes that this is happening already in Iran.) There is a period of political turmoil but the long term trend is toward democracy. The exact form depends on culture - Todd expects Islamic fundamentalism to give way to democracy but not along American lines. Contrary to other reviews, he does not attribute American decline to dropping birth rates and in fact notes that the United States (like France and Great Britain) has a relatively high birth rate for a developed nation. He attributes this to a more libertarian culture.
There are clear implications for the war on terror. If Islamic fundamentalism will burn out in a generation or two, the logical policy response is Cold War style deterrence and containment until the Mideast reforms itself. Naturally Todd does not approve of Bush's strategy.
Todd argues there is an American Empire in the sense that the United States draws a kind of tribute from the world shown in our current account deficit. Because the United States is the center of the current world system, it draws in investors looking for a safe haven and thus allows us to live beyond our means. He sees this system as doomed for three major reasons - the United States no longer has a competitive economy, the United States can't win ground wars and American political culture is becoming more incompatible with an empire. Thus the United States engages in small, show wars to create an appearance of strength where it is lacking.
Todd's proof of American economic weakness is the trade deficit - Americans don't make things the world wants to buy. A steady flow of foreign currency - $600 billion a year as of 2005 - is necessary to maintain current standards of living. The high American GDP is an illusion based on services that are hard to assign concrete values to. His prime example is Enron - valued by the market at over $100 billion, starring for years on business covers but it all turned out to be smoke and mirrors. Sooner or later reality will catch up and the United States will have to live within it's means. I'm not sure how valid his criticisms of the American economy are. However, it does seem odd for a supposedly competitive economy to need to borrow so much and the example of Enron is undeniable.
The discussion of military weakness is more controversial. Todd has respect for American air and sea power but sees American ground forces as weak, now and in the past. He was writing in 2003 and used the failure of Operation Anaconda to capture Bin Laden as an example of weakness. Now he might use the American occupation of Iraq as another example. Certainly the United States seems unwilling or unable to provide sufficient manpower to occupy Iraq. The Bush administration has used stop loss orders, call ups of the individual ready reserve, reduced recruitment standards and even transfer of Marine guards from Annapolis to draw every last drop from the current volunteer force but it doesn't seem enough to bring Iraq under control.
The political culture argument seems weakest. Todd distinguishes between differentialist political cultures which are highly ethnocentric and exclude outside members and universalist political cultures which are willing to accept anyone who accepts the political culture. France and Russia are examples of universalists, Germany and Japan are differentialists and Great Britain and the United States are somewhere in between. Differentialist political cultures are ill suited for empires because they have no place save at the bottom for subject people. He sees the United States as moving in a differentialist direction using racial intermarriage as a proof. The problem is that he confuses the current government with the country as a whole. The largely southern conservatives who currently run the government have a highly differentialist culture but that is not true of the country as a whole. My own casual view of both popular culture and Alexandria, VA suggests Todd is also wrong on racial intermarriage.
If you're looking for a different perspective on the United States and the world, give Todd a chance, He called the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1970s - he can't be taken lightly.

This book has been a best seller in Europe and is only recently available in English. I heard about it from a politically astute friend in Germany.

Emmanuel Todd, who is French, offers a fascinating perspective on world political trends. The United States is the focus of the book but the book also deals with several other countries and regions.

One of Todd's theories is that the United States can't succeed as an empire because it doesn't have the productivity to do so. Other developed areas of the world that have been dependent on the United States and have supported the U.S. with investment dollars will soon discover that they no longer need us.

Todd believes the theocracies we see in many Muslim nations are only a temporary phenomenon that will be replaced by democracy in this century. He uses information on literacy and birth rates to argue that this conversion is already underway.

Todd has some interesting ideas about the relationship between family structures and political systems. He suggests that democracy will take a number of forms, depending on the culture of the country.

Todd's credentials include a book he wrote in 1976 predicting the fall of the Soviet empire.

Even is his ideas are wrong, they are interesting and provocative.

While many reviewers of Todd's book seem to fault what they call his failure to point out long-term demographic changes in the EU zone, they themselves fail to see that Todd is writing about what will occur within the next 10-20 years. On page 189, Todd admits "birth rates are now low everywhere [in Europe]. This weakness causes its own specific problems, but it does have the advantage of rendering this part of the world more tranquil almost automatically." This demographic stabilization, Todd believes, is what allows for continued European integration in what Robert Kagan has characterized as Kantian Europe. It is the prerequisite for this Kantian transformation. However, Todd worries, "If the low birth rates persist for too long, Europe will experience a true demographic crisis that could jeopardize the continent's propsertity."

America, however, is also going through major demographic changes of its own. It has solved the problem of its low birth rates through the influx of immigrants from Latin America. This is discussed in Samuel Huntingon's latest release, a summary of which is availible in an article published in the March / April 2004 edition of Foreign Policy Magazine. He claims this is changing the basic characteristics of America. In Europe, an influx of Muslim immigrants may halt the long-term population decline; however, it would alter the basic characteristics of Europe as well. By citing European demographic problems, without mentioning that similiar problems are occuring in America, is a cheap shot at Todd. Todd's numbers are correct during the time he is attempting to describe.

In the end, the two major faults in Todd are his reliance upon a democratic Russia for the success of any attempts by the EU at balancing the US and the almost total absence of China. Todd admits that Russia may not remain democratic, and as time goes by Russia does appear to be reverting to some sort of non-democratic rule. Under Putin, Russia has continued to clamp down on the media - restricting political coverage. The oligarchs are coming under increasing attack, and any attempts to enter politics by them have been stopped - the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky this fall being an example (although charges of fraud may be legitimate, this is a selective prosecution with political motives). At the same time, the war in Chechnya has continued and Putin refuses to negotiate with the Chechens. This has required actions anti-thetical to democracy - from media censorship to military rule in Chechnya itself. As to China, with a GDP of almost $6 trillion it is the country that is most like to balance against the US in the future. It is true that the EU is capable of doing so today, and if it is able to get its act togther do so long in the future against both the US and China, the absence of China is just mind boggling. With China becoming the new power in the Pacific, it is likely the US and Japan will continue to grow closer to one another - not move apart. Recent reforms allowing for Japanese remilitarization - being pushed by the US - are centered around an integration into the US imperial system - not to balance or compete against it.

Todd's book, however, is good on the whole. The European Union is at a crossroads today - Todd is advising it to choose an independent path against the economically dependent US. This is, I believe as does Todd, in the best interest of Europe and the world. A system with the US and China balancing against one another will not be beneficial as both have no respect for international norms. At the same time, the US economic system is weakening and the country is being overtaken by a group of oligarchs. (John Kerry's networth, with his wife, is in excess of $700 million. For George W. Bush, see Kevin Phillips' American Dynasty.) As the US continues to over-extend itself, conflict becomes more likely. The European Union, if unified, can serve to stabilize and re-affirm international norms, the ones established but now being violated by the US. As a revisionist power, the US poses the largest threat to international stability today as it continues its decline from economic dominance.

It is very refreshing to get an insightful and very readable, if incomplete, European perspective on the geo-politics of the United States. A French historian and demographer, Todd focuses on fundamentals from economics and demographics to predict the fall of the US empire. Balancing this forecast of doom is an optimistic prediction that the world as a whole is moving toward an era of peace, stability, and democracy. The major weakness of his argument is that he shows no nderstanding of the importance of environmental and resource constraints, such as the looming effects of Peak Oil (inflationary shocks as world oil production heads into permanent decline).

Todd says that the demographic transition from high birthrates to low birthrates often entails violence and revolution, as virulent fundamentalist movements arise in reaction to radical cultural shifts. But when things have settled down, an era of peace, stability, and increasing prosperity ensues. Many countries in Africa and two key US allies, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, have yet to make this transition. So Todd says, look for trouble there, but be patient - don't inflame the situation by invading - eventually the societies themselves will sort things out.

However Todd does not grasp the key role that oil plays in the US economy - to him it is just one of many imports that make the US dependent on the rest of the world, and therefore far weaker than most people realize. He's talking about the huge trade imbalance, outsourcing of industry, and vulnerability of the dollar. Therefore US aggression in the Middle East appears to him as stupid "micro-theater"- hapless actions taken to mask fundamental US weakness, to convince others, especially Japan and Europe, that the US must still be supported as the protector of the world economy.

Most interesting is Todd's suggestion that Russia could make a comeback as guardian of the world against a predatory United States. He sees the US becoming less democratic, more oligarchic, like Britain and France, and therefore more capable of militarism. But Russia, no longer a military threat, has a stronger economic base (oil and natural gas) and has always had strong universalist tendencies rooted in its family structure. The broad appeal of communist ideology was due to this universalism. By contrast the US has a weak economic base, having de-industrialized and needing to import key resources. The US has also retreated to a more tribal "us vs. them" attitude toward uncooperative ethnic groups and cultures, especially Arabs, exemplified by Bush's "axis of evil".

Todd sees Russia and Europe coming closer together at the expense of US-European ties. Russia has the oil and gas to export, while Europe has manufacturing. The US has little left of either. Strangely, Russia is still seen as a long term competitor or opponent of the US, though many in the US, younger or more practical, might not see it this way. Even the Bush administration, full of old Cold Warriors, is pushing for a much bigger global market in natural gas, where Russia has by far the biggest reserves.

Todd makes much of the importance of family structure for the political development of countries. For example, when all brothers are treated equally there are greater egalitarian or universalist tendencies. When the oldest son inherits the farm or business, authoritarian structures are more easily accepted. Russia is cited as an illustration of the former, with Germany an example of the latter. Actual history suggests that family structure is just one of many explanatory variables. Other than education, Todd does not do so well at identifying and integrating these manifold factors.

Todd says that Europe is of two minds in its attitude toward the US. The business elites are strongly attracted to the US-led free trade regime which has benefited elites almost everywhere. But ordinary people don't want to see their social safety nets shredded or their culture homogenized a la McDonald's. Here Todd is clearly on the mark.

Todd sees the US as incapable of true empire for several reasons. One is its economic dependency and fragility, financed by "tribute" in the form of IOUs, such as Treasury Bonds, bought largely by Japan and Europe. There is no direct military control or taxation. The other is that, unlike the Romans, the US has not given US citizenship to the denizens of the territories within its sphere of influence.

However, as Chalmers Johnson suggests, we should look at modern empire from new perspectives. The rest of the world is forced to prop up the US economy, otherwise their own economies will be hard hit. And the US empire project is directed at granting the benefits of US citizenship throughout the world, not as political citizens but as consumers, not as equal citizens, but with most of the wealth going to elites, for whom the rest labor at low cost. It's a kind of universal citizenship for the wealthy, with just enough "bread and circuses" for the masses to keep them from revolting, also enough education and entrepreneurial opportunity that they will be good employees and suppliers, and enough social opportunity that the most talented and hardworking can make it into the elites rather than leading revolts. In practice, of course, what has often materialized, under the lure of short-term profit, has been the stench of exploitation.

A vast array of US military bases around the globe serves to head off radical challenges to the development of this empire. Besides this pro-active militarism, there has been a long history of covert actions, and failing all that, direct military intervention. All this has the feel of empire, but it does not mean that Todd isn't on to something. As the rest of the world has developed economically and politically, the effectiveness of the resistance to the more direct forms of imperial control has increased markedly.

This is particularly evident in Latin America, where several populist leaders have not only been elected but have survived to lead successful revolts against the US-led free trade regime. Spectacular global protests have emboldened the resistance. With successful establishment of the Euro, Todd is not the only one who sees a future revolt against the hegemony of the dollar. Dumping the dollar, he says, would mean a 20% decline in the US standard of living, possibly taking the form of a stock market crash, a bursting of the housing bubble, and general inflation and unemployment.

What Todd has missed is the most likely trigger that will bring down the empire - the decade of Peak Oil, already announced at US gas pumps. This will also lead to radical shifts in the balance of power and wealth, plus overall decline of the global economy, hardly a formula for peace and stability. Demographics can open one eye but blind the other.

I have to say that I can side neither with the reviewer who says this shows Americans the end of the world, nor the reviewer who describes at length Todd's overreliance on trade balance statistics. Emmanuel Todd is a french intellectual (I've read he's in the know with Chirac). He describes the global rise and fall of empires (Rome, Spain, Britain, US, etc)in a kaleidoscopic mix of economics, politics, history (including ancient history), cross-cultural anthropology, and demography. For me, this is a fascinating excursion whether the author is "right" or "wrong" - "agree, disagree" - on one page or another. Where else will you find a discussion of the Japanese GDP alongside a discourse on medieval inheritanced laws in Europe versus the Middle East? C'mon! Have a sense of humor. It's certainly interesting to have a European view in entertaining detail, rather than just hearing a slogan like "France doesn't support Bush, we hate France". Although written just before the current Iraq war, it provides much insight into French viewpoints of US imperialism (or at the least, excursionism). A major theme is that a "declining" US will pick small countries to bombard (Granada, Iraq) - rather like the constant distant wars Orwell wrote into the politics of "1984".

A book about the "American Empire" that is refreshingly different from any other I've read or read about. M. Todd is a Frenchman educated at Cambridge University, with an American grandfather, a background and training that gives him an unusual perspective, at least for an American reader such as myself. More important, he published a book in 1976 that predicted the collapse of the Soviet System, a prediction that demands he be taken seriously. He relies heavily on demographic and economic statistics in his analysis, and to some extent differences in family structure in different countries. For example, he notes that while white infant mortality in the US decreased from 1997 to 1999, black infant mortality increased. Even though the changes were small, he regards them as confirming the failure of racial integration in the US. Is he right? I can't pretend to say. But it is a perspective I've never seen before, one with some plausibility. This is just one example; he ranges over many issues. Some of his assertions seem outrageous, such as his claim that the US is militarily weak, but he backs them up with facts and argument. The book sparkles with original ideas. Whether he is right or wrong in his claims, his facts are worth knowing and his arguments are worth thinking about.

****

Addendum in 2007: M. Todd's book looks better and better. As of 2007, the U.S. has been unable to win in Afghanistan, after almost six years of war, and unable to win in Iraq, after more than four years of war. M. Todd's claim that the U.S. is militarily weak no longer looks outrageous. A strong military wins wars. Maybe M. Todd will turn out to be prescient in other respects, as he was about the death of the Soviet Union.

A few other people predicted the Soviet collapse, but conventional opinion ignored them, regarding them as a near-lunatic fringe. The earliest mainstream prediction I know of that predicted the collapse was Brzezinski's Grand Failure, published in 1989. M. Todd correctly foresaw the future when general opinion was overwhelmingly against him. That's not easy, and it makes me think he might be right again.