Enjoy fast, FREE delivery, exclusive deals and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery
Amazon Prime includes:
Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
- Instant streaming of thousands of movies and TV episodes with Prime Video
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
- Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
Buy new:
$20.24$20.24
FREE delivery: Wednesday, Sep 27 on orders over $25.00 shipped by Amazon.
Ships from: Amazon Sold by: Maxium Store
Buy used: $7.99
Other Sellers on Amazon
+ $3.98 shipping
88% positive over last 12 months
FREE Shipping
100% positive over last 12 months
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Us vs. Them: The Failure of Globalism Hardcover – April 24, 2018
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
Explore your book, then jump right back to where you left off with Page Flip.
View high quality images that let you zoom in to take a closer look.
Enjoy features only possible in digital – start reading right away, carry your library with you, adjust the font, create shareable notes and highlights, and more.
Discover additional details about the events, people, and places in your book, with Wikipedia integration.
Purchase options and add-ons
"A cogent analysis of the concurrent Trump/Brexit phenomena and a dire warning about what lies ahead...a lucid, provocative book." --Kirkus Reviews
Those who championed globalization once promised a world of winners, one in which free trade would lift all the world's boats, and extremes of left and right would give way to universally embraced liberal values. The past few years have shattered this fantasy, as those who've paid the price for globalism's gains have turned to populist and nationalist politicians to express fury at the political, media, and corporate elites they blame for their losses.
The United States elected an anti-immigration, protectionist president who promised to "put America first" and turned a cold eye on alliances and treaties. Across Europe, anti-establishment political parties made gains not seen in decades. The United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union.
And as Ian Bremmer shows in this eye-opening book, populism is still spreading. Globalism creates plenty of both winners and losers, and those who've missed out want to set things right. They've seen their futures made obsolete. They hear new voices and see new faces all about them. They feel their cultures shift. They don't trust what they read. They've begun to understand the world as a battle for the future that pits "us" vs. "them."
Bremmer points to the next wave of global populism, one that hits emerging nations before they have fully emerged. As in Europe and America, citizens want security and prosperity, and they're becoming increasingly frustrated with governments that aren't capable of providing them. To protect themselves, many government will build walls, both digital and physical. For instance...
* In Brazil and other fast-developing countries, civilians riot when higher expectations for better government aren't being met--the downside of their own success in lifting millions from poverty.
* In Mexico, South Africa, Turkey, Indonesia, Egypt and other emerging states, frustration with government is on the rise and political battle lines are being drawn.
* In China, where awareness of inequality is on the rise, the state is building a system to use the data that citizens generate to contain future demand for change
* In India, the tools now used to provide essential services for people who've never had them can one day be used to tighten the ruling party's grip on power.
When human beings feel threatened, we identify the danger and look for allies. We use the enemy, real or imagined, to rally friends to our side. This book is about the ways in which people will define these threats as fights for survival. It's about the walls governments will build to protect insiders from outsiders and the state from its people.
And it's about what we can do about it.
- Print length208 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherPortfolio
- Publication dateApril 24, 2018
- Dimensions5.8 x 0.8 x 8.6 inches
- ISBN-100525533184
- ISBN-13978-0525533184
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Frequently bought together

Similar items that may deliver to you quickly
Editorial Reviews
Review
— António Guterres, United Nations Secretary-General
“The best book yet on the waves Donald Trump rode to power. Ian Bremmer is right that rage and scorn are not plans. He provides good practical ideas for what can be done.”
—Lawrence Summers, professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and former director or the National Economic Council
“Few can beat Ian Bremmer in taking the pulse on the health of nations and the world. Here he dives into the divisions and disputes of the wave of protests and populism that gave the US Donald Trump and Europe Brexit.”
—Carl Bildt, co-chair of European Council on Foreign Relations
“My favorite thinker on geopolitics offers a masterful analysis of why globalism crashed and populism has soared. This book won’t just help you predict the future of nations; it will play a role in shaping that future.”
—Adam Grant, author of Give and Take, Originals, and Option B with Sheryl Sandberg
“A crisp and compelling anatomy of present political ills across many countries. Bremmer’s discussion of global approaches to revising the social contract between government and citizen offers a welcome ray of light.”
—Anne-Marie Slaughter, president & CEO of New America
“Global politics is a jungle today. Thank goodness Ian Bremmer can be your guide.”
—David Miliband, president and CEO of the International Rescue Committee
"Once again, Ian Bremmer provides a striking preview of tomorrow's top stories. A timely warning, but also a source of hope, Us vs. Them is required reading for those worried about our world’s future."
—Nouriel Roubini, author of Crisis Economics; professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business; chairman of Roubini Macro Associates
“Ian Bremmer is provocative, controversial, and always intelligent about the state of our world, which he knows so well!”
—Christine Lagarde, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Winners and Losers
I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul.
-William Ernest Henley
"It's time for a local revolution," the candidate told the roaring crowd. "Countries are no longer nations but markets. Borders are erased . . . Everyone can come to our country, and this has cut our salaries and our social protections. This dilutes our cultural identity." Marine Le Pen's four sentences capture every important element of the anxiety rising across the Western world. The borders are open, and the foreigners are coming. They will steal your job. They will cost you your pension and your health care by bankrupting your system. They will pollute your culture. Some of them are killers. Le Pen fell short in her bid to become France's president in 2017, but her message remains compelling for the twenty-first-century politics of us vs. them.
But this is not a story about Marine Le Pen or Donald J. Trump or any of the other populist powerhouses who have emerged in Europe and the United States in recent years. Spin the camera toward the furious crowd-there's the real story. It's not the messenger that drives this movement. It's the fears, often, if not always, justified, of ordinary people-fears of lost jobs, surging waves of strangers, vanishing national identities, and the incomprehensible public violence associated with terrorism. It's the growing doubt among citizens that government can protect them, provide them with opportunities for a better life, and help them remain masters of their fate.
As of December 2015, just 6 percent of people in the United States, 4 percent in Germany, 4 percent in Britain, and 3 percent in France believe "the world is getting better." The pessimistic majority suspects that those with power, money, and influence care more about their cosmopolitan world than they do about fellow citizens. Many citizens of these countries now believe that globalization works for the favored few but not for them.
They have a point.
Globalization-the cross-border flow of ideas, information, people, money, goods, and services-has resulted in an interconnected world where national leaders have increasingly limited ability to protect the lives and livelihoods of citizens. In the digital age, borders no longer mean what citizens think they mean. In some ways, they barely exist.
Globalism-the belief that the interdependence that created globalization is a good thing-is indeed the ideology of the elite. Political leaders of the wealthy West have been globalism's biggest advocates, building a system that has propelled ideas, information, people, money, goods, and services across borders at a speed and on a scale without precedent in human history.
Sure, more than a billion people have risen from poverty in recent decades, and economies and markets have come a long way from the financial crisis. But along with new opportunities come serious vulnerabilities, and the refusal of the global elite to acknowledge the downsides of the new interdependence confirms the suspicions of those losing their sense of security and standard of living that elites in New York and Paris have more in common with elites in Rome and San Francisco than with their discarded countrymen in Tulsa, Turin, Tuscaloosa, and Toulon. "The globalists gutted the American working class and created a middle class in Asia," former White House strategist Steve Bannon told the Hollywood Reporter a few days after Donald Trump's 2016 election victory. "The issue now is about Americans looking to not get fucked over."
In the United States, the jobs that once lifted generations of Americans into the middle class-and kept them there for life-are vanishing. Crime and drug addiction are rising. While 87 percent of Chinese and 74 percent of Indians told pollsters in 2017 that they believe their country is moving "in the right direction," just 43 percent of Americans said the same.
In Europe, the European Commission and the unelected bureaucrats who enforce its rules have legislated for its twenty-eight member nations without understanding their varied needs. In recent years, they've failed to halt a debt crisis that forced many Europeans to accept lower wages, higher prices, later retirement, less generous pensions, and an uncertain future, all while telling them they must bail out foreign countries that have spent their way into debt. In the migrant crisis, globalist European leaders insisted that all EU members must accept Muslim refugees in numbers determined in Brussels, and barricades and a spike in nationalism were the result (I define "nationalism" as one form of us vs. them intended to rally members of one nation against those of other nations).
Were the wave of populist nationalism sweeping the United States and Europe the only signs of globalism's failure, it would be bad enough. But there's a larger crisis coming. Many of the storms creating turmoil in the U.S. and Europe-particularly technological change in the workplace and broader awareness of income inequality-are now headed across borders and into the developing world, where governments and institutions aren't ready. Developing countries are especially vulnerable, because the institutions that create stability in developing countries are not as sturdy, and social safety nets aren't nearly as strong as in the United States and European Union. They face an even bigger gap between rich and poor, and the reality that new technologies will kill large numbers of the jobs that lifted expectations for a better life will be much harder to manage. In short, just as the financial crisis had a cascading effect through financial markets and real economies around the world, so the sources of anger convulsing Europe and America will send shock waves through dozens of other countries. Some will absorb these shocks. Some of them won't. As poorer people in developing countries become more aware of what they're missing or losing-quality housing, education, jobs, health care, and protection from crime-many will pick up rocks.
It is not rising China, a new Cold War, the future of Europe, or the risk of a global cyberconflict that will define our societies. It's the efforts of the losers not to get "fucked over," and the efforts of the winners to keep from losing power. Not just in the United States and Europe, but in the developing world too, there will be a confrontation within each society between winners and losers.
And winners and losers there will be. It's too late to assuage the anger of people whose needs have been neglected for years, too late to stop the technological advances that will exacerbate the inequality and nativism stirred up by globalism. What remains to be seen is who will win-and who will be the scapegoat. In some countries, us vs. them will manifest as the citizens versus the government. In other countries, the division will be between the rich and the poor. In some cases, disgruntled citizens will blame immigrants for their problems, punishing "them." And in other cases, an ethnic majority will turn on an internal ethnic minority, blaming them for the problems.
"Us vs. them" is a message that will be adopted by both the left and the right. Antiglobalists on the left use "them" to refer to the governing elite, "big corporations," and bankers who enable financial elites to exploit the individual worker or investor. These are the messages we hear from Senator Bernie Sanders and Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras. Antiglobalists on the right use "them" to describe governments that cheat citizens by offering preferential treatment to minorities, immigrants, or any other group that receives explicit protection under the law.
How will governments choose to react? The weakest will fall away, leaving us with more failed states, like Syria and Somalia. Those still hoping to build open societies will adapt to survive, attempting to rewrite social contracts to create new ways to meet the needs of citizens in a changing world. And many governments that have a stronger grip on power will build walls-both actual and virtual-that separate people from one another and government from citizens.
We can no more avoid these choices than the world can avoid climate change, and the time is now to begin preparing for a world of higher tides. This is the coming crisis. This is the conflict that will unravel many societies from within.
How did we get here?
In Europe and the United States, the battle of nationalism vs. globalism has deep historical roots, but recent history has given it a new intensity. First, there was the earthquake. The financial crisis of 2008-2009 drove anti-EU fury in response to bailouts and austerity in Europe and resentment of Wall Street and its political enablers in the United States. In the United States, the right dismissed the Occupy Wall Street movement as a vapid left-wing fringe group without significance. The left waved off the Tea Party movement as a motley assortment of angry, aging racists intent on "making America white again" and well-heeled Republican Party activists disguised as grassroots patriots. Other Americans ignored both sides as if nothing important were shifting in American politics. The migrant crisis and a series of terrorist attacks then boosted a more xenophobic set of politicians and political parties in Europe. A number of EU member states established temporary border controls, and some openly defied EU rules. Britons voted to take back control of their laws and borders in 2016, and Trump was elected president as a battering ram against globalist elites and the media in the United States.
Then the anger seemed to abate, and we experienced an illusion of moderation. Barricades in the Balkans and a deal between the EU and Turkey to sharply slow the flow of migrants into Europe eased the refugee crisis and pressure across the continent for another round of border controls. Anti-Muslim firebrand Geert Wilders finished second in Dutch elections in March 2017. Two months later, pro-EU newcomer Emmanuel Macron overcame the challenge from Le Pen to become France's president, though the broader election story was the sound defeat of traditional parties of the center-right and center-left that had dominated French politics for decades in favor of a candidate who, like Trump, had never before run for office.
The center-left showed renewed strength in Britain, though it relied on large numbers of working-class Brexit voters for its revival. Germany's Angela Merkel, defender of European unity, won a fourth term as chancellor. In the United States, the Trump backlash went into high gear. The new president's approval rating settled into a narrow range between the mid-30s and low 40s, and his legislative agenda stalled. Courts blocked some of his plans, and various scandal investigations kept him distracted, though Democrats found no credible message of their own for U.S. voters.
The next chapter is now being written, and it will not be a better one. That's because globalism contains the seeds of its own destruction: Even as it makes the world better, it breeds economic and cultural insecurity, and when people act out of fear, bad things happen.
Economic insecurity
Globalization creates new economic efficiency by moving production and supply chains to parts of the world where resources-raw materials and workers-are cheapest. In the developing world, the influx of capital from wealthier nations has created the first truly global middle class. In the developed world, this process bolsters the purchasing power of everyday consumers by putting affordable products on store shelves, but it also disrupts lives by killing livelihoods as corporations gain access to workers in poorer countries who will work for lower wages.
Trade has not become as toxic a political issue in Europe as in the United States. In part, that's because the European Union includes so many small countries that depend on trade for economic growth, and exports are a crucial growth engine for Germany, the EU's largest economy and de facto political leader. In fact, its current account surplus, a measure of the flow of goods, services, and investment into and out of a country, topped China's to become the world's largest in 2016.
In addition, social safety net protections in many European countries cushion the blow to workers when they're displaced by trade-related change. In exchange for the higher taxes they pay, Europeans enjoy more generous and longer-lasting jobless benefits than Americans, have broader access to health insurance, and pay lower tuition fees for both first-time and older students. Those who champion trade in the U.S. try to make up for these differences with promises that government will provide those who lose when trade moves jobs overseas with so-called "trade adjustment assistance"-money, retraining, and other forms of support. But these benefits are easier to promise before deals are approved than to deliver after they're signed and politicians no longer need to keep their word.
Beyond trade, globalization boosts technological change by exposing businesses of all kinds to international competition, forcing them to become ever more efficient, which leads to greater investment in game-changing innovations. Advances in automation and artificial intelligence are remaking the workplace for the benefit of efficiency, making the companies that use them more profitable, but workers who lose their jobs and can't be retrained for new ones won't share in the gains. Technological change then disrupts the ways in which globalization creates opportunity and shifts wealth.
As a result, large numbers of U.S. factory jobs have been lost not to Chinese or Mexican factory workers but to robots. A 2015 study conducted by Ball State University found that automation and related factors, not trade, accounted for 88 percent of lost U.S. manufacturing jobs between 2006 and 2013.
Broadening the effect, the introduction into the workplace of artificial intelligence is also reducing the number of-and changing the skill sets needed for-a fast-growing number of service sector jobs. The consulting firm McKinsey & Company has estimated that 73 percent of work in the food service and accommodations industries could be automated in coming years. More than half of jobs in the retail sector could be lost, and two-thirds of jobs in the finance and insurance sectors are likely to disappear once computers can understand speech as well as humans do. What does that mean for the future of work? What does it mean for the middle class? It means that jobs are eliminated, and the middle class continues to shrink. Though technological change may eventually create more jobs than it kills, there's not much reason for confidence that fired workers will get the education and training they need for tomorrow's more technically sophisticated jobs.
In the world's wealthiest countries, particularly the United States, wealth inequality has steadily widened as globalism has advanced. According to a study published by Pew Research in December 2015, "After more than four decades of serving as the nation's economic majority, the American middle class is now matched in number by those in the economic tiers above and below it." In 1970, middle-income households earned 62 percent of aggregate income in the United States. By 2014, their share had fallen to just 43 percent. The median wealth (assets minus debts) of these households fell by 28 percent from 2001 to 2013. Crime and drug addiction have spiked. Nearly 40 percent of U.S. factory jobs have disappeared since 1979. In 2018, U.S. stock markets hit historic highs as U.S. companies drew record profits, but the American middle class is in real trouble.
Product details
- Publisher : Portfolio (April 24, 2018)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 208 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0525533184
- ISBN-13 : 978-0525533184
- Item Weight : 10.4 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.8 x 0.8 x 8.6 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #652,925 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #130 in Income Inequality
- #324 in Nationalism (Books)
- #30,728 in Social Sciences (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
Important information
To report an issue with this product, click here.
About the author

Ian Bremmer is the president and founder of Eurasia Group, the leading global political risk research and consulting firm.
In 1998, Bremmer established Eurasia Group with just $25,000. At present, the company is the leading global political risk research and consulting firm, with offices in New York, Washington, and London, as well as a network of experts and resources in 90 countries. Eurasia Group provides analysis and expertise about how political developments and national security dynamics move markets and shape investment environments across the globe.
Bremmer created Wall Street's first global political risk index (GPRI). He is the founding chairman of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on Geopolitical Risk and is an active public speaker. He has authored several books including the national bestsellers Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World and The End of the Free Market: Who Wins the War Between States and Corporations? Bremmer is a contributor to the Financial Times A-List and Reuters.com. He has written hundreds of articles for publications including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The New York Times, Newsweek, Harvard Business Review, and Foreign Affairs. He appears regularly on CNBC, Fox News Channel, Bloomberg Television, National Public Radio, the BBC, and other networks.
Bremmer earned a PhD in political science from Stanford University in 1994 and was the youngest-ever national fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is a global research professor at New York University and has held faculty positions at Columbia University, the EastWest Institute, and the World Policy Institute. In 2007, Bremmer was named a Young Global Leader of the World Economic Forum. His analysis focuses on global macro political trends and emerging markets, which he defines as "those countries where politics matter at least as much as economics for market outcomes."
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
He comes across as an open-minded economist who seeks to make a case for preserving globalism by honestly weighing its benefits vs. its costs. He does not deny that many big business executives and politicians have underestimated the costs of globalization. Nor does he deny that many people are justifiably angry about their misrepresentations. He nevertheless believes that globalism represents the best path forward for humanity and seeks to show that its benefits outweigh its costs. Whether you’re a Populist or a Globalist, you can be sure that your views will receive a fair hearing.
For me, the most interesting aspects of the book are the inherent contradictions of globalism. Even such an honest and comprehensive analyst as Dr. Bremmer does not resolve them. On the one hand, he says:
=====
Advances in automation and artificial intelligence are remaking the workplace for the benefit of efficiency, making the companies that use them more profitable, but workers who lose their jobs and can’t be retrained for new ones won’t share in the gains. Technological change then disrupts the ways in which globalization creates opportunity and shifts wealth. As a result, large numbers of U.S. factory jobs have been lost not to Chinese or Mexican factory workers but to robots. A 2015 study conducted by Ball State University found that automation and related factors, not trade, accounted for 88 percent of lost U.S. manufacturing jobs between 2006 and 2013.8
=====
Then he says:
=====
Globalization creates new economic efficiency by moving production and supply chains to parts of the world where resources— raw materials and workers— are cheapest…. In the developed world, this process bolsters the purchasing power of everyday consumers by putting affordable products on store shelves, but it also disrupts lives by killing livelihoods as corporations gain access to workers in poorer countries who will work for lower wages.
=====
So, which is it? Are all these millions of jobs being lost because of automation not related to trade, or are they being lost because companies are firing their higher-paid American and European moving the work to the cheapest labor countries?
In my view, it is that companies are moving the work to cheap-labor countries to AVOID having to invest in technologies to keep their American and European workers productive. It’s cheaper to replace 1,000 Americans earning $25 / hour with 1,000 Mexicans and Chinese earning $2 / hour than it is to invest $20,000,000 in making the American workers earning $25 / hour more productive.
Furthermore, it is difficult to produce a product in the USA where the average wage is $25 / hour and sell it in Mexico or China, where the average wage is $2 / hour. Those $2 / hour Mexicans and Chinese don’t earn enough money to afford the product. So what’s an American company going to do? They’re going to fire their American employees, move the work to Mexico and China, and produce it with $2 / hour labor. They’re going to sell part of the production locally, and then import the rest into the USA. They are going to inflate their profit margins on the USA sales by arbitraging the $2 / hour labor cost in Mexico and China with an American price list.
But don’t Americans benefit by getting products cheaper? Not necessarily. Dr. Bremmer points out that Americans would rather have jobs that allow them to afford SOME products, even if they are relatively expensive, than to be unemployed and unable to afford any products, even if they are relative cheap. Nor, is there really any indication that foreign-made products are cheaper. We’ve been told that “If Iphones were made in the USA they’d cost $700 and no American would buy them.” Iphones ARE made in China, and they DO cost $700, and Americans still buy them. The winner is Apple, which pockets the difference between cheap Chinese labor costs and Americans’ ability to pay $700 for an Iphone. I am happy with Apple products and own the stock, so I am not picking on Apple. Just saying that there is no reason why it can’t make Iphones in the USA, and put Americans to work instead of Chinese.
And then Bremmer addresses the question of immigration:
=====
…“We can see that Trump’s biggest enthusiasts within the party are Republicans who hold the most anti-immigration and anti-Muslim views, demonstrate the most racial resentment, and are most likely to view Social Security and Medicare as important.”
=====
But why do we need copious immigration if it is true that technology is destroying so many existing jobs? Why bring more people into the country to fill jobs that don’t exist?
My view is that our borders are intentionally left open to illegal immigration because: A) Big business wants them here to beat down wages, and B) Liberals want them in here to dilute the legacy, conservative-voting population and create more Liberal voters. And, let me say that I am a business owner who is married into an all-immigrant Hispanic family. My wife, a naturalized U.S. citizen voted for Mitt Romney in 2012 and Trump in 2016. I voted for Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016. Dr. Bremmer describes the motivations of white folks like me, with industrial traditions in the Midwest, who switched from Obama to Trump.
Dr. Bremmer leaves many questions unanswered. His view is that unrestricted free trade with all countries is good, because….free trade with all countries is good; open borders to allow copious legal / illegal immigration into a country is good, because….copious immigration is good.” These are tautologies, of course, that are taken as matters of faith, and not necessarily of evidence.
He also covers the need to remediate the ill effects of globalization, but admits that “these benefits are easier to promise before deals are approved than to deliver after they’re signed and politicians no longer need to keep their word.”
My conception of Globalism is that it is an organization of big business / big government crony capitalists, supported by liberals in the media and academia, who seek to supplant national democracies with unelected supra-national bureaucracies unaccountable to the people of any nation.
“You don’t like our shipping your jobs overseas. Well, that’s too bad. The World Trade Organization says there’s nothing we can do about it.”
“You don’t like our opening our borders to hordes of illegal foreign immigration. Well, too bad, the World Court says we have to allow it.”
The objectives of big business crony capitalists are to replace the high-wage labor in the developed countries with cheap foreign workers. The objectives of Liberal politicians are to replace the legacy populations of each developed countries with Third World people who are prone to being manipulated to socialist agendas.
If that’s your view, you will enjoy this book. If your view aligns with Dr. Bremmer’s that globalism must be maintained with all its warts, you will enjoy his view. My opinion about globalization has not changed after reading the book, but I am in the process of considering Dr. Bremmer’s points. My thinking may be matured as I reflect on his views, or perhaps it will not be changed. But I WILL reflect on Dr. Bremmer’s views, as I reread portions of the book.
This is the latest in a growing list of books that seeks to understand why the we/they divide exists without, to its credit, falling into the trap of using the data to simply fan the fires of partisan division. Bremmer has a political agenda (we all do), and he’s no fan of Trump, the person. He does, however, go out of his way to note, “Donald Trump didn’t create us vs. them. Us vs. them created Donald Trump, and those who dismiss his supporters are damaging the United States.” Whether you agree with that or not, he is one of a handful of analysts willing to try and rise above the personal vilification that defines so much of our current political debate.
The author reviews the “we/they” division around the world and his analysis of current events in places like Nigeria and Venezuela is revealing and informative. I must admit, however, that for a time I found the analysis to be just a bit repetitive and a little superficial. There are lots of facts and figures but not a lot of insight into the why behind the what.
I do believe, however, that Bremmer essentially closes the “why” loop in the last section of the book when he takes up the obvious question of a way forward. In short he believes that we must do no less than redefine the social contract between the government and the governed.
And it is here that he once again opens his thinking in a way that few other authors have. All too often any discussion about the social contract devolves into a largely PC debate about freedom of the press, representative democracy, and the legal protection of marginalized people. We talk about authoritarianism and fascism, but what most citizens want, in the end, is a government that is fair, trustworthy, and competent, treats them with respect, and, most importantly, has their collective interests at heart.
And that, Bremmer points out, is a social contract we can find common ground on. We are never going to agree on every aspect of what a good government should or should not do. If we can agree on the framework of a social contract that acknowledges the inequities created by globalism, the challenges presented by the mass migration of people, the need for lifelong education in a technologically advancing world (without ignoring the continued importance of the traditional liberal arts), and the global desire for personal security, we can make a start.
My only disappointment with the book is that he doesn’t really take on the issue of the growing power of the corpocracy. No segment of society has benefited more from the asymmetry of globalism than the corporate and financial elite. Adjusting the social contract without, at the same time, revisiting the economic contract between workers, employers, and communities, will amount to nothing.
Bremmer does, however, introduce the universal wage, which is not a new idea and will ultimately have to precede any chance of addressing the we/they divide. Globalism and technology have essentially commercialized every aspect of what it means to live in the modern world. We have to take the mere fight for survival (and the security of health care) off the table if we are to have any hope of restoring economic progress and human dignity.
The author does provide several ideas for doing that although he stops short of a specific agenda and he is a little less optimistic than I’d prefer, perhaps naively, to be. “Things have to become much worse, particularly for the winners, before they can become better for everyone else. This is the ultimate failure of globalism.”
If, however, we can all approach the issues with the even-handedness and objectivity that Ian Bremmer does here, we can surely accelerate the process.
Top reviews from other countries
As mentioned above, this book is only an introduction to the aforementioned themes; A good starting point for novice readers in economics and politics, but will not satisfy the seasoned reader. As such, given the short space Bremmer dedicates to such an enormous topic (only 169 pages), he is left able to only provide broad statistical information and summarisations of said themes. Bremmer's earlier work, being far more focused (as in Superpower [2015]) on a particular theme, is able to delve into the subject far more effectively. This, in my opinion, is the biggest let down to the book.
Overall, a decent read in need of further exploration.








