From Wealth to Power | 
|  | | |
 This book is also available, brand-new, from 3rd-party marketplace sellers at Amazon.com, from $20.91. |
The HTML code below can be pasted onto your web-site, your MySpace page, or blog - or any number of similar places - to create a link to this page: If, instead of a text link, you'd like to create a link to this page which will display the book cover, if it's available, then the code below will do exactly that:
Check for the same book at these other US book sites:
• [ Abebooks ] • [ Alibris ] • [ Barnes & Noble ] • [ Half.com ] • [ Powells ] … or check UK bookstores
| Editorial Review / Publisher's Information:
Product Description
What turns rich nations into great powers? How do wealthy countries begin extending their influence abroad? These questions are vital to understanding one of the most important sources of instability in international politics: the emergence of a new power. In From Wealth to Power, Fareed Zakaria seeks to answer these questions by examining the most puzzling case of a rising power in modern history--that of the United States. If rich nations routinely become great powers, Zakaria asks, then how do we explain the strange inactivity of the United States in the late nineteenth century? By 1885, the U.S. was the richest country in the world. And yet, by all military, political, and diplomatic measures, it was a minor power. To explain this discrepancy, Zakaria considers a wide variety of cases between 1865 and 1908 when the U.S. considered expanding its influence in such diverse places as Canada, the Dominican Republic, and Iceland. Consistent with the realist theory of international relations, he argues that the President and his administration tried to increase the country's political influence abroad when they saw an increase in the nation's relative economic power. But they frequently had to curtail their plans for expansion, he shows, because they lacked a strong central government that could harness that economic power for the purposes of foreign policy. America was an unusual power--a strong nation with a weak state. It was not until late in the century, when power shifted from states to the federal government and from the legislative to the executive branch, that leaders in Washington could mobilize the nation's resources for international influence. Zakaria's exploration of this tension between national power and state structure will change how we view the emergence of new powers and deepen our understanding of America's exceptional history.
Amazon.com Review
Fareed Zakaria, the managing editor of Foreign Affairs, tries to understand why the United States decided in 1898 that it was time to start acting like a world power. His answer lies in the transference of the government's main power from Congress, which was concerned primarily with the needs of its individual constituencies, to a presidency occupied by dynamic leaders such as Benjamin Harrison and Theodore Roosevelt, who once declared that "when the interests of the American people demanded that a certain act should be done, and I had the power to do it, I did it unless it was specifically prohibited by law." The lessons Zakaria learns from the example of America have useful applications to contemporary political science; one might consider, for example, the ways in which a politically unified Germany or a economically powerful Japan differs from the 19th-century America that was politically and economically strong; the presence of both qualities would appear to be required for a nation to flex its muscles on the international scene. Although it never quite completely answers the "why," From Wealth to Power does extremely well on the "how" and the even more important "so?"
| Other Items You May Enjoy:
Browse Books From These Related Subjects:
Customer Reviews:
• When Do Nations Become Assertive? 31 December, 2004
In From Wealth to Power Fareed Zakaria presents two competing theories of foreign policy, applies his own modifications to one theory, and compares them with the actual evolution of American foreign policy from 1865 to 1908. The following three paragraphs summarize his thesis.
1. A theory of foreign policy is a method of understanding past and predicting future motives, intentions or goals of a nation's interactions with others, regardless of the outcomes. This is in contrast with a theory of international politics which seeks to explain and predict outcomes. A primary goal of a theory of foreign policy is to understand and predict when a nation is likely to adopt an expansive foreign policy by increasing its military forces, asserting itself diplomatically, or attempting to annex or conquer territory.
2. The two traditional theories of foreign policy are classical realism and defensive realism. Classical realism holds that a nation will adopt an expansive foreign policy when it has the resources to do so. Defensive realism takes the position that nations develop expansive foreign policies in reaction to perceived threats. Zakaria presents his own modification of classical realism, which he calls state-centric realism. In this variation, he posits that not only must a nation have the resources to implement an expansive foreign policy, but an adequate portion of the nation's resources must be available to the state, the national government, the makers and implementers of foreign policy.
3. Zakaria justifies replacing classical realism with state-centric realism based on (1) logical argument: national resources the state cannot utilize cannot support a larger army and (2) the example of the United States immediately after the Civil War when the US became wealthy as a nation but maintained a minimal national government. He then examines events in US diplomatic history to determine whether they are more consistent with state centric realism or defensive realism. His conclusion is that state centric realism is far more consistent with observed behavior than defensive realism.
In the process of reaching this conclusion, Zakaria touches on several interesting themes in American history in from 1865 to 1908:
1. The federal government's reconstruction of the South following the Civil War was largely a failure. When it was ended as a result of the 1876 election, the old power elite and structures, minus slavery, returned. The real changes in the South came about over the next century as a result of the rise of the national economy and national market starting in the 1880s. As a closed regional market, the market inefficiencies of regionalism and racial discrimination in the South were hidden by the lack of competition. As interregional trade grew, the South had to make better use of all its resources to compete effectively. In the process, it became part of a more united nation.
2. The rise of the national economy and market also transformed the federal government by inserting it into the management of commerce and the economy in the 1880s and 1890s. Key events were the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887 and the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890.
3. The Civil Service Reform Act of 1883 transformed the federal bureaucracy from a small group of appointees based on political patronage (the practice since Andrew Jackson instituted the "spoils system") to a larger cadre of career bureaucrats.
4. Slowly and step-by-step, Presidents Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, and Cleveland clawed back the authority of the presidency as an independent branch of the federal government. Under Presidents Andrew Johnson and Grant, much presidential authority had shifted to the Senate, which expanded its advice and consent role to include the selection of cabinet secretaries and the negotiation of treaties, and to the House, which attached conditions to appropriation bills that made funding contingent on the President adopting specified policies.
These themes increased the power of the federal government by uniting the nation, increasing its role in the economy, and creating a professional bureaucracy. They also provided the conditions necessary (and sufficient, as events have shown) for the US to adopt a more expansive foreign policy under Zakaria's theory of state-centric realism.
Zakaria also notes that the rise of the power of the state in the US, in response to domestic economic development, was notably different that in Europe where state power usually rose in direct response to foreign military threats.
From Wealth to Power is a valuable contribution to the literature of foreign policy and international politics. It makes a particularly good companion volume to Paul Kennedy's The Rise and Fall of Great Powers which focuses primarily on the historical outcomes of foreign policies. (Zakaria studied under Kennedy as an undergraduate at Yale.)
It was fascinating to see a political scientist / historian carefully and consciously apply the scientific method in his work: Zakaria proposes competing hypotheses then presents and analyzes data with the goal of showing that one of the hypotheses is inconsistent with the data and, therefore, false. Beyond the thesis of his book, he has thereby made a major contribution to making political science a real science.
- Reviewed by customer ID: A2YX62863M0HO7
• Fresh Outlook On Realism 15 January, 2007
Zakaria offers a new angle for analysis of foreign policy through eyeing "State Centered Realsim". For those who are tired of reading defensive realists, the book offers easy and interesting reading through checking American foreign policy in the 19th century, post civil war period.
- Reviewed by customer ID: A2CX7JGYQEK831
• The Growth Of The American State, And Of American Power 30 August, 2004
"What turns rich nations into great powers," asks Fareed Zakaria in his opening line; he attempts to answer that question by examining American foreign policy from 1865 to 1908 observing that the period from 1865 to 1889 featured few expansive ventures, though that from 1890 to 1908 saw plenty expansions.
Mr. Zakaria, now the editor of Newsweek, wrote "From Wealth to Power" for his doctoral dissertation. Hence the tone of the work is largely academic, with plenty of references to academic debates and literature reviews. All the same, the text is accessible and hardly ever esoteric; the academic density is likely to add to rather than subtract from the enjoyment of reading the book.
What of the thesis itself? Mr. Zakaria approaches his period of examination from two alternative angles, both of which are used in the international relations literature to explain why nations expand: realism and defensive realism. The former places emphasis on why and when states choose to expand by focusing on an innate drive to power, tempered by practicability and opportunity; the latter maintains that states expand when they are faced with threats.
Mr. Zakaria, it turns out, is content with neither of the two propositions. What best explains this period of American foreign policy, he contends, is a variation of realism: state-centered realism (SCR). The important qualification of SCR is that it accounts for power conversion-the ability of the state apparatus to convert national resources into stated government objectives. This approach, Mr. Zakaria continues, applies to the American case because although the American nation was strong from 1865 to 1908, only when the state and its bureaucracy were streamlined was America able to pursue an ambitious foreign policy (from 1890 onward).
The thesis is elegant, the argument tightly argued, and the prose clear and concise. Occasionally, Mr. Zakaria attacks defensive realism by refuting arguments that some defensive realists would rarely make; but this is rare and cannot distract from the convincingness of the his overall thesis: that it was the rise of the American state that helped America convert its vast national wealth into international influence. Anyone seeking to understand that period of American foreign policy, or the overall theoretical question, can hardly do better than read "From Wealth to Power."
- Reviewed by customer ID: A391X2D7CMPY8S
• Nicely Done 24 January, 2000
Being a casual observer and student of affairs international - be it political,economic or foreign policy matters of nations- I must say that I enjoyed the book immensely. In my opinion it is well written, to the point and precise even though I didn't care too much for the 'theories' elicited in the book on the subject, everything else was fascinating and noteworthy.
- Reviewed by customer ID: A33XVK26SD8AJM
• Good Realist Perspective But... 07 April, 2002
Zakaria's insights seem relevant to the on-going debates on offensive/defensive realism. But he has very misguided views on defensive realism. "State-centered realism" is nothing new to the realists' general perspective on state-centered systemic determinism which even most of the defensive realists regard as essential. By combining US foreign policy history with his proclaimed theory - isn't he in fact making a case for defensive realism?
- Reviewed by customer ID: A10JWF2XS3I7X8
|
