Bengfort.com

So I figured out how to combine two of my New Years’ Resolutions; read more, and blog more, thus- a book review blog! I felt for a while like my ideas were stagnating because living in DC doesn’t have as many cultural quirks as living in Italy did (I’m pretty sure we’re all familiar with the American culture) so I decided that my blog needed a theme. Thus, I’m going to review a few of the things I read, and maybe throw in a movie or two if I’m impressed (or entirely unimpressed).

The first book up is World on Fire by Amy Chua.

World on Fire by Amy Chua

In World on Fire, Amy Chua contends that the two main forces of globalization aggressively pursued by Western countries, namely, market liberalization and democratization, contribute to and in some cases bring about serious ethnic conflict and global instability. This is due to the two policies’ simultaneous effect of increasing inequality and subsequently hatred for market-dominant ethnic minorities, while at the same time empowering the poor majority to react, often resulting in violence or severe oppression of the minority. Chua explains it thus, “The global spread of free market democracy has thus been a principal, aggravating cause of ethnic instability and violence through the non-Western world. In country after country outside the West laissez-faire markets have magnified the often astounding wealth and economic prominence of an ‘outsider’ minority, generating great reservoirs of ethnic envy and resentment among the impoverished ‘indigenous’ majority…democratization, by increasing the political voice and power of the ‘indigenous’ majority, has fostered the emergence of demagogues who opportunistically whip up mass hatred against the resented minority. As a result, in its raw, for-export form, the pursuit of free market democracy outside the West has repeatedly led not to widespread peace and prosperity, but to ethnic confiscation, authoritarian backlash, and mass killing.” (187-88) Chua proceeds to describe a series of examples in which a program of market liberalization in combination with democratization, usually backed by the West, has led to either severe ethnic conflict or political backlash. From the Philippines and Yugoslavia to Nazi Germany and even Anti-Americanism, Chua applies her framework to conflicts both past and present.

In a purely informational sense, Chua’s book is an enjoyable, interesting and pleasant read.  After an emotional and attention-grabbing introduction describing the death of a beloved Aunt, purportedly due to the consequences her thesis describes, Chua segues into the deeper context of her argument. Her first two sections come across as a sort of history lesson through a series of descriptions, references and loose figures. Like a good history textbook, Chua begins her chapters with a humorous or enlightening anecdote, followed by some background information, a brief description of the current setting, and finally a reiteration of the issues. The book continues this way both throughout the globe and throughout time, her arguments getting progressively less robust, increasingly more flexible and even extrapolating to places that have only one or two of the three characteristics her thesis describes (market dominant ethnic minorities, economic liberalization, and democratization). In this way, her third section seems like the tagline for an infomercial- “But wait, there’s more!”- as she attempts to reconcile her thesis with intra-city conflicts in the United States, anti-Americanism, Nazism, and the current crisis in the Middle East. What Chua doesn’t realize is that the further she extrapolates and attempts to convince readers of her argument’s global (and national, in the case of the United States) relevance, the further she alienates those who were sold to her argument in the first place.

This argument by itself seems simplistic and logical. It makes sense that in countries where the vast majority of the population live in dire poverty, and those that do hold most of the wealth are of a noticeably different skin color, culture or ethnicity, ethnic conflict would result. It also makes sense that the greater the inequality between these peoples the more conflict and hatred there would be, and if free markets do in fact exacerbate these inequalities it might even be a direct consequence. While it is much less obvious, it also makes sense that a form of government that empowers the angry majority without protecting the rights of the minority can and often does lead to civil conflict or oppressive majoritarian policies. The way Amy Chua frames her book it seems like she is simply trying to describe a phenomenon rather than prove a thesis, much as a history book might say what happened in a particular era and offer several plausible suggestions as to why this might have occurred. The anecdotal and descriptive style of writing leaves no room for alternative interpretations; each example is specifically framed for her argument, and there are no competing explanations or variables that she is including or comparing against. If the point of the book is that she is simply trying to prove that these effects of occur, the lack of scientific methodology severely undermines her claim. A better approach might be to gather a set of recent conflicts or transition governments and see how the variables of market-dominant minorities, the gini coefficient, perceived ethnocentrism, and democratization (including the various levels of democratization, considering that “democracy” is debatable in many of the examples she gives) affect the outcome. This would make her results much more scientifically robust and offer solid proof.

It seems, however, that instead of trying to prove her thesis she is merely trying to describe a phenomenon that is the most likely explanation for several events throughout the world. She transitions easily from example to example, reiterating her point of view and showing how each scenario fits in the context of her argument. Given that her information is accurate, her conclusions seem logical, and aside from a few very interesting history lessons it seems no major ideological breakthroughs are made. Perhaps it is simply the mark of a great writer, but Chua’s observations and conclusions seem obvious. She is not trying to prove a hypothesis as much as she is saying something is true and providing anecdotal examples as supporting evidence. The question then becomes what the point of her writing this is. If it is not to methodologically prove the relationship between free market democracy and ethnic conflict for sheer academic value, then what is it? To raise awareness? To explore possible solutions? To disprove prior theories?

That question is exactly what the reader has in mind after two hundred pages of this message being reinforced. In logical terms, it seems that she spends her entire book defending a premise without drawing a conclusion.  In fact, some of the logical conclusions that could be drawn she rather obviously avoids discussing, even in the most narrow of terms. It seems that in her avoidance of drawing judgments from her work, either because of her reluctance to make broad claims or timidity in saying anything controversial, she discredits or completely diminishes the value of her work. Even one of her most obvious answers, that the United States should stop promoting simultaneous intense market reform and immediate democratization in countries with market-dominant ethnic minorities, she refuses to say directly. Instead, she states, “First, the best economic hope for developing and post-socialist countries lies in some form of market-generated growth. Second, the best political hope for these countries lies in some form of democracy, with constitutional constraints, tailored to local realities. And third, avoiding ethnic oppression and bloodshed must be a constant priority. But if these goals are to be achieved- if global free market democracy is to be peaceably sustainable- then the problem of market-dominant minorities, however unsettling, must be confronted head-on.” (263-264) She then goes on to state feeble policy recommendations that may help remedy these problems, most on the part of the corrupt and often unstable governments that have very limited incentive to do so. By the end it almost feels as if she herself does not believe there is a good solution, and just spent the entire book discussing the problem.

In the end, Amy Chua’s book is a delightfully informative, logically sound (for the most part) and enlightening read. Like many other books, it does well in debunking the neoclassical myth that free market democracy in the purest sense is the answer to all the world’s problems and an invincible catchall policy. This, however, is not a new concept, and in the absence of any further conclusion or salient recommendation Chua’s book fails to be anything but mildly thought-provoking.