According to the US industrialist and world-class bigot Henry Ford, “History is bunk.” Edward Luce, who cites Ford’s assertion, tells the reader that Oliver Wendell Holmes was closer to the mark when he said: “An ounce of history is worth a pound of logic.” But what emerges from Luce’s carefully balanced and often startlingly evocative analysis and reportage is the denial of history by the current crop of American leaders. Every one of the gallery of grotesques that have tried to challenge US President Barack Obama for the presidency interprets the US slide from preeminence as the result of Democrat policies, while Obama himself dismisses all talk of decline. The assumption underlying practically all US discussion is that any slippage in the country’s global standing is the result of misguided policies that can be reversed by an act of will.
It is true that there have been serious errors in policy. Luce, formerly the Financial Times’ south Asia bureau chief based in New Delhi and now the paper’s chief Washington correspondent, spells out these exercises in self-damage in painful and illuminating detail. He shows how the US has choked off the flow of talented scientists and entrepreneurs by making immigration more difficult, while major companies have been encouraged to move offshore so that IBM and General Electric now employ more people overseas than they do in the US. He examines the factors that have de-skilled much of the US workforce, not least failures in public education, and tells some poignant stories of the economic squeeze that is laying waste to the lives of so many. Rightly, he sees the collapse of social mobility as a turning point. What hope have the former middle classes if their children are also trapped in debt and dead-end jobs?
Surprisingly, Luce says little about the foreign policy disasters that have speeded the US’ fall from grace. Though the Iraq war achieved little aside from increasing the influence of Iran, occupying the country has been ruinously expensive. Trillions of US dollars have also been spent in Afghanistan, the principal result being to entrench the position of the Taliban. Yet despite these debacles there is fierce resistance to Obama’s relatively modest proposals for spending cuts in the military-industrial complex. A similar paralysis exists in many areas of domestic policy. America’s debt burden would be less crippling if the US did not have the least cost-effective system of medical care of any advanced country. But as Obama has demonstrated, radical reform is politically impossible. Again, it is mainly the US’ absurdly punitive drug laws that have led to a higher proportion of its citizens being incarcerated than anywhere else in the world. Here too, though, the likelihood of reform must be close to zero.
Those who argue that the US’ decline has been the result of policies that can be changed pass over the chronic dysfunction of the American political system. “Given America’s separation of powers,” Luce writes, “the Tea Party needs only a majority of the majority of one half of one branch of government to have a pretty good shot at ensuring nothing significant happens in Washington ... in light of such a low bar, and given its organizational prowess, it is hard to see a neat end to the Tea Party’s ‘tyranny of the minority’ in the near future.” As Luce implies, deadlock in Washington is a by-product of America’s sacrosanct constitution. One might wonder how a system of government that was framed in pre-industrial times could possibly be suitable at the start of the 21st century. But while the Constitution is often ignored in practice, there is no prospect of the structures of government being reformed. As the Tea Party has shown, a mythic story of the US’ constitutional origins still has powerful resonance.
Another obstacle is the political power of money. In an entertaining aside, Luce quotes the dictum of Mark Hanna, a celebrated 19th-century political operator: “There are two things that are important in politics. The first is money, and I can’t remember what the second one is.” Luce believes that “it is within America’s power to reverse its increasingly plutocratic internal character.” Yet it is hard to see how policy-making can be freed from the pervasive influence of the financial sector. The same banks whose reckless and predatory activities created the financial crisis have shaped the legislation that is supposed to prevent similar crises in future. Luce quotes Nicholas Brady, treasury secretary under former president George H. W. Bush, complaining about the lack of proper consultation on the legislation. Observing that the chief architect of reform, current US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, “just talks to the investment bank chiefs,” Brady concluded that the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act “is largely their bill.”
If the capture of US policy-making by financial institutions effectively rules out any serious attempt to tackle the country’s economic problems for the foreseeable future, a still greater obstacle is the incapacity of elites to face the realities of America’s situation in the world. Luce’s book is a call to thinking, but US thinking is stuck in a vice of myth and denial. The country’s politicians, economists and journalists have celebrated globalization as a process in which US capitalism is replicated throughout the world. Contrary to what many assume, China is unlikely to replace the US as the world’s leading power. Instead, there may well be no global hegemon for the foreseeable future. But as new varieties of capitalism come on to the scene, the US’ relative economic position is bound to decline. Even if Washington could somehow be reformed and American policy-making reset, this would not change.
Luce finishes by noting that “America’s biggest challenges are not unique,” and of course he is right. The country’s difficulties are not fundamentally different from those all developed countries face in responding to the global shift of economic power. But by the same token, what may prove to be the US’ greatest weakness is the adamant insistence that it can defy the normal course of history. Pundits who insist that American decline is not a fact but a choice are closing their minds to the only real issue, which is how the US will adjust to a descent from primacy that cannot be stopped. At present the auguries are not good.
A few weeks ago I found myself at a Family Mart talking with the morning shift worker there, who has become my coffee guy. Both of us were in a funk over the “unseasonable” warm weather, a state of mind known as “solastalgia” — distress produced by environmental change. In fact, the weather was not that out of the ordinary in boiling Central Taiwan, and likely cooler than the temperatures we will experience in the near-future. According to the Taiwan Adaptation Platform, between 1957 and 2006, summer lengthened by 27.8 days, while winter shrunk by 29.7 days. Winter is not
Taiwan’s post-World War II architecture, “practical, cheap and temporary,” not to mention “rather forgettable.” This was a characterization recently given by Taiwan-based historian John Ross on his Formosa Files podcast. Yet the 1960s and 1970s were, in fact, the period of Taiwan’s foundational building boom, which, to a great extent, defined the look of Taiwan’s cities, determining the way denizens live today. During this period, functionalist concrete blocks and Chinese nostalgia gave way to new interpretations of modernism, large planned communities and high-rise skyscrapers. It is currently the subject of a new exhibition at the Taipei Fine Arts Museum, Modern
March 25 to March 31 A 56-year-old Wu Li Yu-ke (吳李玉哥) was straightening out her artist son’s piles of drawings when she inadvertently flipped one over, revealing the blank backside of the paper. Absent-mindedly, she picked up a pencil and recalled how she used to sketch embroidery designs for her clothing business. Without clients and budget or labor constraints to worry about, Wu Li drew freely whatever image came to her mind. With much more free time now that her son had found a job, she found herself missing her home village in China, where she
In recent years, Slovakia has been seen as a highly democratic and Western-oriented Central European country. This image was reinforced by the election of the country’s first female president in 2019, efforts to provide extensive assistance to Ukraine and the strengthening of relations with Taiwan, all of which strengthened Slovakia’s position within the European Union. However, the latest developments in the country suggest that the situation is changing rapidly. As such, the presidential elections to be held on March 23 will be an indicator of whether Slovakia remains in the Western sphere of influence or moves eastward, notably towards Russia and