Walter Russell Mead

Glad I picked Walter Russell Mead's book over Chomsky – not because I detest Chomsky, but was looking for a more unbiased viewpoint on a highly sensitive matter.

This book surely is a definitive analysis of the intricate ties between the American nation, Israel, and the Jewish people, transcending mere historical accounts. Mead delves into the complexities of international relations, psychodynamics between Eleanor Roosevelt, Truman, Ben Gurion, and of course Stalin, just to name a few; and the multifaceted nature of America's relationship with Israel.

The book puts beyond doubt that US support is driven by pragmatic geopolitical considerations rather than the influence of any single group, which most conspiracy theorists would like to believe. You also get a sense of appreciation for American foreign policy, the Kissinger era in the 80s/90s, and how paramount the US-NATO alliance is for the survival of the world in general. Long and exhaustive, nevertheless an informative read.… (mais)

Bought as a bookshop remainder in 2010, I recently picked this book up as my next read. However, a glance through the covernotes and blurb changed my mind.
I got the impression that the book trumpets the great deeds of the west (= USA, with some others) in establishing a fine world order.
Well, much has chaged in the 15 years since the book was written. The "new world order" is looking a little frayed and tatty, and any projections based on a 2007 world view now lookk highly dubious.
Pass.… (mais)

It's been 14 years since Walter Russell Mead's God and Gold was published. That's one global financial crisis, one global pandemic, one Brexit, two Presidents (and starting the first term of a third), and a US insurrection ago. Does this book still have anything to tell us about "Britain, America, and the making of the Modern World"? Well, perhaps.

Despite that subtitle, this book is not a history of how Britain and America made the modern world order. It's not a history book at all, which the author acknowledges in his introduction. It's more of a philosophical dissertation. Mead takes as a given the "Anglo-Saxon" primacy in creating the modern world order, and proceeds to lay out what he sees as the underlying conditions that led to the leadership role of these two nations.

There's a lot to quibble with about this book.

First off, it's well documented, with appropriate footnotes, but there is much too much taken as given. Mead never really defines the "modern world order" that the whole book is about. Is it economic, legal, moral, technological, industrial, military, diplomatic? Mead, I think, might argue that it's all or at least pieces of all of the above, but by not defining it, he gives himself free rein to marshal his argument unfettered by definitional constraints.

Secondly, this book is way too long for the case it's trying to make. Mead wanders. And wanders. While wandering with him was fun in parts, you do get to the end of the book asking yourself whether all that wandering really bolstered the argument he's trying to make.

Mead does have a likable writing style - he keeps things moving and provides a "light touch" even when the topics of discussion are heavy subjects. He covers a lot of ground, he raises a number of points, he posits a number of arguments. Then, in the final chapter he tells you what it all means (the name of the chapter is literally "The Meaning of It All"). Like the rest of the book this is a pretty generalized discussion, but basically it says that global capitalism will eventually lead the whole world to, not Utopia, but to a "perpetual revolution" of higher and more transcendental human meaning. Really.

So does this book have anything to tell us 14 years later? About as much as it did when published. Which is to say - there is a lot of interesting stuff here, and it might lead you to pick up some of the works he references in his arguments, but ultimately, for me, it doesn't build to a wholistic, convincing argument.… (mais)