Prescription for America’s Ailments


October 3, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com

Books of The Times

Savior of the World, Heal Thyself: Prescription for America’s Ailments

By Walter Russel Mead (October 2, 2011)

In “That Used to Be Us” Thomas L. Friedman and Michael Mandelbaum join a growing number of foreign policy thinkers warning that America’s position abroad cannot endure without a renewal of the domestic sources of American prosperity and strength.

The concerns are justified. The United States faces the most profound set of challenges since the 1930s, when an economic depression and the breakdown of the British-led international order raised basic questions about our domestic politics and international strategy.

“That Used to Be Us” represents an effort by Mr. Mandelbaum, a professor at Johns Hopkins University and one of the country’s leading public intellectuals, and Mr. Friedman, a columnist for The New York Times whose three Pulitzer Prizes only hint at the global influence of his work, to describe the rocky conditions of the present day and prescribe a way forward.

This may be an American crisis, but as Mr. Friedman (right) and Mr. Mandelbaum eloquently explain, it is not just an American concern. Nor is it simply a matter of improving the living standards of future generations in this country. Because of the unique — and at this point irreplaceable — American role in providing important public services across the globe, the world as a whole will become a much poorer and more dangerous place if Americans fail at the task of national renewal.

The authors provide a thoughtful and balanced corrective to critics on the left who believe that our present economic troubles demonstrate the fundamental failure of the liberal democratic capitalist ideas on which American society is built, and the critics on the right who believe that only a return to 19th-century small government policies can save us. The principles behind our society, they argue, are broadly correct, but without institutional reform we cannot apply them as fairly or as fully as we should.

When it comes to solutions the authors reach for a classic American approach that — at least in my judgment — is fundamentally sound though difficult to apply. A long tradition of American thinkers and statesmen — George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, to name a few — have argued that a strong and forward-looking federal government should promote a healthy domestic economy and a strong international presence.

This tradition is often called Hamiltonian because of Alexander Hamilton’s role in formulating its basic outlines while serving as Washington’s Treasury secretary. Mr. Friedman and Mr. Mandelbaum’s blueprint for the next stage in American prosperity is essentially a revival of this Hamiltonian vision of a strong, pro-market national government that creates the most favorable possible conditions (and provides funds for the infrastructure) to promote private enterprise.

As Mr. Friedman and Mr. Mandelbaum(right) note, this Hamiltonian project cuts across the conventional wisdom in both political parties today. The Republican hostility to most forms of government activity recalls the stances of Hamilton’s opponents who argued that a powerful federal government would attack liberty and waste taxpayer money. Politicians like Representative Ron Paul and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas consciously draw on the anti-Hamiltonian ideas of thinkers like Thomas Jefferson to attack the idea of a powerful, economically interventionist federal government.

But the authors of this book also have uncomfortable words for Democrats. Hamiltonians historically believed in sound government finance and efficient administration. This is not the kind of talk that public sector labor unions and partisans of the entitlement state like to hear. “That Used to Be Us” unsparingly describes the causes and likely consequences of the recklessly unsustainable pension and entitlement promises that are among the gravest fiscal problems we now face. It also calls for smarter and less cumbersome forms of regulation, something that business is more likely to support than some traditional Democratic constituencies.

These are big truths, and the authors see them clearly and whole. As is usual in Mr. Friedman’s work the power of the core argument is buttressed by detailed reportage and blizzards of specific fact and detail, but the accumulation of anecdote and evidence never detracts from the book’s central thrust. “That Used to Be Us” is an important contribution to an intensifying debate, and it deserves the widest possible attention. But there are a couple of weak spots in the argument that could use shoring up.

One small example involves California. On the one hand the authors take that state to task for its fiscal irresponsibility, chaotic policy making and a generally incoherent approach to economic development and governance. Yet at other times they hail California as a model, citing its tough energy and construction codes. Many people argue that those energy regulations contribute to the gridlock that is driving California’s economy down. “That Used to Be Us” would present a stronger argument if it addressed problems like this more directly.

More broadly, the authors propose an essentially Hamiltonian approach to the country’s challenges but do not really take on the arguments that Jeffersonian critics make in response. For example, can subsidies and incentives really work when the technological uncertainties are so large and political lobbies so powerful?

The authors point to Chinese high-speed rail development and American government support for alternative energy generation as highly effective, but recent rail mishaps in China and the Solyndra bankruptcy here render these solutions more problematic. (Daniel Yergin’s new book, “The Quest,” also raises important questions about the value of alternative energy subsidies.) And what of the way lobbyists and private interests distorted Fannie Mae mortgage programs in ways that worsened the housing bubble? Even well-intentioned federal interventions often go awry.

Partly because small-government advocates are denigrated rather than engaged, many conservative thinkers will look at this book as more liberal sludge — calls for greater federal spending, tough energy policy to ward off climate change, more control over American life by credentialed “experts” — and dismiss “That Used to Be Us” as same-old, same-old boilerplate from the Eastern establishment.

That would be a mistake. The gaps opening between the arguments in this book and conventional Democratic politics run very deep. When talking about the cultural sources of American strength Mr. Friedman and Mr. Mandelbaum can sound like staunch Tea Party members. When pointing to an institution where American values are still strong, they choose the military. They say the United States has been an exceptional nation, and they want it to remain one.

As American politics looks increasingly dysfunctional, Mr. Friedman and Mr. Mandelbaum show great courage in casting aside conventional assumptions. Few readers will agree with every observation and argument in this thoroughly researched and passionately argued book, but all of them should find “That Used to Be Us” compelling, engaging and enlightening.

Walter Russell Mead is the James Clarke Chace professor of foreign policy and humanities at Bard College and editor at large of The American Interest.

A version of this review appeared in print on October 3, 2011, on page C5 of the New York edition with the headline: Savior of the World, Heal Thyself: Prescription for America’s Ailments.

22 thoughts on “Prescription for America’s Ailments

  1. Prescription for America’s ailments? Just two…

    1. You are supposed to be a government by the people, of the people and for the people. Please live by it.

    2. For God’s sake leave the world alone. You will be surprised at the results.

  2. SCARLET.PIMPERNEL : You too seem to have fallen for that line of thinking… that has governed the planet for the past half-century. Your way forward would be for everyone to keep their daggers drawn at everyone else. Exactly what the military folks want.

  3. You got me wrong there! I would like the U.S. to withdraw into its own shell, become a fortress America and let the rest of the world slug it out. It was the 2WW that saved the U.S. from the Great Depression and not some economists and their wishy-washy theories of economic recovery. If the world goes to war then U.S. can intervene and we would see a repeat of another economic recovery.

  4. Fair point SCARLET PIMPERNEL : But after half a century of being armed to the teeth, it is time we gave genuine negotiations a chance. Granted that it might not work and that humans are doomed to repeat history.

    To create wars that kill millions in order to bring about prosperity seems a sad way of living.

  5. What arrogant hogwash. Is air force one still in cloud nine? 🙂

    The only advice the authors ought to dish out is to tell the U.S. of A that she pulls up her knickers and live within her means.

    For a start, Pres Obama ought to stick to his pre-election promise to free America from the clutches of the APEC nations and begin to invest massively in green technology which has the huge potential to be America’s next generator of growth but it is apparent that he has to pass through the dead bodies of the oligarchs that control the energy and military industrial complexes to achieve that.

    The crux of America’s woes and the bane of the Republican’s foreign policy is the lure of black gold and her militaristic (mis)adventure that led to her invasion and occupation of foreign sovereign nations.

    If America remains lukewarm in her efforts at energy conservation and is so hard up for oil, perhaps, she should start digging up her own back yard for it since she has huge untapped reserves.

    The only reason the U.S. of A has been getting away with murder, figuratively and literally speaking, so far, is the position of the USD as the world’s de facto trading currency. A position of privilege so long as she continues to possess not only the biggest stick in the global village but the economic muscle to wield it.

  6. ” Iran will nuke Israel from the face of the earth. ”

    That’s stretching it a bit. Iran does not possess nuclear weapons (yet) and even if she has, she will not dare to launch an unprovoked attack on Israel knowing that Israel has nuclear weapons.

    That is why it will be Israel’s worst nightmare if Iran has nuclear armaments. The reason is obvious . Nuclear armament capability is a strong deterrent against foreign invasion. That is why everyone leaves belligerent N. Korea alone.

  7. I agree with you, Frank. Back to Econ 101 for Obama’s Economic Team. America can ill afford to be Police man of the world.

    Get out of Afghanistan before you repeat USSR’s humiliating defeat. Pull out of Iraq, which you pursued for the wrong reason that is by continuing with a Bush-Republican war. You also cannot hold the rest of world at ransom by pursuing wrong economic policies.

    If you continue what you are doing on economic policy based on pandering to corporate America and the banks, President Obama, you deserve to be a one term President. What happened to your Audacity of Hope? You are no different from the man who you succeeded. You are as careless, bull headed and incompetent as George W. Bush.–Din Merican

  8. It is common knowledge that Iran does not have nuclear weapons but is fast developing nuclear capability.

    That could well be the scenario if Iran is left alone to develop its own nuclear arsenal. It is one school of thought. You are free to develop your own theory and challenge the supposed belligerency of Iran as being a Western ploy to justify their aggressive, if you will, foreign policies in that part of the world. You can come up with your own conspiracy theories.

  9. What happened to your Audacity of Hope? You are no different from the man who succeeded. You are as careless, bull headed and incompetent as George W. Bush.–Din Merican

    You are buying into the Republican trash they put out there. A Republican U.S. President would be equally at a loss of what to do. It is a very complex situation they have right now. Whoever is the sitting President, Democrat or Republican, is very likely to be a one-term President. It is about democracy. When you are not happy, you change. Obama is unlikely to make it to a second term. But that should not be a reason to talk down at his presidency. History will be the judge of his legacy.
    _________
    Thanks,pimpernel, for admitting you and your fellow Americans are “screwed” (for want of a more descriptive word) whichever way you look. I am buying neither the Republican crap nor the Democrat spin. I am just looking at the results of American foreign and economic policies in recent years (that is, after the Clinton Years). I find no comfort in them.–Din Merican

  10. It was also common knowledge that Saddam did not possess WMD but that did not stop his country from being invaded and practically destroyed. The sequence in these policies is fairly simple – first a decision and then massive spin to justify it. The case of Iraq may be history now but that will not prevent the very same technique being used with Iran and Pakistan.

    The message is clear – some countries are not supposed to have nuclear facilities.

  11. President Obama, you deserve to be a one term President –Dato Din Merican

    When Obama have to fall on his knees before the Jewish/Israeli Lobby in the US and tell the world he would Veto the establishment of a Palestinian State, Barack Obama is a “Yes we can” Presidential FRAUD.

    He promised to fix the Palestinian issue when he campaigned to be President.

    This was the chance, instead he was just like George W. Bush and all the past few Presidents….they are all Jewish lobby lackeys aka US Presidents who depend on the money and influence of the Jewish /Israeli lobby group, strong enough to make the Prime Minister of Israel as the de facto US President when it comes to US foreign policy.

    By the way, there are less than 3% of American Jews in the US and they wield almost absolute power in the Congress and Senate.

    That’s American democracy at work, Americana democracy based on lobby interests at the expense of national interest.

  12. America can ill afford to be Police man of the world. — Din Merican

    U.S. being the policeman of the world? That is the cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy under a Republican administration. The Democrats are soft on foreign policy. What the Obama Administration is doing is wind down the two wars, save billions and stop the bleeding in terms of U.S. dollars spent on making the world more safe. Let other countries take over. There are forces within working to stop that. You are free to develop your own theories.

  13. What the Obama Administration is doing is …stop the bleeding in terms of U.S. dollars spent on making the world more safe -scarlet.pimpernel

    Nonsense. American taxpayers had been bled dry slowly since 1948 by Israel with the help of the Jewish politicians in Congress and advisers in the White House.

    You know how much money average American Joe spent to keep Israel alive to take more Palestinian lands and kill more innocent Palestinians?

    Read here: Washington Report on Middle East Affairs

    Or here ” A Conservative Estimate of Total Direct U.S. Aid to Israel: Almost $114 Billion”

    In case you ask, What is “Washington Report on Middle East Affairs”

    The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs is a 100-page magazine published 9 times per year in Washington, DC, that focuses on news and analysis from and about the Middle East and U.S. policy in that region.

    The Washington Report is published by the American Educational Trust (AET), a non-profit foundation incorporated in Washington, DC by retired U.S. foreign service officers to provide the American public with balanced and accurate information concerning U.S. relations with Middle Eastern states.

    The American Educational Trust (AET) is a non-profit foundation incorporated in Washington, DC in 1982 by retired U.S. foreign service officers to provide the American public with balanced and accurate information concerning U.S. relations with Middle Eastern states.

    AET’s Foreign Policy Committee has included former U.S. ambassadors, government officials, and members of Congress, including the late Democratic Senator J. William Fulbright, and Republican Senator Charles Percy, both former chairmen of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Members of AET’s Board of Directors and advisory committees receive no fees for their services.

    The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs does not take partisan domestic political positions.

    As a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli dispute, it endorses U.N. Security Council Resolution 242´s land-for-peace formula, supported by seven successive U.S. presidents. In general, the Washington Report supports Middle East solutions which it judges to be consistent with the charter of the United Nations and traditional American support for human rights, self-determination, and fair play.

  14. Uncle Din,

    I agree. President Obama should just be a one term president. But then, looking at the GOP presidential candidates I’d rather Obama be the president.

    Frank,
    No American president would dare to defy the great Israeli power. To not protect the Israelis or to criticize them would get one the label, anti-semite. One of the Women’s Studies professors at my college is a pro-Palestinian. When she criticized the Israelis’ actions of taking the Palestinians’ lands, she was called anti-semite by some. But luckily we are living in a state where people don’t really care about Jews or Israel that much so her job is never in jeopardy.

  15. I agree. President Obama should just be a one term president. But then, looking at the GOP presidential candidates I’d rather Obama be the president. -didi

    Agree or disagree depends on whether you are in a position to determine Obama’s reelection? Can you vote in a US Presidential election? If yes go for it gal. Show Obama he’s history. For the rest of us it’s just wishful thinking or just dreaming.

  16. To people outside of US especially the Palestinians, who is voted in as President wouldn’t make that much difference. Foreign policy will always be the same.

  17. Only recently 11 Muslim students at University of California Irvine were charged and found guilty for obstructing a speech by the Israeli Ambassador while on campus. They were just exercising the rights to free speech, yet the University and the Police decided to charge them accordingly.

    The Israeli influence goes beyond the Presidency and Congress of the U.S. Every elected official is afraid of the retaliation by the Jewish pressure groups and lobbyist in WDC. The Israeli have mastered the art of lobbying Congress and the negative media exposure if they don’t side with Israel. They may not be large in number but they make up for it in influence buying.

  18. The Israeli influence goes beyond the Presidency and Congress of the U.S. Every elected official is afraid of the retaliation by the Jewish pressure groups and lobbyist in WDC. The Israeli have mastered the art of lobbying Congress and the negative media exposure if they don’t side with Israel. They may not be large in number but they make up for it in influence buying.- SEMPER FI

    It goes to show that the 97 % of the US population are a bunch of WIMPS and COWARDS.

    Yet the Americans have the stupidity to call their country, ‘LAND OF THE BRAVE AND THE FREE”

    They ONLY could pretend to be BRAVE, yet they cannot even protect their own interest from a mere 2 % of the people in their midsts and of course, their’s is

    –the Land of the Free,…. FREE to allow the Jewish/Israeli lobby to run wild with their foreign policy and to protect the national interest of Israel,

    — Land of the Free… FREE to give their hard earned money FREE for Israel to buy weapons to kill innocent Palestinian children and women over the last 60 years.

    — Land of the BRAVE??? Land of the Cowards viz-a-viz the Jewish/Israel Lobby.

  19. In case you all miss the point, Thomas Friedman is an American Jew, and not only that, he is an Israel apologist. During the lead up to the Iraq war, he was instrumental in show-casing the lie of the Jewish neo cons, such as Richard Perle and others who were ardent supporters Zionist/Pro Israel lobbyists in the Bush Adminstration and in CNN that Saddam Hussein had WMD and called for the destruction of Iraq.

    Read Thomas Friedman’s books when it comes to international politics and issues with a grain of salt.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.