Now Reading: Wills on Shakespeare & Rome and Gaddis on Kennan

I've now embarked on these two very promising titles:

1. Garry Wills, Rome & Rhetoric: Shakespeare's Julius Caesar (2011).

2. John Lewis Gaddis, George F. Kennan: An American Life (2011)

Fun reading ahead!

Niall Ferguson's Civilization: The West & the Rest

Niall Ferguson's Civilization: The West and the Rest (2011) describes six "killer apps" that defined Western civilization and led to its preeminence in the 500 years between 1500 and 2000. Ferguson is a lively and engaging writer who steps into the sweep of a 500-year history with verve and flair. Ferguson is not adverse to controversy, and he doesn't shy away from making judgments. This has made him a controversial figure within the ranks of some historians. In addition, he moonlights as a commentator on current events. Nevertheless, I think we can disagree with him and still find him very persuasive.

Ferguson argues that competition, property rights and liberty, modern medicine, the Scientific Revolution, consumer goods, and the work (or word) ethic distinguished Europe and its progeny (North America and Australasia) from its rivals in the Ottoman empire and China, both of which were surely were more advanced than most of Europe as of 1500. Indeed, the "great divergence" begins about 1800.

Some have criticized Ferguson for underplaying the detrimental aspects of European colonial empires. However, I find these criticisms unpersuasive. Ferguson, who certainly has a combative streak in him, argues that colonialism, for all its downsides, nevertheless has some good sides. In some sense, this is simply a truism. Ferguson certainly notes some of the horrors associated with colonial rule. He does not spend much time dealing with the day-to-day indignities that colonialism entailed. Nevertheless, his critics seem to miss the point. That point is that Western civilization brought cultural, scientific, and industrial advances to portions of the world where they would not have arisen or where they would only have arisen much later.

Perhaps Ferguson is most interesting in this work when he talks about where we go from today. Has he argues in his book, Japan was the first of the Asian nations to take up and apply the "killer apps" of the West. Other Asian nations have done so quite successfully, and China is now in the midst of making an incredible transformation. Ferguson notes, however, that few of the Asian nations have "downloaded" all of the apps. For instance, China has only a limited sense of private property and no real democracy. Russia has some vestige of democracy, but no real sense of property rights. Ferguson suggests that in order for any nation to get all of the benefits of this heritage, all of the "apps" must be downloaded and run.

Ferguson also delves into where we might head from here. His greatest concern is that empires in the past have often collapsed quite suddenly. Rome, the Soviet Union, and numerous other examples show a sudden and drastic collapse as opposed to the stereotype of a slow decline. He ponders the possibility that current Western nations may suffer the same fate. Knowing that it is very difficult to predict the future (a point about which I think that he would agree), one can only speak conditionally; nonetheless, this prior pattern causes some concern. By the way, Ferguson delves into complexity theory and sudden tipping points that might cause collapse, an important and fruitful perspective.

This book makes a fine companion to Ian Morris's book. Both deal with the transition that distinguished Western Europe and its offspring from the remainder of the world. This is one of the great historical phenomena. It is the dominant narrative of the past 500 years, and Ferguson conversation in an engaging and worthwhile manner.

In sum, I highly recommend this book, and I enjoyed a great deal. If you're looking for a good overview of what happened and why, this is it an excellent place to start.

QT: Niall Ferguson on Debt, the EU & the US

We are in a hard place. Yes, we need to reduce debt, and yes, we need stimulus. We have to put the petal to the metal and then drive like granny. Not an easy course to successfully follow. No, I don't think that Washington is quite like Athens or Rome, but we do need to be careful. Sticky wicket, I say.

QT: Jack Goldstone Gets It Right on the Supercommittee

Goldstone posts his comment from back in August and I must say, he seems to have nailed it from the beginning. President Obama needs to step up vigorously on these issues.

QT: Drew Weston Again on Obama

I don't want to belabor a point, but I think that Drew Weston has again found a serious weakness in President Obama's decision-making regime. One senses a lack of strong, forceful leadership from the president. My hopes were buoyed by his adoption of a new stimulus program to go to Congress, but everything seems to be languishing. I do believe that the American electorate, as it so often does, foisted its hopes onto Obama in a way that he never justified, nor did he discourage. Indeed, every politician has to hope for such a magical time. However, the downside is that difficult decisions need to be made, and those difficult decisions define the decision-maker at each turn. Thus, a blank slate can no longer remain blank, and some hopes can no longer be projected onto that person. Obama is bright and has good instincts, but I share a sense that he lacks the fighting characteristics that made someone like FDR a great president.

Johan Huizinga on History

I'm listening to David Brooks's The Social Animal (quite fun), and he throws in this quote from the great Dutch historian Johan Huizinga about the feeling he received from engaging history:

A feeling of immediate contact with the past is a sensation as deep as the present enjoyment of art; it is an almost ecstatic sensation of no longer being myself, of overflowing into the world around me, of touching the essence of things, of through history experiencing the truth.

In my own modest way, I understand what Huizinga says. The stories of history often engross me, and they have since I was a little guy. Not just "what happened?" but more a matter of "what's going on here?", something deeper than--although dependent on--narrative. Perhaps call it narrative plus. I think great novelists can capture it, and I suspect that great novelists and great historians have much in common (hat tip to John Lukacs). Anyway, an interesting quote (found @ p. 233 of Brooks book).

Henry Kissinger on George Kennan

Yesterday I posted an entry about Henry Kissinger, and in doing so I noted that he, along with George Kennan, are probably the two most important figures in American foreign policy outside of some presidents (and more important than some presidents). In the New York Times today, Kissinger reviews the new biography of George Kennan by John Lewis Gaddis. Kissinger's review is lengthy and thorough. Kennan is a complex figure, and Kissinger argues that Kennan would offer both realist and idealist visions that often contradicted each other. This trait limited Kennan's work as a policymaker, but it contributed to the deep insights that he could provide to those in power. As John Lukacs also notes, Kissinger remarks that Kennan is a superb prose stylist.

This new book is going to near the top of my reading list. As readers of this blog may recall, Lukacs has written about his friend can in a short biography and Lukacs published a selection of the letters that they exchanged over the course of around 40 years. It will be interesting to compare perspectives of the authorized biographer Gaddis with those of the friend Lukacs.

Kennan is an intriguing figure, who, like many number of great persons, he is at once contradictory, vexing, and inspiring. Full of very human foibles, but full of striking insights and accomplishments as well, I'm sure that this book will prove worthwhile. I look forward reporting on further in the future blog post.

Kissinger: National Geographic Documentary

Along with George Kennan, probably no other other American in the 20th century--excluding some presidents--has had such a profound (and controversial) influence on American foreign policy than Henry Kissinger. Love him or hate him (and he's been the subject of strong emotional reactions for a long time), this recent interview, which runs about an hour and a half, takes us into his world. Still quite sharp into his 80's, he reflects on his time as national security adviser and has Secretary of State. His interviewer, Niall Ferguson, who's undertaking an authorized biography of Kissinger, is barely heard in this interview, as the words come almost exclusively from Kissinger. Because of his incredible role in relations with the Soviet Union, China, the Middle East, and Viet Nam, his reflections on these events and situations is bound to hold interest.

On the other hand, the interview doesn't hold the pathos, sense of revelation, and soul-baring that Robert McNamara's interview in Errol Morris's film, The Fog of War, displayed. Perhaps it's the Irish-American McNamara's personality vs. that of the German-Jewish immigrant Kissinger's that accounts for the differences. In any event, if you're interested in recent history and American foreign policy, it's well worth the time to view this.

I found this to take a moment say again what I fine collection our public library (ICPL) holds. Another gem!

QT: A Better Food Pyramid

Although I'm an imperfect practitioner (hell, I'm pretty imperfect at about everything), I do think that Mark Sisson has the best all-around advice on health and nutrition. (He's a bit less draconian than Art DeVany, so maybe that's why he gets my nod by a nose.) Anyway, here's his (and my perfect) food pyramid. Yea, that's right. Try it, and I'll bet you like it (i.e., feel better & test better.)

QT: More Chris McDougall on Running

If anyone could convince me to run, it would be Chris McDougall. I joke that I only want to run if I'm chasing or being chased. But more likely, it just wasn't ever comfortable, whatever that means. Anyone, here is more McDougall (of Born to Run fame) on the latest in barefoot running. Don' miss this video, either. I just might try it!

Austerity vs. Stimulus: The False Dichotomy

This conversation highlights a big problem, well, maybe a couple.

The press promotes the idea of a dichotomy of thinking where I think none exists. Ferguson agrees that some stimulus further could prove useful (and that it did keep us from going over the cliff), and Krugman acknowledges that in the long-term that we need to get our fiscal house in order by dealing with debt. The press does us a disservice when they promote this either-or thinking. Of course, Ferguson, who seems to relish verbal brawls, may make matters appear starker than they are. His point, that things could crumble quickly, seems worth heeding, but Krugman's worry of a slow crumble (slow growth, high unemployment) also presents dangers. We're in a tight spot, and sound thinkers need to navigate between the extremes.

I might note that this video piece by Ferguson supports my point, although his endorsement of tax reform as a third way strikes me as misguided at best (more below). Not that we couldn't stand to improve our tax code (see Robert Franks & Richard Thaler for some really innovative ideas), but how does this really help us? On the other hand, putting people into meaningful work--read infrastructure upgrades--seems very doable and worthwhile.

Note to Ferguson: You're right that we're always fighting the last war (see his comments on Milton Friedman and Keynes), but he fails to say that history NEVER repeats itself. Of course, "this depression is different", but how different? I think we are seeing some new wrinkles (as Ferguson notes re inequality). So, he's right to suggest new answers, but I doubt the tax system. Also, corporate taxes may not work in principle, but then they are "persons" (NOT "people"). (Persons is a legal term in this context.) Anyway, new thinking and updated perspective are always needed, but the tax code business seems quite lame.

Ferguson loves to pick a fight, I think.

My motto, Keynes in crisis; Hayek day-to-day.