Michael MandelbaumBesprekingen

In That Used to Be Us Thomas Friedman addressed the decline of United States over the past decades. Where we were once the leaders and envy of the world we now rank as low as 17th place behind much of the developed world. Since 2011 the situation has become even worse. The book begins with a description of China's rise the the United State's decline. Then it looks at causes and finally offers some solutions.

Friedman and co-author Michael Mandelbaum identified the formula for America's success to consist of five items. Education, Infrastructure, Immigration, Research and Development and Regulations are the way we became great. Those five elements have been neglected and we have declined.

The authors stated that the USA's problems are the fault of both major political parties. That is the one part of this otherwise excellent book that I just don't buy. Perhaps because I am a committed member of the Democratic Party but I think I am more objective than that. Of the five elements of America's success it has been the other political party that has failed to support or even actively opposed funding our 5 pillars of success.

This is a well thought out book that still address the current situation even though some elements have changed.

Friedman and Mandelbaum produced a thought-provoking book about many of the ills facing America, and some insights as to how these problems could be corrected. Major topics included our Educational System, Energy, technology, climate change, budget deficit, and globalization. Our Educations system was explored in some detail, and I enjoyed some of the improvements made in Colorado, and how the Teachers Union partnered in those ideas.

The authors also took issue with our current political paralysis, and found much to fault with both major Parties. I suspect that if one was keeping track, they were slightly more critical of the GOP than the Dem's, but since neither party was supported, it really shouldn't matter. I found their discussion on the value of a Third Party Candidate very interesting. Like many, I had considered a vote for a third party candidate to be a wasted vote, but the book provides examples of how unsuccessful third party candidates from the past, from Teddy Roosevelt at the beginning to Ross Perot at the end of the 20th Century, actually were able to influence the policies of the major parties, even in losing their elections.

Nice to read a book that finds both reds and blues to be at fault and not helping in the current political climate. Jibes well with my own views of liberal anarchy

This book took me a while to read because I would become frustrated as I read, put down the book, and not come back to it for some time. Friedman, who wrote "The World Is Flat," addresses a number of key issues in regards to America's leadership in the world, and how other countries have latched on to the ideals and standards which we projected but have now fallen away from. I appreciate Friedman's emphasis on education, since I work in a college and see many of the problems that he describes. Friedman discusses the false image that many Americans hold regarding American policy, politics, education, and technology, and refutes them with citations of studies, comparisons, and reports.

Certainly not a pleasant read, but one worth examining.

I first became aware of Thomas Friedman when a New York Times article he wrote came on my google news feed for anything with the title of my book.

The novel I'm currently writing is called 'None of the Above', about an unconventional president. I saw a three page article that felt like a synopsis of my book, saying Thomas Friedman's choice for president is None of the Above. So I researched the author and found this book.

It was weird/exhilarating to read a book with so many of the same thoughts I've had over the last few decades. I've been in tech for 20 years, so I've been familiar with the effects of globalization and hyper connectivity first hand.

One of the things I did learn about was some of the historical context back in the 70s for some of the issues we face today. The book laid out the historical formula for American success in clear terms.

I highly recommend the book. It's not too late to salvage our country, but we're definitely on a downward slope.

Summary: Develops the thesis that 1989-2014 represented a singular period of widespread peace marked by absence of conflict between major powers, and what might lead to a return to peace in the future.

Michael Mandelbaum proposes that the period between 1989 and 2014 was a singular period in recent history of global peace. At first glance, I want to say, "you've got to be kidding." My mind goes to Bosnia, Kosovo, Rwanda, 9/11, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq, just for starters. Yet each of these represented more localized conflicts rather than globe-spanning conflicts between superpowers.

During this period, the old Soviet Union was dismantled with the Eastern Bloc countries gaining autonomy, and in some instances, more democratic forms of government. Even Russia, under Boris Yeltsin took halting steps toward democracy and more of a capitalist system. In East Asia, the opening of commercial trade relationships with China eased tensions with its Communist government. In the Middle East, for a period after the Kuwait War, most or all accepted the U.S as a "benevolent hegemon" (at least until our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan).

Why did it all change? Mandelbaum traces the rise of autocratic nationalist leadership in Russia, China, and Iran, and argues that the ambitions of these leaders have brought us into a new era of global conflict, along with the added factor of North Korea in East Asia. With Russia, the economic setbacks of Boris Yeltsin's tenure in office combined with the expansion of NATO to incorporate most of the Eastern Bloc but not Russia in a united Europe paved the way for the rise of Vladimir Putin. With the transition to Xi Jinping, and following the Recession of 2008, China took steps to strengthen its military presence, threatening other nations and the region and bringing it into increasing conflict with the U.S. North Korea's young ruler, particularly feeling threatened by the U.S. presence in South Korea, also pursued a military buildup and nuclear program, one difficult to counter. Shia clerics in Iran seized on the weakening of Iraq and Afghanistan after U.S. intervention to extend influence on behalf of Shiite Muslims throughout the region and to pursue a nuclear enrichment program which could allow them to become a nuclear power in the region.

Mandelbaum considers the possibility to a return to such peace. His fundamental thesis is that peace is fostered by the rise of democracy, accompanied by economic capitalism, which discourages conflict with trading partners. He points to democratic movements in all three of the major powers (not so much in North Korea) as offering potential.

Mandelbaum's thesis seems to rely on continued American greatness and "benevolent hegemony" combined with skillful relations that make it advantageous for these autocratic regimes to become more democratic and less belligerent. I have questions of whether such a continued role is sustainable for the U.S. given its burgeoning debt, fluctuating foreign policy and internal divisions. I also wonder whether democracy depends on worldview and cultural factors that cannot be addressed simply by implementing democratic processes, even if these powers were inclined to move toward them.

I'm far less sanguine than Mandelbaum and think we are in for some "heavy weather." It seems to me that this new dangerous world order is a challenge for the United States to get its own economic house in order, to address the structural inequities that weaken its own democratic institutions, and to take the measure of these other powers in our diplomacy and military strategy for what they are rather than what we would like them to be. This will call for singular political leadership and national resolve--clearly absent in our currently divided political processes and national life.

_____________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this an advanced review e-galley of this book from the publisher via Edelweiss. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

Just downloaded it for the Kindle, looks like a must read.

Good summary of what's gone wrong and mostly non-partisan in the blame (they rightly key on Republican fiscal myths and failures, but also pull no punches with Democrats weaknesses), though anyone aligning themselves with the "right" would likely see this as "liberal." (Can you tell I'm not a fan of those labels?)

I don't think their proposals as to "how we can come back" are very achievable though. Too idealistic. They do recognize the many reasons why the collective solutions which are needed will fail in the current political culture.

They are preaching to to the choir in my case, but if you read this book and still think America is on the path of continued "exceptionalism," that we don't need to raise taxes, and we don't need to cut spending, then you are clearly part of the problem.

Well thought out overview of the state of our economy and our ability to compete and maintain in the global economy. The authors have several thought provoking observations about how we fell behind and what we need to do to pick ourselves us by the boot straps and get back in the game.

If you are looking for a pretty easy to read and understand overview of the global economy then this is a good book for you. It presents a reasonably optimistic view of the global future with the necessary caveats. I also think it is a good book for those that don't have a strong grasp of how our economy works and how things fit in the context of history. I strongly recommend at least reading the first half of the book to get the big picture. The part I enjoyed the best was the realization that without some central global ruling force with the power to implement policies and enforce them, we are forced to deal with cooperation among nations. That always has been the challenge. It is hard for nationalistic self interest to look at the big picture of a more prosperous world. This is especially true in the USA where we got ours and are unwilling to make too many sacrifices in our lifestyles for the global good. It also makes you realize that it is the middle class of our country the feels the impacts of globalization the most. The rich continue to get the biggest piece of the pie.½

America is in trouble. We face four major challenges on which our future depends, and we are failing to meet them. If we delay any longer, soon it will be too late for us to pass along the American dream to future generations. In That Used To Be Us, Thomas L. Friedman, one of our most influential columnists, and Michael Mandelbaum, one of our leading foreign policy thinkers, offer both a wake-up call to collective action. They analyze four challenges we face - globalization, the revolution in information technology, the nation's chronic deficits, and our pattern of excessive energy consumption - and spell out what we need to do now to sustain the American dream and preserve American power in the world. They believe that the recovery of American greatness is within reach. They show how America's history, when properly understood, offers a five-part formula for prosperity that will enable us to cope successfully with the challenges we face. They offer vivid profiles of individuals who have not lost sight of the American habits of bold thought and dramatic action. They propose a clear way out of the trap into which the country has fallen, a way that includes the rediscovery of some of our most vital traditions and the creation of a new third-party movement to galvanize the country.

I like the authors' points but the narrator makes me insane. He pronounces "December 17" as "December seventeen" instead of "December seventeenth." Much worse, he pronounces "0.15" as "point fifteen" and so forth with any decimal in the text. This in a book bemoaning the Usan war on math and physics, and even when decimal is "point twenty," no one in the production realized that 0.2 and 0.20 are the same. Also he pronounces the first syllable of "steroids" as "steer" instead of "stare."

I credit the authors, not the reader, with writing "the aughts" for "the first decade of a century." So sensible, so sadly unused. This leads, however, to another complaint about the reader: he pronounces 2010 as "two thousand ten" instead of "twenty ten." The "two thousand" bit is okay for years 2000 through 2009, but when a year in this century has a number greater than 0 in the tens place, say "twenty" unless you are willing to say "two thousand one hundred twelve" a century from now.

A cogent and impassioned analysis of the dilemmas facing the United States in a globalized world-economy: higher education, globalization, IT, GT (green technology), Deficit/the Debt, Global Warming, and so forth. Covers a lot.

I would have appreciated a more thorough analysis and some more citations and deeper reasoning, but that would have required several more books. Nevertheless, this book diagnoses the problems fairly well - the dispute is on what is to be done.

A fascinating look at how the American Empire has got itself into big trouble and what it might do to recover its former power and glory. Presidential and Congressional elections are tomorrow (2012) and I neither see nor hear much that promises any change that will improve matters.
Frankly, I found this volume somewhat depressing because I do not see the will to make the tough changes that are required to improve the situation. You may ask why a Canadian would be so concerned. To paraphrase a former Canadian Prime Minister, when you lay down beside an elephant, you must be careful when it rolls over.

Anybody voting should read this book. Although it doesn't have all the answers, it does ask the key questions that need to be addressed in order for our country to thrive and not just barely survive.

Having not read their previous books I found this book was spot on as to why America seems to be losing ground to other countries in the world. The book is very non partisan but blames the extremes in both parties for much of our current malaise. They believe a third party should emerge based on what they call radical centrism. One that will cut entitlements but at the same time be willing to raise taxes. One theme is the two wars in the middle east were the only two in history that taxes were not raised to pay for them I think this is a must read book and I really can not see why the low rankings to this point. Lots of evidence and logical conclusions for the open minded.

I enjoy reading Friedman's books, but his topics are so current that the book is almost out of date before you finish reading it. Some thought provoking commentary, some doomsday thinking, but mostly support for the urgency to get off our collective duffs and get back to the work of America. He and his co-author site four challenges for the 21st centruy--globalization, IT revolution, growing deficits and energy consumption. All four topics are covered from numerous angles. Worth the read.

I'm a fan of Thomas Friedman's work ever since I read his book "The Lexus and the Olive Tree". I felt this most recent offering (produced in corroboration with Michael Mandelbaum) is certainly relevant and made some very strong points about America's current state of affairs. All his works build on each other -- like an on-going textbook with revisions -- so there's a lot of old material presented again. Hence, the highest review I can offer is 4 stars. I wonder if any of our politicians and "leaders" have bothered to examine the conclusions drawn in this work; or if they are strictly focused on their own personal & special interest agendas.

For the most part I enjoyed this latest book by Thomas Friedman. I think they (he and his co-author) make a very good case for what is wrong with the United States now. They talk about the lack of funding for education and R&D, the media, global warming, the polarization of the political parties and how that came to be and how the United States is competing with the world now on a more and more equal basis.

The problem I had with the book was they spent very little time talking about solutions unlike Friedman's book, "Hot, Flat and Crowded" where he spent much of the book talking about very innovative green energy solutions.

All in all, though, this is a good read which sums up very well the problems faced in the United States in a centrist way. The authors are quite fair in dishing out blame and despite all the problems they lay out they remain optimistic.½

Somewhat repetitive and contains similar material to The World is Flat and Hot, Flat and Crowded. Those two books were eye-opening to me, this one was pretty much a rehash.½

Friedman and Mandelbaum do an excellent, even-handed job of unraveling this economic, political, and cultural quagmire Americans currently find themselves in. Tracing the roots of this mess all the way back as far as the early 70's, they explain where the United States has gone wrong and offer broad recommendations for how we can, should, and need to get ourselves back on track.

I listened to his “The World Is Flat” and “Hot, Flat & Crowded” and they were great. This one was just as long but did not seem to have anything new to say, although it was sprinkled with some interesting tidbits. Also, not sure how much I believe in their solutions to solve these issues.

In this incisive new book, Michael Mandelbaum argues that the era marked by an expansive American foreign policy is coming to an end. During the seven decades from the U.S. entry into World War II in 1941 to the present, economic constraints rarely limited what the United States did in the world. Now that will change. The country's soaring deficits, fueled by the huge costs of the financial crash and of its entitlement programs—Social Security and Medicare—will compel a more modest American international presence.
In assessing the consequences of this new, less expensive foreign policy, Mandelbaum, one of America's leading foreign policy experts, describes the policies the United States will have to discontinue, assesses the potential threats from China, Russia, and Iran, and recommends a new policy, centered on a reduction in the nation's dependence on foreign oil, which can do for America and the world in the twenty-first century what the containment of the Soviet Union did in the twentieth.