|
|
The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers (Paperback)
by Paul Kennedy
| Category:
Current affairs, Global politics, Nonfiction |
| Market price: ¥ 208.00
MSL price:
¥ 158.00
[ Shop incentives ]
|
| Stock:
In Stock |
MSL rating:
 Good for Gifts |
| MSL Pointer Review:
A mandatory reading for anyone who's attempting to get a good historical perspective about the role of the US in the modern world. |
| If you want us to help you with the right titles you're looking for, or to make reading recommendations based on your needs, please contact our consultants. |
Detail |
Author |
Description |
Excerpt |
Reviews |
|
|
|
Author: Paul Kennedy
Publisher: Vintage; Vintage edition
Pub. in: January, 1989
ISBN: 0679720197
Pages: 704
Measurements: 8.0 x 5.2 x 1.3 inches
Origin of product: USA
Order code: BA00510
Other information:
|
|
Rate this product:
|
|
- MSL Picks -
Kennedy's The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers is a classic that should rank with the great books and great ideas of the 20th century. Anyone who wants to understand what has happened in history, and what will most likely happen, should read this book.
Great theories and great books are often so because they state, in a convincing way obvious facts that we want to ignore because they are inconvenient or unflattering. Sigmund Freud's psychopathology of everyday life and Interpretation of Dreams shocked the Victorian world by pointing out that a lot of human behavior is about sex. Darwin's Origin of Species and Descent of Man was a shocker because it pointed out that we are animals, descended from animals. Karl Marx's contribution, shorn of polemics, was to point out the importance of economics in history and ideology.
Kennedy amasses considerable evidence for the unattractive theory that wars are won by economic might (and not because providence is on the side of the "good guys"), that all empires are mortal, and that empires can kill themselves by economic over-extension.
He correctly predicted the economic problems of the Soviet Union, before it was obvious to all, and he predicted the over extension and deficit spending that would could the lot of the US in the future - and are the lot of the US in Iraq. This is not a popular thesis.
Every historian from Thucydides, and Polybius to Gibbon, Toynbee and Spengler has understood that empires are "mortal." Yet every empire and every citizen of every empire insisted that their empire was the "exception" that could never be challenged and never fail. That is what makes many uncomfortable about this book, but it cannot be ignored.
It is really beside the point to say that it was written nearly two decades ago and is therefore "out of date." The Origin of Species was written nearly 150 years ago and is certainly "out of date" and "mistaken" in many details, but it is absurd to claim it should not be read for that reason. When Kennedy describes the dilemma faced by Spain in maintaining its costly presence in Flanders, he is describing essentially the same problems and considerations that face the USA in deciding whether to continue the war in Iraq.
Even if you think the US is exempt from the laws of history for some reason, you cannot ignore this book.
(From quoting Ami Isseroff, Isarael)
Target readers:
General public
|
|
- Better with -
Better with
The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty Through Profits (The Wharton Press Paperback Series)
:
|
|
Customers who bought this product also bought:
|
|
Paul Kennedy is a history professor at Yale University.
|
|
From the Publisher:
About national and international power in the "modern" or Post Renaissance period. Explains how the various powers have risen and fallen over the 5 centuries since the formation of the "new monarchies" in W. Europe.
|
| View all 8 comments |
Patrick Bernardy (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-10 00:00>
Even though this work is 540 pages long and covers 500 years of world history, Kennedy's thesis is simple: the "Great Power" politics of the last 500 years has been dominated by a relative and interconnected relationship between a nation's economic base and its military strength. The more capable a nation (or coalition of nations, as was usually the case) is of sustaining, or even increasing, their economy before, and especially during, a war, the more likely that nation will be victorious. Kennedy shows (sometimes with exhaustive data, in both senses of that word) that in every period of international affairs since roughly 1500, the power which dominates does so because of vast economic resources.
The most important thing that needs to be said concerning the usefulness of this work is its "big picture" quality. It is useful, especially for a novice historian like myself, to view a period of history in such an interconnected way. To view the last 500 years of world history under the light of an economic struggle between Great Powers gives a linear quality to history, a cause-and-effect picture that one can insert dates, names, wars, treaties, and revolutions into at a later time. The power bids of the Habsburg, French, British, German, and American nations during this 500 years of history offers an interesting perspective, and one of Kennedy's secondary themes:
the five nations mentioned above were the most powerful economically and militarily during their bids, and what occurred (whether successful or not) was a coalition against them. It could be argued that the American-Soviet grapple was the ultimate expression of this trend of action-reaction seen since 1500, consuming not just Europe and its colonies, but an increasing proportion of the planet.
Unfortunately, I was very disappointed by the last 120 pages of this book. To be fair to Mr. Kennedy, he gave an adequate disclaimer that his future speculation was based on measurable and reliable economic trends and common-sense extrapolations, but that one can never predict the assassination of an archduke or the freak destruction of an overwhelming invading armada. That being said, it was still not very useful to me to read a hundred-plus pages concerning the future trends of economics and geopolitics with the knowledge that two years after the publication of this book, the one main assumption made by Kennedy-the continued existence of the Soviet Union and the further escalation of the Cold War-was incorrect. The fates of the five powers leading into the 21st Century (US, USSR, China, Japan, and the European Economic Union) as Kennedy describes them, hinged on the Soviet regime's participation, making this chapter ludicrously quaint in hindsight. For instance, if Japan had hit an economic slump (which it did), or China turned capitalist (which it hasn't yet, but it certainly isn't as Marxist as it once was), or if Europe continued to evolve into one massive trading block (which it did), none of these events, even taken together, would have made this last chapter irrelevant. But the one thing that does, the collapse of the Soviet Union (and its subsequent consequences for so many trends, like the arms race) did occur and shatters this wonderful work at its end. My advice to Mr. Kennedy is that he must remove the final chapter from this work, or update it
accordingly.
But perhaps he cannot; perhaps his thesis, in the era of terrorism and the Internet, is no longer valid in the new multi-faceted and quickening pace of modern politics. The 500-year military struggle between the Great Powers may very well be over, in favor of fringe-group attacks on a singular global trade network brought culturally closer everyday by communication technology. But then again, with religious fundamentalism increasing, not only in the Middle East but in America as well, maybe we will see a rebirth of that monumentally ridiculous mechanism for war. In other words, don't count out humanity. We will always find ways to make war on one another, even if we have to dust off some old classics.
|
Belen Alcat (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-10 00:00>
In this book, published in 1987, Kennedy's aim is to explain us the relationship among different forms of power: economic, political and military power. According to him, the economic power is the source of the other two.
Kennedy warns, however, that the relationship among them is quite fragile and never easy. For example, if a country spends too much money in order to increase his its military power (renforcing its political power), it will surely undermine its economic power (the original source of the other two).
In his opinion, the great powers are those states who can reach the best balance of military and economic strength, and he also thinks that as soon as they lose that ability they lose their place to another great power.
Kennedy shows us how this relationship has worked throughout time, and how much it has influenced on the balance of power between countries. He specifically studies the period from 1500 to the mid - 1980's, and even though he might concentrate too much on Europe (as he warns beforehand), he gets his point across quite well.
Some of Kennedy's predictions weren't accurate: he predicted the fall of USA as a great power, and believed that Japan would take its place. What is more, he wasn't able to foresee the fall of the Soviet Union, a few years after his book was published.
However, his ideas and his theory are quite good, and still valid, as is his warning regarding the danger of *Imperial overestretch* to the great powers (specifically USA).
I recommend this book to those who want to understand what is happening today. Even if it is somehow dated, many of its premises are still valid, and the historical perspective is almost flawless.
|
James Pruett (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-10 00:00>
Paul Kennedy'sRise and Fall of the Great Powers, is classic historical criticism with just a couple of main thoughts, one of them novel. First: it is strong underlying economies that ultimately determine the victor in a prolonged war (this is not new but it is nonetheless most thoroughly articulated here by Kennedy).
Second: it is the very requirements of maintaining a strong military and empire that causes a powerful nation to decline in power and prestige.
Kennedy's focus is on military conflict between 1500 and 2000, a time of great change in the global balance of power. Consider that in 1500, the Arab, Orient, and the West were on about equal footing, with the edge here probably given to the Ottoman Empire and to China. Arab invaders, for instance, were in Spain, Greece, and Vienna. The Chinese, already possessors of gunpowder, the printing press, and the compass. But in around 1500, the Western nations began taking the lead, charting a course of military and economic power that went global, changing hands through the nation states of Europe: Portugal, Spain, France, England, and later Germany.
Throughout the book, Kennedy's criticism, while oftentimes harsh (for instance with France and Italy during the First and Second World Wars), is fair and I think for the most part unbiased. His book is sweeping and scope and attempts perhaps too much. But at least it does not bog down in trivia. His focus is preponderantly on the economic military connection. Other forces examining the rise and decline of political and economic power are not examined here; consequently his book is one-sided and incomplete next the work of Spengler or Toynbee. Nonetheless, his work is of major importance. Imperial Overstretch is his innovation.
This book is certainly worth reading and should be a cornerstone of the economic historians library. The effect of this book clearly shows that economic power supports military/political power and the fragile relationship between the two. Almost 15 year old, this book is still relevant, although in need of update, particularly in relation to the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the rise of Anti-Western terrorism from the Muslim world. America's power, while perhaps less threatened by East Asian economic power than Kennedy's book suggests it would be, is nonetheless in the uncomfortable position of holding on to #1 in a world increasingly hostile to its every intention. Kennedy's book offers a great summary as to how these arrangements came into being and what we might expect in the near future. Their fluidness, he explains, indicate how fragile power is to maintain once you have it.
Pat Buchanan's book, Death of the West, I might suggest as a good follow up to this one. As Buchanan explains, the depopulation and demoralization of Europe/America/Japan are now the most critical issues affecting the changing world order and balance of power. One race, a people, a country, must constantly renew itself. Without that, the underlying is difficult if not impossible to grow.
|
Brian Huff (MSL quote), USA
<2007-01-10 00:00>
I enjoyed The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers a great deal, despite its sometimes flawed statistical analysis. It helped put the last 500 years of European empires in perspective. It also did a great job of explaining why a powerful country often loses its power.
Kennedy discussed at length that the decline of power had little to do with absolute wealth: modern Spain and England have far more wealth today than they did when they were empires. The key is relative power, or how strong you are in comparison to your neighbors.
I especially enjoyed the discussion of post World War I Europe. It presented the best argument to date (including de Tocqueville) for why the US and Russia were destined to emerge as world powers after World War II.
Its biggest flaw is its publish date: 1989. Just before the Berlin Wall fell. So a great deal of the speculation in the last chapter is fairly worthless.
However, this book gives a fantastic grounding in the subject of geopolitics. I would recommend reading it alongside Collapse by Jared Diamond, and The Clash of Civilizations by Samuel Huntington.
|
View all 8 comments |
|
|
|
|
