After January 6, 2021:
I must re-evaluate Zakaria's Brilliant book -- he told us Illiberals would use democratic elections, processes, and ideals to corrupt democracy into autocracy. Very visionary warning years before 2016 election and the disaster of President Trump. Thank you for program and books.
I have watched and viewed Mr. Zakaria's TV punditry & journalism over the years and I felt his point-of-view interesting enough to spend some of my precious leisure reading one of his books. I was overall disappointed when I read this in 2010. In 2003 there were more crucial issues affecting the future of freedom than what was addressed by this book.
What is `illiberal democracy'? When the procedures are democratic & constitutional, but result is a racist, fascist regime this defines `illiberal democracy'. Zakaria's example is the Nazi take-over of a weak Weimar govt. in 1930s Germany (when hyperinflation had demoralized the voters).
At Home:
I would also argue that the last Bush regime of 2001-2009 and its contemporary U S neo-conservative coalition (of 90s to present) were illiberal. Geo W Bush was elected by coalition composed of 3 largely authoritarian, top-down power elites:
1) Politically-organized religious fundamentalists,
2) Economic interests of `military-industrial complex' (Ike's phrase)
3) Interests of multinational corporate lobbies & ultra-wealthy
Three of the most obvious Bush regime attacks upon middle-class freedom include:
-- legitimacy and partisanship of Supreme Court deciding outcome of 2000 election
-- the Patriot Act's effect upon privacy & `negative' freedom of expression (a post-9/11 trade-off with increased needs for national security)
-- the untargeted Bush tax cuts, which had a profound effect, relieving Corporate America & the ultra-wealthy of significant financial obligation to govt. at the expense of social programs benefiting American lower & middle-classes and debt left to future generations.
I find the weaknesses of Future of Freedom are mostly in Zakaria's choices of threats to freedom. By defining freedom and liberty as `negative' in the classical & bill of rights' sense - `the freedom from restraint', Zakaria has avoided discussion of recent threats to America's extraordinary accomplishments involving `positive' liberties. For example, American public institutions based upon 'freedom of opportunity' include 1)affordable public education 2) social security and other govt.-managed safety nets, 3) civil service, merit-based employment opportunities.
All of these protect courageous dissenters of the lower & middle classes when they become marginalized by powerful special interests(or, ostracized by the `tyranny of the majority'). All of these, as expressions of positive liberties, provide public-supported opportunities which allow upward economic opportunities to individuals with merit & motivation. Traditional America values the individual. Aside from origins and class, America is the 'land of opportunity' because its system of government enables individuals to make achievements and contributions commensurate with their talents.
Of course, there are problems of bureaucracy & redundant or ineffective programs. There are no `market forces' as in the private sector to keep these programs vibrant. Meritocracy can easily devolve into 'welfare for the masses' or oligarchy based upon inherited privilege.
Perhaps one of the omissions which makes Future of Freedom a timid and often irrelevant analysis for 2003 is Fakaria's indifference to the consolidation of mass media by multinationals like Fox / Murdoch. To the detriment of public and independent broadcasting / broadband channels, this policy allowed a single Big Media conglomerate to become the dominant news source / point-of-view in many major U S markets. This was on-going in early 2000s and supported by Powell & FCC as govt `de-regulation'. This is an area where Zakaria is most knowledgeable. However,Zakaria cannot be harsh on this issue. Zakaria has chosen to be a network pundit. Timidity is what is expected from mainstream network TV / Time-Warner. Those who care about a strong diverse news media must thank PBS' Democracy Now for their harsh commentary on this issue and the wisdom of the U S Supreme Court in overturning the FCC's actions.
Zakaria relates to and 'believes' in a 'civic-minded' technocratic elite that is somewhat insulated from the short-term interests of elected politics. This may be a way to improve many of the current problems of grid-lock partisan politics and the pervasive influences of lobbies and special interests.
In the end I think that a strong pluralism best serves the freedoms that we expect from western-style democracies. I consider 8 to be fundamental:
1) Constitutional federalism with checks-and-balances at
a)federal level between executive, judiciary & legislative, and bill of rights that is enforced by judiciary
b)separation between federal and state authority as outlined in Constitution
2) a strong independent free press which allows out-of-mainstream opinions from far left / far right
3)tolerance of a wide range of religious institutions & viewpoints, protected by bill of rights and enforced by exec / judiciary (without allowing the 'establishment of a state sect'). In fact, a 'wall of separation' between church & state is an ideal.
4)strong affordable secular public-financed education -- especially impressive are the land-granted state systems of America and the post-WWII G I education benefits. Future voters must be trained to think rationally about complex political policies and issues. While standards may be mediocre, America has attempted to provide mass public education on an unprecedented scale.
5)a social safety net to protect those of lower / middle classes from recession, unemployment, other short-term crises
6) a strong productive economic middle-class with opportunities for small business, self-employed professionals,
7) A strong 'civic-minded' state-of-the-art military that understands that military action cannot be taken by committee or consensus but that the military must abide 'rule of law' and civilian 'chain of command' when it is involved in any major diplomatic or foreign mission. This is especially true in nascent democracies which Zakaria discusses as so many become military dictatorships.
8) a business / corporate elite which does not spend ridiculous amounts of $ on lobbying, advertising, and public relations campaigns trying to evade competition & taxes. The funds are better spent helping govt. improve the infrastructure that business needs, by pursuing targeted tax credits that produce efficiency /competitiveness and innovation, and by accepting its civic obligation to pay reasonable taxes rather than to 'create loopholes'. This is the way to ensure that U S remains a competitive economy and can afford the 'civic-minded' institutions described above.
& Abroad:
Zakaria's hypothesis: There is a 'window of GDP' ($3k to $5K per capita income) during which probability of liberal democratic institution-building is likely to succeed and be sustained. This seems plausible and may be warranted by evidence.
A counter-case, for example, the tiny S. Indian state government of Kerala, has achieved high quality of life standards on a very low GDSP; this was achieved within the largest democratic nation -- India. While Kerala may not be a sovereign nation, I would think that these facts might intrigue Zakarias. It is estimated that 20% of Kerala's 'GDSP' comes from Services -- its highly educated residents send home $ earned working abroad in the Persian Gulf States. Is it wishful thinking to wonder if this model might have viability in select, poor nations (if they can educate their citizens to a level that makes them viable as expatriate service-providers)?
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Add a debit or credit card to save time when you check out
Convenient and secure with 2 clicks. Add your card
Customers who bought this item also bought
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Top reviews from other countries
ARTHUR P DE S BRITO
MUITO APLICÁVEL AO ENTENDIMENTO DO CENÁRIO POLÍTICO BRASILEIRO
Reviewed in Brazil on May 19, 2015Harm Hilvers
Can we pass laws ourselves?
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on June 10, 2012
