The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers

Rating:
Summary: Product of the Time
Review: Kennedy's book is a product of the time it was written. In the mid-80's the topic of the day, primarily put forth by the more intelligent neo-liberals, was defense spending and its relation to economic growth. More defense spending was supposed to lead to less economic growth. The idea informed many of the chapters in Kennedy's book, but particularly the last couple.

Now, perhaps Kennedy was accurate about the earlier great powers; I don't have sufficient background to comment. He's an engaging writer on those subjects at any rate. However, his idea of imperial overstretch, as applied to the US, was wrong, and demonstrably so given the last fifteen years. It's worthwhile to look at why this is the case, since this reveals his blind spots.

His thesis--that military power rests on economic power--is fine as far as it goes. He even identifies many of the factors that go into creating economic power; that portion of the book is so broadly stated that it is almost impossible to refute. Having identified the broad range of factors, however, in the last couple chapters he promptly focuses on those that happened to be the topic of discussion in the mid-80's: defense spending, deficits, and industrial planning. In the event, these turned out to be much less influential than others. The free market in the US turned out to be flexible, growth-oriented, and much quicker on its feet than those of Japan, Europe, or the Soviet Union. As a result the US grew considerably more quickly than the other powers. The mechanisms that Kennedy considered most important--defense spending and global commitments--turned out to be second order effects compared to the ability of the US to deploy capital efficiently, innovate, redeploy labor to new industries, and grow. Japan, in contrast, turned schlerotic, and Europe was always a step behind. The Soviet Union collapsed, of course, only four years after Kennedy dismissed the idea in this book.

Why did he go wrong? He had the right idea, in many ways. But, steeped in the policy debates of the period, he looked at the wrong things. After having declared economics to be paramount he got the economics wrong, which led to his downfall.

Rating:
Summary: A very good book, but...
Review: Like almost all of military historians, professor Kennedy sometimes thinks all that happens in the world is due to militar power. Sometimes his analysis has flaws that we can clearly detect. Apart from the critics, it is also awesome that someone nowadays sits down to write the history of the world since 1500! That's something great, and we're lacking people who does that. It is definetely a book worth reading.

Rating:
Summary: Boring
Review: My title says it all - his information is good and covers a wide range of topics, but the book's style makes it very boring to read.

Rating:
Summary: Update the Book, Mr. Kennedy!
Review: Now is a good time to "audit" Kennedy's books.

His Pollyannaish faith in Japan (which he emphasized even more in his other book) now seems totally misplaced.

He completely failed to see the coming collapse of the Soviet Union - happening merely three years after publication! (He thought nothing short of war could cause it.)

Still on the debit side, but far less important, is his lack of confidence in Europe's prospect for unity. The jury is still out on this, but I tend to be less jeremian than Kennedy. (I think a United States of Europe is within sight in anyone's lifetime.)

On the credit side, his prophetic vision of China's rise has been fulfilled beyond expectations. (He did himself discredit by casting doubts on this in his other book.....perhaps as a result of Tiananmen Square.)

Above all, his Cassandra's warning for the United States remains, in my opinion, valid, despite winning the Cold War. With terrorism, skyrocketing defense spending, and another war impending, America is still at great risk of "imperial overstretch".

The bottom line seems to be that Kennedy's main thesis is correct, although his fortune-telling powers seem just average for such a gifted historian. This book deserves a B-. (But this is a much better grade than I would deign to give Huntington for his "Clash of Civilizations", or Bobbitt for his "Shield of Achilles".)

So much has happened in the 15 years since publication, that there ought to be a substantial revision of the last chapter at least. We eagerly await it.

Rating:
Summary: A very important historical explanatory model.
Review: Paul Kennedy has developed a unique approach at explaining history. Paul Kennedy's historical model focuses on a few variables, including:
1) What % of GDP a Power dedicates to defense spending in order to maintain its empire;
2) What tax burden as % of GDP does that Power need to raise in order to maintain the defense spending level required;
3) How much leeway does that Power has in increasing its tax burden on its citizen;
4) How willing are the citizen to incur the level of tax burden required to maintain the necessary defense spending level.

Using these four variables, Paul Kennedy takes us on a fascinating tour of World history. He can explain a whole lot using his model, including the rise and fall of the Roman Empire, of Napoleon, the British Empire, among many others.

The current deteriorating U.S. fiscal position with rising budget deficits, due to a defense spending boom smacks of the imperial overstretch that P. Kennedy analysed in the later stage of several now defunct empires.

We are now reliving the Reagan years with Bush Jr. who is using the exact same formula (spend more on defense, cut taxes, let budget deficit baloon, and borrow). The Reagan years turned out OK with a booming economy and stock market. But, reading this book will give you a vision on an alternative scenario. If you want to know what may happen to the U.S., this book is now as current as ever.

Rating:
Summary: Better as history than a predictor of the future
Review: Paul Kennedy's "Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" is partially a victim of the unexpected end of the Cold War. Published in 1987, Kennedy was trying to sound the alarm that a great power such as the United States puts its future economic livelyhood at stake when its defense costs become too burdonsome. In the case of the Soviet Union Kennedy was right on the money, so to speak. But the American economy has proven much more resiliant than anyone might have expected during the 80s. Kennedy's book is best read today for its account of how innovation as the result of constant warfare helped propel the West to supremacy in the world. Overall, this is a vital political science book that was required reading for a foreign policy class at my university ten years ago. I should check back to find out if it still is.

Rating:
Summary: Guns and Butter: the Latter Spread Rather Thinly
Review: Paul Kennedy's "Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" was and remains a profoundly influential thesis on the love-hate relationship between national economic growth and national military spending and the way that relationship affects "world power." Reduced to its inner truism, if you spend too much on weaponry you'll ultimately drive your economy into the ground and this will in turn lead your military capacity to spiral down as well. It's guns and butter all over again, with the added benefit that the death of the USSR can be cited as yet another example. From a reader's perspective, the trouble with the book is, for all its erudition it covers an enormous canvas and thus it spreads its narrative EXTREMELY thinly: we hear of the rise and fall of Sweden, Poland and the Hapsburgs but nothing of the color and diversity of those cultures as they made their way up, then down, the billboard chart of hegemony.

Rating:
Summary: Courageous and Sweeping Premise: Already Somewhat Dated
Review: Paul Kennedy's, Rise 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.

Rating:
Summary: A Good, Concise Historical Text.
Review: Professor Kennedy has prepared a well written historical text covering the economic change and military conflict of the Great Powers of the world from 1500 A.D. to 2000 A.D..

The only part of the text which requires modification is the prognostication of the future of the United States and other "great" world powers as stated in the last one-hundred pages of the book.

Make no mistake about it though, this book is a very good recount of pre-1980 history and should be read, reviewed and analyzed under that premise.

For example: "Although the United States is at present still in a class of its own economically and perhaps even militarily, it cannot avoid confronting the two great tests which challenge the longevity of every major power that occupies the 'number one' position in world affairs: whether, in the military/strategical realm, it can preserve a reasonable balance between the nation's perceived defese requirements and the means it possesses to maintain those commitments."

This book represents a groundbreaking treatise of historical accuracy and is a must have for any student of history.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent summary of the rise of the West
Review: Professor Kennedy's book provides an very good account of the rise of Western military, economic, and political supremacy since the early 1500s, and shows how the all the "Great Powers" have, in some form or another, suffered from the same fate. He clearly illustrates how 'imperial overstretch' has historically affected a nation's or an empire's capacity to maintain its control over large territories and overseas possession, and his book shows how economic and industrial might are positively correlated with military strenght and political influence. His comparison between Britain's imperial decline and the subsequent gradual decline experienced by the United States in both the military and economic arenas, should serve as a clear warning to our leaders and policymakers in Washington and Corporate America. As American economic and military supremacy becomes increasingly challenged in various regions of the world, and its manufacturing base continues to erode, thus limiting its capacity to wage a massive war in an industrial scale (as in WWII) to defend its vital interests; Prof. Kennedy's revelations in "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" become more and more relevant.