There is a sort of "declinism" literature that appears 20 years. In the 1980s, it is "the missile gap" w/ the USSR and "The Grand Strategy of the Soviet Union" by the eminent historian Edward Luttwak. amazon.com/Grand-Strategy…
When that grand strategy somehow did not materialize & the USSR collapsed, the threat (and books) were forgotten.
There was also, starting in the 1970s, the Japanese threat whereby Japan will buy the entire America.
When Japan went into two decades of no growth that threat too was forgotten.
The most recent variant is the "China threat". China is indeed increasing in importance but is just going back, in relative economic power, to where it was in 1500.
So if you take as your desired or normal state of affairs, the situations of China and India in the 19th, then indeed they are a "threat".
But in reality, 19thC was an anomaly when Western powers easily controlled the entire globe and that will not come back.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here is (for whoever may be interested) the list of books on China that I have read in the past 5-6 years;
in no particular order, with my assessments: 5 stars is the best, 2 the worst.
Books I reviewed on my blog are noted with ++.
John Palmer, The death of Mao, Faber & Faber, 2012 **
Jonathan Fenby, Will China dominate the 21st century, Polity, 2014 ***
Quan Yanchi, Mao: Man, not God ***
Jacques Gernet, Daily life in China on the Eve of Mongol Invasion 1250-76, Stanford UP, 1962. ****
++Giovanni Arrighi, Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the 21st Century, Verso, 2007. *****
Minxin Pei, China’s crony capitalism, Harvard UP, 2016. ****
Minxin Pei, China’s Trapped Transition, Harvard UP, 2006. ***
Nirad Chadhury, Thy Hand, Great Anarch: India 1921-1952.
"Ever since I have become capable of thinking I have despised public opinion. I have realized that it follows events & cannot influence them, & besides shifts with a blind fickleness which is terrifying to watch." (p.69)
..One must say that the economic theories of political violence and terrorism are total nonsense. I would set down most emphatically that nowhere in the world has terrorism been, or is, a product of economic distress. It springs solely from racial or class hatred." (p.314).
[On British report on India]
"It was as if the wolf, when presenting his argument to the lamb for eating it was assuming that he was speaking only to a fellow-wolf & at the same time taking it for granted that if the lamb was not persuaded it must be a very unreasonable animal."
A new (first ever) paper contrasting in detail income from surveys and fiscal/tax data. osf.io/preprints/soca…
In the case of the US, no difference in income levels and shares at all for percentiles 1-99, incl. practically no difference for percentiles 96-99.
But there are significant differences when it comes to the top 1%. According to the tax data, the top 1% takes 18% of total income; according to surveys only 10%.
Yet, an unknown part of the difference between the two sources is due to the fiscal data's **misclassification** of corporate income as personal income due to the tax reform in 1986.
Thus fiscal data may overstate true increase in the top 1% share. And surveys may understate it.
A very long thread (in Serbian) on an excellent book on 1968 student demonstrations in Yugoslavia. amazon.com/Jugoslavija-sv…
Upravo sam zavrsio knjigu hrvatskog istoricara Hrvoja Klasica, “Jugoslavija i svijet 1968”. Najveci deo knjige tretira studentske demonstracije 1968. Klasic daje veoma precizan hronoski pregled demonstracija, njihovo politicko znacenje, efekat na SKJ u razlicitim republikama.
Drugi deo knjige posvecen je medju-republickim (medju-nacionalnim) odnosima u toku tih godina, i poziciji YU I Tita u svetu.
Knjiga je odlicna.
I had a very nice conversation with @EconTalker about the methodology and objective of economics. We mentioned also the "Nobel" prize in economics. Here are several of my slides.