The future of freedom

I have read the book "The future of freedom, Illiberal democracy at home and abroad" by Fareed Zakaria. Honestly spoken, it was one of the best and most thought provoking books I have ever read. I made myself the pleasure to write a review of the book, organized by chapter.

Introduction

I thought the introduction to the book was very good since it made the reader curious and started to think about the meaning of the introduction. What it really described was how economy with nonpolitical, independent banks work today. In my opinion, it is necessary for a modern society to have a nonpolitical banking system in order to work and have legitimacy.

Introduction: The Democratic Age

What amazed me in the first chapter was the fact that you can apply democratization to all aspects in today’s society. But is the fact that quantity has become quality only positive? No, since it can create populism in politics and spur consuming that is not sustainable in the long term.  

I had never thought of the difference between democracy and liberty; the terms are often connected, which the author also mentions. However, it is important to highlight the difference between the terms. Maybe enforcing elections in developing, unstable countries is not the best way to increase freedom and human rights? Not in my opinion, and neither in the author’s.

The chapter also mentions the strong tradition of freedom in the US, which truly explains the strong opposition against today’s changes in the country, for example regarding Medicare.

As in all cases, there can always be too much of a good thing.

Chapter 1: A Brief History of Human Liberty

Zakaria really takes the honor away from Greece, which in many books is regarded as the birthplace of democracy. I was really struck by the sections about the Catholic Church and its importance. Even though many see the church as illiberal, we also have to thank it for the thought of dividing power, which is necessary for freedom.

The connection between Europe’s geography and its democratic traditions and development was very interesting. Is also reflected the importance of concurrence in society for development, as well as a middle class for a scrutinizing of the fractions with more power. To enrich and create a middle class, you need a free market. This is in line with the author’s statement that economic liberty should come before political liberty. To put it simply: first free market, then middle class, then division of power, then liberty.

Chapter 2: The Twisted Path

The second chapter reflects upon the possible dark side of democratic elections: the rise of parties with populist, racist or simply not sustainable views. Democracy is not be the best alternative, if the country itself is too unstable and lacks democratic traditions. The author continues to strengthen the statement that there exists a lowest level of economic development for a country to sustain a liberal democracy. This is logical, as in the human nature we are taught to prioritize our needs – with survival in first hand. It is only when those needs are secured that we can think of the group and contribute to liberty and well-being for all citizens.

I was struck by the difference between earned wealth and wealth that came from natural resources or aid from other countries. If a country doesn’t have to earn wealth, it doesn’t have to tax its citizens. Therefore, the state has no obligations towards the population. Thereby, the state and its economic and social systems will not develop. This explains why many countries struggle today, as well as the dark side of western countries “helping” countries by sending them money without further thought.

China is interesting in the way that economic liberalization has reached very far; however, it has not lead to vast political changes yet. Time will show if it will. In my opinion, China will need to liberalize its political structure in line with the economic liberalization since the people will claim it, communications improve and globalization increases.  

Chapter 3: Illiberal Democracy

The connection between economic development and liberal democracy flourishes throughout the book. Russia is an example of where the democratic attempts happened too early. This leads to illiberal democracies. The author, in line with my opinion, suggests that “what Africa needs more urgently than democracy is good governance”.

The section about India suggests that even though a country do have political elections, the country can still be corrupt, intolerant, illiberal and without a legitimate judicial system. West tends to romanticize India due to its “democratic progress”, but what about the progress when it comes to freedom?

Since elections require politicians to compete for people’s votes, politicians will use the easiest and most efficient way to organize support; often on racial, ethnic or religious lines since that is easy applicable for people.

I disagree with the author on page 118 where the author claims: “nowhere will it be more important that the United States get it right”. Why does America see it as their responsibility to “get it right” in other countries around the world? As a major nation there are obligations, and it is good that America recognizes them. However, the rest of the world argues that America sometimes takes on too many responsibilities on their shoulders… This was also shown at page 136.

Chapter 4: The Islamic Exception

The introduction to the chapter is interesting since it really reflects the difficulties with enforcing human rights in authorial nations with firm dictators. On the other hand, the author also describes the dark side of overthrowing a totalitarian ruler: an even worse alternative like the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

The sections about Islam were very interesting. According to me, western media does not succeed in giving a nuanced perspective of the religion. When Islam is mentioned in media, it is often in connection with terrorism, extremism or suppression of women. One cannot determine the nature of Islam, since Islam like any other religion is not what the books say, but what interpretations you make of the texts and religious customs.

I agree with the author when he says that religious fundamentalism is a consequence by failure of political institutions. And one of his best conclusions was in my opinion regarding why you cannot rule society with religion: In religion it is right or wrong, black or white. Politics is on the other hand all about compromising.

Chapter 5: Too Much of a Good Thing

I was very interested in the chapters about America since it felt very current to me currently living in America for a year. Why have the Americans lost faith in their democracy? It is shown since fewer people vote, fewer engage themselves and more and more people express their distrust and dislike of American politics. I think the American system has become too open. With reforms such as the primary elections mean that now it is the people who choose the candidates, not the party. This has made political parties unexciting in America. Political parties can accumulate interest groups to rational politics, but now, individuals cannot stand behind a sustainable suggestion only since their party does it.  As the political party declines further, being rich and famous will become even more important.  Everything is focused on gaining support.

How do candidates gain support? It is gained through short term political decisions and easy applicable standpoints. In other words, the American system has become too democratized and has gotten a disease called populism. Raising money has become the fundamental activity of a political campaign. In my point of view, this is wrong. The focus should instead be on the politics!

Chapter 6: The Death of Authority

Comparing economic systems in Sweden and USA is very interesting. Sweden has the world’s highest tax rates, but also one of the most developed welfare systems. America, on the other hand, lacks a welfare system but has through concurrence increased front-edge competence in different areas (such as health care).

 Religion in the two countries differs. Going to church is more common in America, as well as putting great emphasis in your belief. Why is that? Traditions are shaped in your childhood, but when did it really start? I don’t think belief ever will disappear. No matter how much we know scientifically, science will never be able to answer some spiritual questions. People want and need guidance in life which today becomes more and more chaotic. But why is America, such a modern country, so much more religious in comparison with the similarly modern Sweden?

The educational systems also differ significantly. If the American was characterized by elevating people rather than bringing standards down, Sweden is the opposite. Everything is adapted to “the group” and the ones who need more challenges and seldom embraced. This prevents Sweden from creating the front-edge competence it needs to compete with other fast developing countries. However, USA might consider offering good education for all individuals no matter economic situation…

Conclusion: The Way Out

The whole book focuses on the dark side of democratization, meaning that the deregulation of it has gone too far. In order to break the negative curve, governments have to go against the temptation to pander and enact policies for the long run. But in order for them to do so, the public needs to show that it will stand behind those sustainable decisions. Therefore, it all comes down to the individual. We all are responsible of how we want to shape the future.

The quote “almost every success story in the developing world has taken place under a liberal authoritarian regime” suggests that the world needs to rethink its policies in developing countries. Is “democracy” always the best solution to all issues? The answer is no; bringing freedom is not about getting rid of the tyrant, it is about building scrutinizing institutions, dividing power and creating legitimate economic and judicial systems. I would like to finish this review with a quote: “First order, then liberty”.