The Post-American World - Reception

Reception

This is a relentlessly intelligent book that eschews simple-minded projections... Zakaria proceeds more subtly than the run-of-the-mill declinist by stressing American advantages not captured by growth rates and export surpluses. ... And maybe it takes a Bombay-born immigrant like Zakaria ... to remind this faltering giant of its unique and enduring strengths. Josef Joffe, New York Times Book Review

Various reviewers called the writing intelligent and sharp. The review in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette called it a "succinct, short and comprehensible volume...full of sharp, almost aphoristic, amusing observations". John Ikenberry of Foreign Affairs saw Zakaria's characteristic elegance and insight reflected in the book. The reviewers in Policy and Economic Affairs identified Zakaria's strengths as being the breadth of evidence used to support the points and his use of personal accounts to summarize the research. The reviewer for USA Today Magazine wrote that "Zakaria analyzes problems brilliantly". The ability to communicate complex situations clearly in plain language made the book accessible to a wide range of readers. Several media outlets picked up the story of Barack Obama reading this book while campaigning for the 2008 presidential election.

Critics commented on Zakaria's teleological point-of-view. In a review published in The Progressive, Johann Hari called Zakaria's assertions Thatcherist referring to the belief that there is no alternative to globalization and free market capitalism. Hari cited examples where policies such as what Zakaria advocated led to disasters, like the 1999 collapse of Argentinian economy, and financial deregulation resulting in the financial crisis of 2007–2010, which had begun just after the book was published. In the book, Zakaria maintains that economic dysfunctions are caused by, and can be solved through, specific government policies. When asked, in February 2009, about the financial crisis, Zakaria asserted that the financial practices that created the collapse were American practices, and that it contributed to the post-American mentality that the US does not have all of the answers. Hari also disagreed with Zakaria's view of the economic histories of Britain and America, which in Zakaria portrayal ignores extended periods of protectionism during which their industries were developed to the point where they were capable of competing with other countries. Likewise, academic and author Brendan Simms found that Zakaria too closely co-related national wealth with national power in his argument that dispersal of global prosperity will necessarily affect global balance of power.

The Economist review found a disconnection between the book's arguments and its sources in that the book addresses international and national (especially analysis of China and India), but nearly all the people behind the sources cited are based, or spent most of their careers, in the New York-Washington corridor. Richard Florida in The Globe and Mail and Michael Vlahos in The American Interest commented that Zakaria state-centric framework distorts the real base of power, which, for commentator Florida, is in cities like Shanghai and Hong Kong rather than all of China. Vlahos likened Zakaria to a courtier mirroring back the ruling narrative to meet the global elite's emotional needs. Regarding the book's focus, one reviewer criticized it by writing "The Post-American World is missing precisely what its title promises: a discussion of what a world might look like that is not dominated by the United States". Errors concerning characterization of Buddhism as Indian religion and Buddha's birthplace as India rather than Lumbini resulted in Nepali politicians demanding an apology from Zakaria or a printed correction.