What do you think?
Rate this book
Six Faces of Globalization: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why It Matters
A Financial Times Best Book of the YearA Fortune Best Book of the YearA ProMarket Best Political Economy Book of the YearAn essential guide to the intractable public debates about the virtues and vices of economic globalization, cutting through the complexity to reveal the fault lines that divide us and the points of agreement that might bring us together.Globalization has lifted millions out of poverty. Globalization is a weapon the rich use to exploit the poor. Globalization builds bridges across national boundaries. Globalization fuels the populism and great-power competition that is tearing the world apart.When it comes to the politics of free trade and open borders, the camps are dug in, producing a kaleidoscope of claims and counterclaims, unlikely alliances, and unexpected foes. But what exactly are we fighting about? And how might we approach these issues more productively? Anthea Roberts and Nicolas Lamp cut through the confusion with an indispensable survey of the interests, logics, and ideologies driving these intractable debates, which lie at the heart of so much political dispute and decision making. The authors expertly guide us through six competing narratives about the virtues and vices of the old establishment view that globalization benefits everyone (win-win), the pessimistic belief that it threatens us all with pandemics and climate change (lose-lose), along with various rival accounts that focus on specific winners and losers, from China to America’s Rust Belt.Instead of picking sides, Six Faces of Globalization gives all these positions their due, showing how each deploys sophisticated arguments and compelling evidence. Both globalization’s boosters and detractors will come away with their eyes opened. By isolating the fundamental value conflicts—growth versus sustainability, efficiency versus social stability—driving disagreement and showing where rival narratives converge, Roberts and Lamp provide a holistic framework for understanding current debates. In doing so, they showcase a more integrative way of thinking about complex problems.
389 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 28, 2021
69 people are currently reading
1029 people want to read
About the author
Anthea Roberts
4 books7 followersAnthea Roberts is Professor in the School of Regulation and Global Governance at Australian National University and author of the prizewinning Is International Law International? In 2019, she was named the world’s leading international law scholar by League of Scholars.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
December 15, 2023
I often listen to conservative talk radio to get a glimpse into their alternative reality. One of the hosts has a mantra which he repeats several times per hour which goes something like this: "We're right. They're wrong. That settles it. The arguments presented on this program cannot be broken." This little celebration of closed mindedness seems to be popular with his listeners, but it stands in stark contrast to the efforts of Andrea Roberts and Nicolas Lamp, who in this book, attempt to objectively present at least six different narratives on the pros and cons of 21st century globalization. In addition to providing lengthy narratives of each viewpoint on globalization, they have prepared Venn diagrams to show the overlap in the positions of the proponents of each viewpoint. Their stated goal is to clear some common ground among the various outlooks on globalization in hopes of lighting a few candles of compromise and empathy as an alternative to the darkness cursing that is now so prevalent in public discourse.
I wish them luck, however I have been rendered terminally pessimistic by the inflexibility of my fellow Americans in recent years.
I wish them luck, however I have been rendered terminally pessimistic by the inflexibility of my fellow Americans in recent years.
May 8, 2022
Rather than a familiar polemic for a perspective on globalization (e.g., it's good or it's bad), the Six Faces of Globalization is a polemic for simultaneously and sympathetically incorporating multiple perspectives on globalization. I would love to read books that take a similar approach to a range of other economic and non-economic issues.
The "Six Faces of Globalization" recounted in the book are:
1. The Establishment Narrative: Trade is good
2. The Left-wing Populist Narrative: Trade helps the rich at the expense of the working class
3. The Right-wing Populist Narrative: Trade helps poor countries (and immigrants) at the expense of the working class
4. The Corporate Power Narrative: Trade helps translational corporations at the expense of people
5. The Geoeconomic Narrative: Trade helps some countries at the expense of other countries
6. The Global Threats Narrative: Trade imperils us all through climate change or pandemics
(They also talk about non-Western perspectives like dependency where globalization hurts poor countries, the Asian narrative of globalization helping, the desire of China and Russia to set up alternative rules, etc.)
The authors do a good job of showing how different globalization policies are motivated by different perspectives, in some cases overlapping, but in other cases contradictory. For example, US policy towards China has elements of all of the above, even some of the tariffs were simultaneously motivated by the Establishment Narrative (opening up China to trade) and the protectionist narratives.
The authors do not choose between these perspectives but instead urge us to take a kaleidoscopic perspective that tries to make some alliances between the different perspectives.
In some ways the strength of the book is its sympathy for different perspectives. But at times it was frustrating. The left-wing narrative (trade helps the rich at the expense of the poor), for example, was stronger on facts about inequality increasing than it was on analysis linking this in any qualitatively important way to trade. Some of the zero sum perspectives in the different faces are clearly based on fallacies and misconnections that should be dispelled and not sympathized with.
But, overall the multiple perspectives is a strength. National security concerns (Narrative 5) can sometimes be a thinly veiled excuse for protectionism but can also be legitimate. There are good reasons to worry that corporations are overly influential in the way that "free trade" agreements are crafted (Narrative 4). Etc.
Finally I should say that this book is unusually well written. It is very well structured and organized. It takes a few metaphors (e.g., the Rubik's cube) and uses them really well. It organizes the arguments and sub-arguments in a way that is both logical and readable. All in all, both enjoyable and enlightening.
The "Six Faces of Globalization" recounted in the book are:
1. The Establishment Narrative: Trade is good
2. The Left-wing Populist Narrative: Trade helps the rich at the expense of the working class
3. The Right-wing Populist Narrative: Trade helps poor countries (and immigrants) at the expense of the working class
4. The Corporate Power Narrative: Trade helps translational corporations at the expense of people
5. The Geoeconomic Narrative: Trade helps some countries at the expense of other countries
6. The Global Threats Narrative: Trade imperils us all through climate change or pandemics
(They also talk about non-Western perspectives like dependency where globalization hurts poor countries, the Asian narrative of globalization helping, the desire of China and Russia to set up alternative rules, etc.)
The authors do a good job of showing how different globalization policies are motivated by different perspectives, in some cases overlapping, but in other cases contradictory. For example, US policy towards China has elements of all of the above, even some of the tariffs were simultaneously motivated by the Establishment Narrative (opening up China to trade) and the protectionist narratives.
The authors do not choose between these perspectives but instead urge us to take a kaleidoscopic perspective that tries to make some alliances between the different perspectives.
In some ways the strength of the book is its sympathy for different perspectives. But at times it was frustrating. The left-wing narrative (trade helps the rich at the expense of the poor), for example, was stronger on facts about inequality increasing than it was on analysis linking this in any qualitatively important way to trade. Some of the zero sum perspectives in the different faces are clearly based on fallacies and misconnections that should be dispelled and not sympathized with.
But, overall the multiple perspectives is a strength. National security concerns (Narrative 5) can sometimes be a thinly veiled excuse for protectionism but can also be legitimate. There are good reasons to worry that corporations are overly influential in the way that "free trade" agreements are crafted (Narrative 4). Etc.
Finally I should say that this book is unusually well written. It is very well structured and organized. It takes a few metaphors (e.g., the Rubik's cube) and uses them really well. It organizes the arguments and sub-arguments in a way that is both logical and readable. All in all, both enjoyable and enlightening.
December 14, 2021
Six Faces is a very clever meta-analysis of the western Globalization debate, examining the main stories we tell about it, and how they have evolved in the face of turmoil over inequality, competition, climate and so on. Six Faces is the kind of stocktake book we all regularly need, but a form which, outside of textbooks is so rarely provided, and rarely with such insightful analysis.
The closest analogue for this book I can think of is the ‘schools of thought’ work you find in fields such as Foreign Policy or parts of Philosophy. Rather than get bogged down in identifying specific actors or trying to tease out how the paradigms function, this work concentrates on ‘narratives’, the stories we tell about globalization. Six are identified and explored with a fair minded chapter on each: Establishment Narrative, Left wing, Right Wing, Corporate Power, Geoeconomic and finally Global Threat narratives.
The concentration on the narratives rather than the political groupings allows the authors to explore three useful further themes. First, a chapter on how actors pick up and modify these narratives to serve other strategic goals. Second, a series of chapters exploring how the narratives have evolved, in relation to new issues (such as covid or climate change) and may evolve in terms of overlaps and alliances. Finally, there is a fascinating and valuable chapter on the need for scholars and officials to think about issues in multi-faceted ways, able to both deeply understand and ideally synthetise the issues in purposeful ways.
One of the charms of this book is that I found myself compelled by several of these narratives. I respect and generally embrace the logic and results of the establishment narrative. I also value the way the left and right wing narratives highlight important problems that need urgent address. In my preference for competitive markets I readily accept the logic that too much corporate power is dangerous. Strangely it was the geoeconomics and global threat, those views perhaps closest to my own field of study that I find the least compelling, especially the latter.
That persuasiveness is a deliberate effort by the authors, who stress the need for a form of ‘cognitive empathy’ as a foundation for understanding. To carry this out, they manage an impressive scholarly sense of distance. Normally I prefer those who muck in and argue a specific case, but such an insertion of personal views would have run counter to the purpose and goal of this book. It would have been very easy for the authors to have said ‘here are six faces and in our last chapter we show why our 7th is the best and only right answer’. This book is quietly radical in refusing to take such an easy path.
I hope that more authors do seek to pursue similar such works. If they do, the last chapter offers an important first step in thinking through the nature and value of such work. It raised for me two questions that seemed somewhat implicit in this work.
First, the book ends with an endorsement of ‘foxes’ over ‘hedgehogs’ (following Isiah Berlin’s famous schema), as well as a call for ‘synthesizing mind[s]’ which seek to ‘knit together information from disparate sources into a coherent whole’. I do however wonder if there is an implicit tension here between these two positions. It seems that the knitting together of details is the core skill of hedgehogs. True, their combinations tend to subsume rather than regenerate the materials they are working with, yet they do better than any at establishing those complementary relationships between elements. More so, hedgehogs inherently assume that such a synthesis exists and can be found. This fox isn’t always so sure. Certainly some issues are, but maybe others by their nature will remain patchworks. And can foxes also knit together? Or are they best placed to tease apart, recognising key distinctions?
Second, the search for a synthesis seems to be based on the assumption that a relatively unified global consensus about narrative is beneficial. The book notes that such a consensus existed in the 1990s and early 2000s (the establishment narrative) and it’s form reflect an attempt to explore the breakdown of that consensus. Yet, should we assume that having a dominant narrative was beneficial, or that we are harmed by the obvious disunity and debate we see today? There’s obviously a spectrum here, no one wants global conformism, nor bitter breakdowns where the gaps are too big to even talk to one another. Yet what is the right place to be on that spectrum? The book seems to imply the movement back to a consensus is the healthier state, again I think that’s worth thinking through.
I sometimes describe books I review here as ‘Citizenship’ books. That is, the kind of book I think we should just buy a copy of for every adult and say ‘read this so you can participate in your society’. This is one such book. It doesn’t tell you how to think about globalization but is sure to improve the quality of your thinking about it. Not only by helping you learn a lot about globalization and its discontents, but also about how we need to try and see these issues in multi-faceted ways if we are to genuinely grapple with them.
Recommended.
The closest analogue for this book I can think of is the ‘schools of thought’ work you find in fields such as Foreign Policy or parts of Philosophy. Rather than get bogged down in identifying specific actors or trying to tease out how the paradigms function, this work concentrates on ‘narratives’, the stories we tell about globalization. Six are identified and explored with a fair minded chapter on each: Establishment Narrative, Left wing, Right Wing, Corporate Power, Geoeconomic and finally Global Threat narratives.
The concentration on the narratives rather than the political groupings allows the authors to explore three useful further themes. First, a chapter on how actors pick up and modify these narratives to serve other strategic goals. Second, a series of chapters exploring how the narratives have evolved, in relation to new issues (such as covid or climate change) and may evolve in terms of overlaps and alliances. Finally, there is a fascinating and valuable chapter on the need for scholars and officials to think about issues in multi-faceted ways, able to both deeply understand and ideally synthetise the issues in purposeful ways.
One of the charms of this book is that I found myself compelled by several of these narratives. I respect and generally embrace the logic and results of the establishment narrative. I also value the way the left and right wing narratives highlight important problems that need urgent address. In my preference for competitive markets I readily accept the logic that too much corporate power is dangerous. Strangely it was the geoeconomics and global threat, those views perhaps closest to my own field of study that I find the least compelling, especially the latter.
That persuasiveness is a deliberate effort by the authors, who stress the need for a form of ‘cognitive empathy’ as a foundation for understanding. To carry this out, they manage an impressive scholarly sense of distance. Normally I prefer those who muck in and argue a specific case, but such an insertion of personal views would have run counter to the purpose and goal of this book. It would have been very easy for the authors to have said ‘here are six faces and in our last chapter we show why our 7th is the best and only right answer’. This book is quietly radical in refusing to take such an easy path.
I hope that more authors do seek to pursue similar such works. If they do, the last chapter offers an important first step in thinking through the nature and value of such work. It raised for me two questions that seemed somewhat implicit in this work.
First, the book ends with an endorsement of ‘foxes’ over ‘hedgehogs’ (following Isiah Berlin’s famous schema), as well as a call for ‘synthesizing mind[s]’ which seek to ‘knit together information from disparate sources into a coherent whole’. I do however wonder if there is an implicit tension here between these two positions. It seems that the knitting together of details is the core skill of hedgehogs. True, their combinations tend to subsume rather than regenerate the materials they are working with, yet they do better than any at establishing those complementary relationships between elements. More so, hedgehogs inherently assume that such a synthesis exists and can be found. This fox isn’t always so sure. Certainly some issues are, but maybe others by their nature will remain patchworks. And can foxes also knit together? Or are they best placed to tease apart, recognising key distinctions?
Second, the search for a synthesis seems to be based on the assumption that a relatively unified global consensus about narrative is beneficial. The book notes that such a consensus existed in the 1990s and early 2000s (the establishment narrative) and it’s form reflect an attempt to explore the breakdown of that consensus. Yet, should we assume that having a dominant narrative was beneficial, or that we are harmed by the obvious disunity and debate we see today? There’s obviously a spectrum here, no one wants global conformism, nor bitter breakdowns where the gaps are too big to even talk to one another. Yet what is the right place to be on that spectrum? The book seems to imply the movement back to a consensus is the healthier state, again I think that’s worth thinking through.
I sometimes describe books I review here as ‘Citizenship’ books. That is, the kind of book I think we should just buy a copy of for every adult and say ‘read this so you can participate in your society’. This is one such book. It doesn’t tell you how to think about globalization but is sure to improve the quality of your thinking about it. Not only by helping you learn a lot about globalization and its discontents, but also about how we need to try and see these issues in multi-faceted ways if we are to genuinely grapple with them.
Recommended.
July 23, 2022
The core argument of this book is that the issue of economic globalization can be looked at from different perspectives, each having their own diagnoses and narratives, which are inherently driven by a different set of values. For example, a populist right narrative on economic globalization (advocating e.g. more protectionist policies) is fundamentally driven by values of community, family, identity. Same goes for a populist left, a geoeconomic, a corporate power, or global threats narrative. What it does well, therefore, is comprehensively outlining fault lines and categorisations on the topic of (economic) globalization, extending far beyond the 'establishment view' and treating every perspective on its own merit. Even though they only address this shortly, they even acknowledge their own blind spots and biases. Yet, from a conceptual point of view, the use of terms like 'populist left' or the 'global threats' narratives is a bit sloppy, with some of the examples of what actually constitutes narrative X or Y raising some eyebrows.
In the second part of the book, they use these six narratives as building blocks to show how actors strategically use other narratives, how they sometimes overlap, include fundamental trade-offs, and how they can be used to better understand debates about Covid, climate change, the renegotiation of NAFTA, the Trump tariffs, or the valuation of work. This second part is a bit tedious and repetitive, with too many examples, also because it perhaps demands too much of the six narratives. As mentioned, you could already have much criticism on their conceptual efforts, which then multiplies when using these in these broader analyses.
More fundamentally, the key merit of the book is that it advocates a type of 'integrative thinking' (or 'thinking like a fox' as they call it): using different perspectives, seeing where they overlap, and searching for the scope of potential alliances. Hence, firmly moving away from the 'establishment view', but also from any other that is challenging its hegemonic place. They succeed in convincing the reader that each perspective has interesting aspects, especially because of this linkage to core values underlying it, and therefore a role to play. On a more critical note, you could question the originality of the argument a bit, since the role of ideas and discourse is widely acknowledged in political science literature (the authors are both international law scholars) hence raising questions why they did not engage more with existing PS constructivist literature. This would have been a nice putting into practice of their own integrative thinking as well.
In the second part of the book, they use these six narratives as building blocks to show how actors strategically use other narratives, how they sometimes overlap, include fundamental trade-offs, and how they can be used to better understand debates about Covid, climate change, the renegotiation of NAFTA, the Trump tariffs, or the valuation of work. This second part is a bit tedious and repetitive, with too many examples, also because it perhaps demands too much of the six narratives. As mentioned, you could already have much criticism on their conceptual efforts, which then multiplies when using these in these broader analyses.
More fundamentally, the key merit of the book is that it advocates a type of 'integrative thinking' (or 'thinking like a fox' as they call it): using different perspectives, seeing where they overlap, and searching for the scope of potential alliances. Hence, firmly moving away from the 'establishment view', but also from any other that is challenging its hegemonic place. They succeed in convincing the reader that each perspective has interesting aspects, especially because of this linkage to core values underlying it, and therefore a role to play. On a more critical note, you could question the originality of the argument a bit, since the role of ideas and discourse is widely acknowledged in political science literature (the authors are both international law scholars) hence raising questions why they did not engage more with existing PS constructivist literature. This would have been a nice putting into practice of their own integrative thinking as well.
January 15, 2022
2022 might have just started but I am pretty sure that this book will end up as one of the best books I read this year. Highly recommended! It provides a well formulated framework to understand current political and economic debates.
August 30, 2022
Excellent application of coherent pluralism to globalization.
July 20, 2022
This book provides a much needed meta-framework for understanding many of today’s political debates. I feel like I’m a better person for having read it because it allowed me to understand the values and viewpoints of those whose political beliefs I do not share, or dismissed or flat-out never even considered. Not only that, it shows how through integrating these different viewpoints there is a potential for fostering new alliances to achieve policy outcomes which are better able to address the complex issues presented by globalisation.
I cannot recommend this book enough - 10 stars.
I cannot recommend this book enough - 10 stars.
July 8, 2022
Exceptional, Informative.
March 23, 2022
This is probably the best book of all 2021. Certainly, the best I’ve read so far this year. I’ve followed the work of Professor Anthea Roberts in the area of international investment law for some years now and I am very pleased I do because reading her latest book correlates to increasing one’s perceptions and knowledge base. Indeed, in this book, Professor Anthea Roberts and Associate Professor Nicholas Lamp have presented a tour of force when it comes to Globalisation and its intractable intersections. This is great work. The first chapters look at Globalisation and canvassed it through what they aptly named "a view from dragonfly eyes". The Book sets to look into a meta-analysis of the mainstream debates currently taking place in Western Culture focusing on narratives around globalisation, namely Establishment, Left Wing, Right Wing, Corporate Power, Geoeconomics, and Global Threats based narratives. All of these narratives were carefully considered - although not necessarily bogged down on theory, here the narratives are considered as they are deployed in the political arena and according to their internal logic rather than proponents’ motivations because the authors argued, they are generally present in Western culture and are not the result of any particular proponent, possessing life outside key proponents' influences.
They continue their analysis of these Globalisation narratives at the point where they differ, for example, according to a level of analysis (e.g. national, international, and transnational), units of analysis (e.g class, communities, countries, and corporations), and in relation to flows (indicating gains or losses). By understanding how these narratives interact you can better appreciate their goals, and how they can best aid things like good policy. You can also track politicians and commentators on how they change and switch narratives to advance their cause so you are on the top of your game and theirs. The book analyses and offers as an example the Trump administration's trade approaches to illustrate how the dynamic interplay of these narratives, in particular in relation to some overlap among them, when Trump citing Section 301 imposed what can be seen as protectionism. The book added to the debate a stunning analysis showing how two narratives interplayed and -as a temporary measure- appealed to two different parts of the electorate, and was then maintained by the Biden administration. The final chapters are very intelligent and proposed a new way of interacting with these narratives calling it integration. I like this. It is provocative and yet swimming in fabulousness and perhaps an opportunity to continue research in that - this book offers the contours of what can be seen as a new proposition: By using meta-analysis it proposes the insight that a grand new theory of inclusivity is possible, desirable and indeed offers us our future (so long as we are willing to use our empathy to understand others!) but above all else, it systematises the key narratives and their place in the 21st Century and with copious notes!
The conclusion is guaranteed to take the proverbial beam out of your eye. In short, this book takes us from the known spaces where “Loony left” or “basket of deplorables” are thrown around only too quickly and too expediently to a place where we can see, understand and apply these narratives as tools to maximize better public policy and statecraft. The best offering of 2021. And the best book I’ve read so far in 2022. I could feel my IQ going up. I’m left suffering that blues that stays with you when you finish a book you really like. Mostly because I doubt this book can be bested this year. 5 stars. For sure.
They continue their analysis of these Globalisation narratives at the point where they differ, for example, according to a level of analysis (e.g. national, international, and transnational), units of analysis (e.g class, communities, countries, and corporations), and in relation to flows (indicating gains or losses). By understanding how these narratives interact you can better appreciate their goals, and how they can best aid things like good policy. You can also track politicians and commentators on how they change and switch narratives to advance their cause so you are on the top of your game and theirs. The book analyses and offers as an example the Trump administration's trade approaches to illustrate how the dynamic interplay of these narratives, in particular in relation to some overlap among them, when Trump citing Section 301 imposed what can be seen as protectionism. The book added to the debate a stunning analysis showing how two narratives interplayed and -as a temporary measure- appealed to two different parts of the electorate, and was then maintained by the Biden administration. The final chapters are very intelligent and proposed a new way of interacting with these narratives calling it integration. I like this. It is provocative and yet swimming in fabulousness and perhaps an opportunity to continue research in that - this book offers the contours of what can be seen as a new proposition: By using meta-analysis it proposes the insight that a grand new theory of inclusivity is possible, desirable and indeed offers us our future (so long as we are willing to use our empathy to understand others!) but above all else, it systematises the key narratives and their place in the 21st Century and with copious notes!
The conclusion is guaranteed to take the proverbial beam out of your eye. In short, this book takes us from the known spaces where “Loony left” or “basket of deplorables” are thrown around only too quickly and too expediently to a place where we can see, understand and apply these narratives as tools to maximize better public policy and statecraft. The best offering of 2021. And the best book I’ve read so far in 2022. I could feel my IQ going up. I’m left suffering that blues that stays with you when you finish a book you really like. Mostly because I doubt this book can be bested this year. 5 stars. For sure.
November 24, 2022
Eye Opening
This book exposed me to thoughts and ideas that were new to me. My inclination toward the establishment narrative may need some adjustment. This book really makes you ponder what is being said. You may need to read some paragraphs a second time to fully understand the concepts. A college course could be developed around this book. All in all, a very worthwhile read.
This book exposed me to thoughts and ideas that were new to me. My inclination toward the establishment narrative may need some adjustment. This book really makes you ponder what is being said. You may need to read some paragraphs a second time to fully understand the concepts. A college course could be developed around this book. All in all, a very worthwhile read.
January 18, 2024
Six Faces is an easy to read primer on the many impacts and associated policies of international trade organized into six "narratives" (Establishment, left-wing populist, right-wing populist, geoeconomic, corporate power, global threats). The authors claim based on anecdotal evidence that Westerners who communicate about global trade mostly emphasize a particular group of trade impacts and associated policy prescriptions within one of six narratives. However, it's unclear which Westerners think or communicate within these constraints: trade policy professionals, politicians or you and I. In any case, I find the claim unconvincing. It's more likely that the trade impacts most important to a particular individual depend on their interests whether or not they fall within a single narrative. But, I like the categorization as a memory aid. Later, they show that some trade policies benefit multiple concerns while some policies conflict. Further, they describe how both the pandemic and climate change are impacted by emphasizing different aspects of trade. They take a quick stab at portraying a few non-Western trade narratives. This section suffers from a lack of concrete policy examples. Finally, they make a pitch for taking a broader, more interdisciplinary perspective in the mold of Tetlock's superforecasting foxes rather than being trade policy hedgehog with just one narrative.
January 23, 2022
This is a fantastic book that illustrates several things.
1. it's possible -- and necessary -- to empathetically engage with the perspectives of those different from you.
2. There are constructive ways of doing it that help you address hard policy and social challenges.
3. Doing so can de-escalate existential debates.
More of this. Their thinking is built on that of Jonathan Haidt, among others. I encountered this book on the Sinica podcast by Kaiser Kuo. That podcast focused understanding China. But you can imagine this methodology as a good way of engagement on a range of issues.
1. it's possible -- and necessary -- to empathetically engage with the perspectives of those different from you.
2. There are constructive ways of doing it that help you address hard policy and social challenges.
3. Doing so can de-escalate existential debates.
More of this. Their thinking is built on that of Jonathan Haidt, among others. I encountered this book on the Sinica podcast by Kaiser Kuo. That podcast focused understanding China. But you can imagine this methodology as a good way of engagement on a range of issues.
January 5, 2023
This book is a very necessary read in a contemporary world of political polarization — in the U.S. especially, but also observed around the globe. I personally enjoyed how they stepped back to create a meta-framework instead of picking a side and diminishing all others. This is the type of analysis that allows the reader to make choices about their own set of political and economic beliefs, and evaluate different prescription policies. I love how it touched on so many relevant issues such as climate change, coronavirus pandemic, U.S. tech rivalry with China to cite a few without over-focusing on any of them. Read this for a class, but would definitely read it again for fun.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 19, 2022
In this book "The six views or faces of Globalization" were discussed without any judgment or conclusions from the authors. However, they suggested a way forward may be crafted out taking all the views in to consideration. In my view that is unlikely if not impossible. Like the stock markets that have different views with millions of participants, some direction will emerge and there will be a few winners and large number of marginal winners (on absolute scale) and a few losers. That is what history seems to show and it will be no different now or in future.
April 24, 2022
This is a great introduction book. I'd dub it a "Globalization for dummies political-enthusiasts and non-polisci majors".
It provides a meta-summary (and well cited) of the six major narratives in western discourse regarding globalization and adds some analysis in the final chapters. In our increasingly polarizing political discourse, I very much welcome this balanced and integrative approach to summarizing all sides of the debate.
Indispensable pre-dinner party reading material if dining with academics!
It provides a meta-summary (and well cited) of the six major narratives in western discourse regarding globalization and adds some analysis in the final chapters. In our increasingly polarizing political discourse, I very much welcome this balanced and integrative approach to summarizing all sides of the debate.
Indispensable pre-dinner party reading material if dining with academics!
December 29, 2023
The best book I have read on economics, globalization, and the current geopolitical moment. I have not stopped recommending this book to family and friends, it is one of the most important books I have ever read.
The authors advocate a sort of “geopolitical empathy” attempting to understand the grievances and successes that have led different groups to vastly different understandings of the global community.
The kaleidoscopic approach suggested by the authors is a refreshing and much needed alternative to entrenchment within a particular narrative.
The authors advocate a sort of “geopolitical empathy” attempting to understand the grievances and successes that have led different groups to vastly different understandings of the global community.
The kaleidoscopic approach suggested by the authors is a refreshing and much needed alternative to entrenchment within a particular narrative.
November 17, 2021
And predictably, the solution is obvious: these bureaucrats need more power to control the lives of others. And once they have total control magically nirvana will the standard. For now, you will just have to work, because as tax payer you have to pay for their wages, their generous pensions, their all expenses paid trips, and for every nephew they want to hire, and the nephews are many.
September 11, 2024
it was a very interesting book. i just think a lot of what was said could have been reduced to a single page or paragraph. although repetition is great there comes a point where you don't need to give the same example just worded differently. i did like all the analogies though it was super helpful to understand concepts
April 16, 2025
A pretty even handedlook at the issues around globalization
A good description of the different points of view,via a six sided model. Still very relevant, though things have moved rather fast in the 4 or so years since it was written.
A good description of the different points of view,via a six sided model. Still very relevant, though things have moved rather fast in the 4 or so years since it was written.
September 4, 2025
Really clearly articulates the different perspectives on globalization and the benefits and drawbacks it has on different people around the world. Got a bit repetitive by the end but the first 2/3 was great.
October 19, 2025
Read this for my MBA and it’s a tidy summary of why the world looks like it does today. It does a good job of explaining why we must hold many, seemingly contradictory truths, about globalization in our mind at the same time to find a way forward.
March 20, 2022
6.5/10
June 11, 2022
Interesting ideas but found the execution a bit dry and skimmed over parts of it
July 17, 2022
Highly intriguing. Utterly fascinating. Extremely well researched.
February 2, 2023
Very dense. Very interesting and valuable to be able to understand different perspectives. I would have appreciated an abbreviated “for dummies” version.
March 8, 2023
I like the approach but the writing style is rather difficult to follow
June 27, 2024
A great book that I read for a great seminar.
September 5, 2023
Incredibly important book in these times of division, ideological dispute and tribalism. It provides a meta-narrative of (economic) globalization in which 6 dominant narratives are projected on a Rubic’s cube: an establishment-, a left-wing populist-, a right wing populist-, a corporate power-, a geo-economic-, and a global threats narrative. It untangles these 6 narratives in terms of level of analysis, units of analysis, winners and losers, distributive flows, underlying values, core proponents and their rationale. On the basis of these narratives policy proposals are analyzed, illustrating overlapping and conflicting parts in these. Finally, all of the narratives are plotted in a kaleidoscopic frame in order to lay out the narrative’s different views on several current global topics in society. In addition there is a short piece on less Western-centric narratives, which are highly relevant in terms of the new rising multi-polar world stage.
Highly recommended for those who are interested in seeing the economic, political and every day world through other people’s eyes, and those who are tired of calling the perpetual other woke, stupid or elitist.
For me it’s mind-boggling that this book has not been given more attention. I highly recommend this one.
Highly recommended for those who are interested in seeing the economic, political and every day world through other people’s eyes, and those who are tired of calling the perpetual other woke, stupid or elitist.
For me it’s mind-boggling that this book has not been given more attention. I highly recommend this one.
February 21, 2025
It’s been too long between reading and writing the review to remember much. One of those books where the topic is discussed online everyday so the book’s ideas don’t seem fresh
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews