What do you think?
Rate this book
The Globalization Myth: Why Regions Matter
A case for why regionalization, not globalization, has been the biggest economic trend of the past forty years
The conventional wisdom about globalization is wrong. Over the past forty years as companies, money, ideas, and people went abroad more often than not, they looked regional rather than globally. O’Neil details this transformation and the rise of three major regional hubs in Asia, Europe, and North America. Current technological, demographic, and geopolitical trends look only to deepen these regional ties. O'Neil argues that this has urgent implications for the United States. Regionalization has enhanced economic competitiveness and prosperity in Europe and Asia. It could do the same for the United States, if only it would embrace its neighbors.
The conventional wisdom about globalization is wrong. Over the past forty years as companies, money, ideas, and people went abroad more often than not, they looked regional rather than globally. O’Neil details this transformation and the rise of three major regional hubs in Asia, Europe, and North America. Current technological, demographic, and geopolitical trends look only to deepen these regional ties. O'Neil argues that this has urgent implications for the United States. Regionalization has enhanced economic competitiveness and prosperity in Europe and Asia. It could do the same for the United States, if only it would embrace its neighbors.
240 pages, Hardcover
Published October 18, 2022
15 people are currently reading
434 people want to read
About the author
Shannon K. O'Neil
5 books17 followersShannon K. O'Neil is the vice president, deputy director of studies, and Nelson and David Rockefeller senior fellow for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. She is an expert on Latin America, global trade, U.S.-Mexico relations, corruption, democracy, and immigration.
O’Neil is the author of the forthcoming The Globalization Myth: Regionalization and How America's Neighbors Help it Compete (Yale University Press, 2022), which chronicles the rise of three main global manufacturing and supply chain hubs and what they mean for U.S. economic competitiveness. She also wrote Two Nations Indivisible: Mexico, the United States, and the Road Ahead (Oxford University Press, 2013), which analyzes the political, economic, and social transformations Mexico has undergone over the last three decades and why these changes matter for the United States. She is a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion, and frequent guest on news, radio, and podcasts. O’Neil has testified before Congress on both Mexico and Latin America, and regularly speaks at global academic, business, and policy conferences.
O’Neil has lived and worked in Mexico and Argentina and travels extensively in Latin America. She was a Fulbright scholar and a Justice, Welfare, and Economics fellow at Harvard University, and has taught Latin American politics at Columbia University. Before turning to policy, O'Neil worked in the private sector as an equity analyst at Indosuez Capital and Credit Lyonnais Securities. She holds a BA from Yale University, an MA in international relations from Yale University, and a PhD in government from Harvard University. She is a member of the board of directors of the Tinker Foundation.
O’Neil is the author of the forthcoming The Globalization Myth: Regionalization and How America's Neighbors Help it Compete (Yale University Press, 2022), which chronicles the rise of three main global manufacturing and supply chain hubs and what they mean for U.S. economic competitiveness. She also wrote Two Nations Indivisible: Mexico, the United States, and the Road Ahead (Oxford University Press, 2013), which analyzes the political, economic, and social transformations Mexico has undergone over the last three decades and why these changes matter for the United States. She is a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion, and frequent guest on news, radio, and podcasts. O’Neil has testified before Congress on both Mexico and Latin America, and regularly speaks at global academic, business, and policy conferences.
O’Neil has lived and worked in Mexico and Argentina and travels extensively in Latin America. She was a Fulbright scholar and a Justice, Welfare, and Economics fellow at Harvard University, and has taught Latin American politics at Columbia University. Before turning to policy, O'Neil worked in the private sector as an equity analyst at Indosuez Capital and Credit Lyonnais Securities. She holds a BA from Yale University, an MA in international relations from Yale University, and a PhD in government from Harvard University. She is a member of the board of directors of the Tinker Foundation.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
January 23, 2023
With the typical Neoliberal resume: Yale/Harvard/Bloomberg/Geopolitical Consulting/Council on Foreign Relations, O'Neil "upends" the neoliberal view on Globalization with a new take - regionalism is more important than globalism (let's ignore that the IMF has been working on this since the early 2010s). But it's the same take it's always been, "A rising tide lifts all boats," but we shouldn't actually look deeper into how much all boats are being lifted.
O'Neil repackages the neoliberal "non-political" (ie anyone questioning us is a communist!) agenda taken from as far back as von Hayek, with a globalization might not work but regionalization works great.
Against arguments from the left - She shows that the race to the bottom in wages and labor safety regulation might not actually work at the global level. But it works fantastically at the regional level. Europe's rich countries are able to shift jobs off to Eastern Europe or merely entice more educated Eastern workers west. The flying V from Asia is now dropping to its next level as China is pushing lower paid work to places like Vietnam and Bangladesh. And some of this is assembly of products made in the richer Country - so it's win-win.
Against globalization arguments from the right - she shows the immigration is good. Not just the above Eastern European workers moving west to places like Germany to make more money than they could in Estonia (but less than a German would make in Germany). And in the US many places see a bump in employment when immigrants move in - as the undocumented are put to work in meat processing etc.
But this is all good. We don't have to look at the actual affects on people losing their jobs (170 pages and she does mention that some people lose once or twice).
Her recommendation is basically the US should push "Buy North American" and move to trade connections similar to that of Europe. How do we do that without the political integration of the EU? Sadly this is unanswered, because this is just an extension of the neoliberal myth that markets should be shielded from and are somehow divided from politics - except in that governments should use its power to create larger free markets above government power.
O'Neil repackages the neoliberal "non-political" (ie anyone questioning us is a communist!) agenda taken from as far back as von Hayek, with a globalization might not work but regionalization works great.
Against arguments from the left - She shows that the race to the bottom in wages and labor safety regulation might not actually work at the global level. But it works fantastically at the regional level. Europe's rich countries are able to shift jobs off to Eastern Europe or merely entice more educated Eastern workers west. The flying V from Asia is now dropping to its next level as China is pushing lower paid work to places like Vietnam and Bangladesh. And some of this is assembly of products made in the richer Country - so it's win-win.
Against globalization arguments from the right - she shows the immigration is good. Not just the above Eastern European workers moving west to places like Germany to make more money than they could in Estonia (but less than a German would make in Germany). And in the US many places see a bump in employment when immigrants move in - as the undocumented are put to work in meat processing etc.
But this is all good. We don't have to look at the actual affects on people losing their jobs (170 pages and she does mention that some people lose once or twice).
Her recommendation is basically the US should push "Buy North American" and move to trade connections similar to that of Europe. How do we do that without the political integration of the EU? Sadly this is unanswered, because this is just an extension of the neoliberal myth that markets should be shielded from and are somehow divided from politics - except in that governments should use its power to create larger free markets above government power.
January 23, 2023
This book serves as an uncritical, top-down pamphlet for free trade and serves to smooth any of its ill effects. The loss of union jobs bolstering America's middle class is laid entirely elsewhere, despite paeans to the need for unionization to return on its own; elsewhere she lists uncritically a bunch of automakers building factories in the US as a plus for workers, but fails to note they were all in right-to-work states. This kind of magically blinkered thinking and compartmentalization is surrounded by the shortest capsule histories you'll ever read (a country's economic development and integration into a regional trading system will usually take a single paragraph) and lists of parts supplied by different countries for manufacturers based in other countries in the region that still barely pad this book up to 170 pages. Fair Trade is not mentioned at all, so there is no critical exploration of it either on its own or in comparison to Free Trade. This ignorance of alternatives and cheerleading of free trade leads to an under-theorized book that relies on summary statistics of trade flows and distance goods travel to bolster its core claims without seriously challenging them.
March 12, 2023
A boring version of the End of the World is Just the Beginning - with less dystopian fiction. Read it and listened to it for a class and had fun putting together the presentation.
(Does that count as 2 read credits for the year?)
Thesis: Regional trading blocks have been the real force powering what we think of as globalization since the 70s and will only continue to become more prominent. The US would be wise to build out/on the USMCA in a variety of ways to better compete for the next 40 years.
Good luck getting a coherent national industrial policy that isn't just a give-away to interest groups (looking at you Chips), let alone a regional one. O'Neil and other neo-cons/neo-lib internationalists may be right, but the country is turning inward and grandstanding on the 'border crisis' gets more votes than creating a rational immigration policy.
(Does that count as 2 read credits for the year?)
Thesis: Regional trading blocks have been the real force powering what we think of as globalization since the 70s and will only continue to become more prominent. The US would be wise to build out/on the USMCA in a variety of ways to better compete for the next 40 years.
Good luck getting a coherent national industrial policy that isn't just a give-away to interest groups (looking at you Chips), let alone a regional one. O'Neil and other neo-cons/neo-lib internationalists may be right, but the country is turning inward and grandstanding on the 'border crisis' gets more votes than creating a rational immigration policy.
November 4, 2022
Shannon O’Neill, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations I had the privilege of being down the hallway from when I was a military fellow there 11 years ago, has just published an interesting book that debunks the tangible notions that have been peddled for years regarding globalization. Her thesis is that regionalization, and not globalization, has fueled the growth in economies the world over. Particularly, those regionally situated in Europe, Asia and North America. She further posits that current and future technological, demographic and geopolitical trends will further strengthen regionalization. Her arguments are logical, as she brings her evidence to bear: the biggest trade partners in these three robust continents do the most with their neighbors, and far less globally. Furthermore, the geopolitical trends worldwide are more conducive to regional security alliances that support the economic ones. As the US has retreated a bit from the democratic global security blanket, this thesis will be even stronger. And as much as NAFTA has done to jump start this concept in North America, she argues the US could do more to lead this effort here at home.
December 4, 2024
A lawyer friend passed along this book to me. It's awesome that law school is teaching supply chains.
On the whole, I agree with this book's message. It is imperative that the US become less inward-looking and focus more on its closest neighbors. I am still heavily skeptical of tariffs, and China's announcement yesterday to ban exports of rare minerals starting day 1 of Trump's presidency just hardens my belief. Maybe long term things will work out, but it's going to be a rough 10-15 years.
On this note, I agree with the author that AI will solve problems related to the inflationary cost of bringing manufacturing back to the US, but we are not there yet. Therefore, I agree with critics of this book that it is too neoliberal and doesn't spend enough time talking about how outsourcing has hurt the US. However, that doesn't mean I agree keeping manufacturing here 20 years ago would have made life better.
Economic forces exist outside morals and politics.
That gets to my other criticism of this book. It barely mentions China or geopolitics until the very end and places too much emphasis on how laws held regionalism of North America back. There is little mention of how globalization was used as a way to befriend Japan, counter the Soviet Union , and democratize China. Therefore, the book's description of globalization as a "myth" stretches the truth a bit. It more argues why regionalism is necessary now over protectionism.
Though it points out Europe and Asia are more regionalised than North America, it falls back on its argument later on stating Europe is facing more demographic problems than the US: How can Europe continue to regionalize if Eastern Europe's demographic issues are partly due to China competition and migration to West Europe?
In this sense, though the book pushes for free trade, it puts more blame on China for the issues facing Japan and Korea now than the naivety of free trade thinkers in the 1980s who forgot there are human and economic forces that can act as a counterweight to law. Plus it seems to agree with European protectionalism while denouncing China's. It's a little outdated on China's policies on protectionism too (joint venture rules loosened half a decade ago now) How will the US be able to focus on regionalism if it also wants to retain global dominance while South Korea and Japan are facing more economic competition from China (just take the protests in SK yesterday for an example)?
This is not even mentioning that this book has no conversation on China's trade and presence in South America.
Again, I mostly agree with this book. The US should invest in Spanish and South American studies. The author also hints that the US's advantages, like its strengths in education, resilience from climate change, cheaper logistics costs than China (I didn't know this), and demographics may get reversed if they are not careful, though I am still curious how inflation and the dollar's primacy will play out if isolationism wins.
On the whole, I agree with this book's message. It is imperative that the US become less inward-looking and focus more on its closest neighbors. I am still heavily skeptical of tariffs, and China's announcement yesterday to ban exports of rare minerals starting day 1 of Trump's presidency just hardens my belief. Maybe long term things will work out, but it's going to be a rough 10-15 years.
On this note, I agree with the author that AI will solve problems related to the inflationary cost of bringing manufacturing back to the US, but we are not there yet. Therefore, I agree with critics of this book that it is too neoliberal and doesn't spend enough time talking about how outsourcing has hurt the US. However, that doesn't mean I agree keeping manufacturing here 20 years ago would have made life better.
Economic forces exist outside morals and politics.
That gets to my other criticism of this book. It barely mentions China or geopolitics until the very end and places too much emphasis on how laws held regionalism of North America back. There is little mention of how globalization was used as a way to befriend Japan, counter the Soviet Union , and democratize China. Therefore, the book's description of globalization as a "myth" stretches the truth a bit. It more argues why regionalism is necessary now over protectionism.
Though it points out Europe and Asia are more regionalised than North America, it falls back on its argument later on stating Europe is facing more demographic problems than the US: How can Europe continue to regionalize if Eastern Europe's demographic issues are partly due to China competition and migration to West Europe?
In this sense, though the book pushes for free trade, it puts more blame on China for the issues facing Japan and Korea now than the naivety of free trade thinkers in the 1980s who forgot there are human and economic forces that can act as a counterweight to law. Plus it seems to agree with European protectionalism while denouncing China's. It's a little outdated on China's policies on protectionism too (joint venture rules loosened half a decade ago now) How will the US be able to focus on regionalism if it also wants to retain global dominance while South Korea and Japan are facing more economic competition from China (just take the protests in SK yesterday for an example)?
This is not even mentioning that this book has no conversation on China's trade and presence in South America.
Again, I mostly agree with this book. The US should invest in Spanish and South American studies. The author also hints that the US's advantages, like its strengths in education, resilience from climate change, cheaper logistics costs than China (I didn't know this), and demographics may get reversed if they are not careful, though I am still curious how inflation and the dollar's primacy will play out if isolationism wins.
May 20, 2025
The author tries to argue that foreign trade is more regional than global. Also, the last chapter tries to argue that the US has a competitive advantage. I think that, given the current state of politics in 2025, he fails. The United States remains the envy of much of the world.---> Yeah, especially after Trump's crazy policies 🤣🤣🤣. China not only defeated Trump's tariff scheme but also Europe; the weak Europe has done it.
Here are the true flows https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/c...
The book started with wrong foot blaming Unions and the lack of international Agreements and the USA limited regionalization, both things are plain lies, since the Unions maybe combative because predatory capitalism want to take all profits from themselves and the USA was the world factory that failed to invest in technology development also because in their greedy and looking for the low labour costs move to other places. Neither the unions nor the "limited regionalization", but capitalism is greedy, should be blamed.
Chapter 5 is wrong, the US loss of the technological advantages, since its predatory, voracious is not investing in STEM. Universities are too expensive for Americans, and higher wages only compensate for higher living costs. China and Southeast Asia are better positioned with their integrated ecosystems and trained workforce. America is only avoiding the demographic bust due to immigration, but the current hate policies won't last.
Manufacturing 4.0, accelerated by greedy capitalism, isn't just about efficiency through virtual design and testing; it's only planned obsolescence, with its associated environmental costs and consumer dissatisfaction due to the constant need to replace systems, without real improvement or the opportunity to repair them. (See Article)
In the demographics of Chapter 5 again the author makes the wrong assumptions, and contradicts himself, since 1) He neglect Manufacturing 4.0 2) Less workers also mean less consumers, a diminishing and aging population consumes less so less workers are need. Basics.
One of the United States’ greatest assets is its stable ground rules---> Well, not in 2025 with "orange" Trump.
The author said that if the US signs more free commercial agreements, the US will sell more equipment and edibles abroad. I highly doubt that they can’t manufacture a Fire extinguish pump in less than 3 years for $1.5 Mi, while in China takes 45 days and costs less than $ 0.5 Mi. Maybe the US can export more poultry and soy, but that doesn't add any value, neither employ many people, and with John Deere's commercial approach to charging a fee for everything, platform Capitalism, I doubt that would be competitive.
Finally, my opinion on Manufacturing 4.0
Manufacturing 4.0 or Planned Obsolescence 2.0? The Dark Side of "Smart" Industry
The Fourth Industrial Revolution promised a utopia of hyper-efficient, sustainable production. But under the reign of unchecked capitalism, Manufacturing 4.0 has become little more than Planned Obsolescence with better marketing—accelerated by the same AI hype machine we’ve seen in every other sector.
The Myth of "Efficiency"
At its core, Manufacturing 4.0 claims to optimize production through:
• Digital twins (virtual prototypes)
• AI-driven predictive maintenance
• Automated, flexible assembly lines
But in practice? It’s a Trojan horse for faster, more insidious product decay.
Why? Because profit-driven automation isn’t about making things last—it’s about making them fail on schedule.
The AI-Enabled Obsolescence Playbook
1. "Smart" = Unrepairable
• IoT sensors don’t just monitor equipment health—they enforce proprietary lock-in.
• AI diagnostics are useless when manufacturers withhold repair codes.
2. Virtual Testing, Real Waste
• Digital twins optimize for cost-cutting, not longevity.
• The result? Products are designed to barely outlive warranties.
3. The Subscription Model Creep
• Why sell a durable machine when you can rent a "smart" one that auto-depreciates?
• See: John Deere’s tractor software locks, BMW’s heated seat subscriptions.
The Human Cost: When "Predictive" Means "Preemptive"
Behind every "smart factory" dashboard lies a brutal workforce calculus:
• "Predictive maintenance" algorithms don't just flag broken machines—they flag "redundant" workers, triggering preemptive layoffs before failures even occur.
• Automated quality control replaces seasoned inspectors with cameras, destroying hard-won institutional knowledge.
• Flexible production lines mean precarious gig work for humans, while robots get the permanent "jobs."
This creates a perverse "skills obsolescence" cycle: Workers are first deskilled by automation, then deemed obsolete for lacking the very expertise the system eliminated.
The Environmental Lie
Tech giants tout "green manufacturing" while:
• E-waste piles up from non-repairable "smart" devices
• Energy demands explode from always-on AI monitoring
• Supply chains grow more opaque (blockchain-tracked exploitation isn’t ethical)
This isn’t progress—it’s planned waste with a machine learning wrapper.
Here are the true flows https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/c...
The book started with wrong foot blaming Unions and the lack of international Agreements and the USA limited regionalization, both things are plain lies, since the Unions maybe combative because predatory capitalism want to take all profits from themselves and the USA was the world factory that failed to invest in technology development also because in their greedy and looking for the low labour costs move to other places. Neither the unions nor the "limited regionalization", but capitalism is greedy, should be blamed.
Chapter 5 is wrong, the US loss of the technological advantages, since its predatory, voracious is not investing in STEM. Universities are too expensive for Americans, and higher wages only compensate for higher living costs. China and Southeast Asia are better positioned with their integrated ecosystems and trained workforce. America is only avoiding the demographic bust due to immigration, but the current hate policies won't last.
Manufacturing 4.0, accelerated by greedy capitalism, isn't just about efficiency through virtual design and testing; it's only planned obsolescence, with its associated environmental costs and consumer dissatisfaction due to the constant need to replace systems, without real improvement or the opportunity to repair them. (See Article)
In the demographics of Chapter 5 again the author makes the wrong assumptions, and contradicts himself, since 1) He neglect Manufacturing 4.0 2) Less workers also mean less consumers, a diminishing and aging population consumes less so less workers are need. Basics.
One of the United States’ greatest assets is its stable ground rules---> Well, not in 2025 with "orange" Trump.
The author said that if the US signs more free commercial agreements, the US will sell more equipment and edibles abroad. I highly doubt that they can’t manufacture a Fire extinguish pump in less than 3 years for $1.5 Mi, while in China takes 45 days and costs less than $ 0.5 Mi. Maybe the US can export more poultry and soy, but that doesn't add any value, neither employ many people, and with John Deere's commercial approach to charging a fee for everything, platform Capitalism, I doubt that would be competitive.
Finally, my opinion on Manufacturing 4.0
Manufacturing 4.0 or Planned Obsolescence 2.0? The Dark Side of "Smart" Industry
The Fourth Industrial Revolution promised a utopia of hyper-efficient, sustainable production. But under the reign of unchecked capitalism, Manufacturing 4.0 has become little more than Planned Obsolescence with better marketing—accelerated by the same AI hype machine we’ve seen in every other sector.
The Myth of "Efficiency"
At its core, Manufacturing 4.0 claims to optimize production through:
• Digital twins (virtual prototypes)
• AI-driven predictive maintenance
• Automated, flexible assembly lines
But in practice? It’s a Trojan horse for faster, more insidious product decay.
Why? Because profit-driven automation isn’t about making things last—it’s about making them fail on schedule.
The AI-Enabled Obsolescence Playbook
1. "Smart" = Unrepairable
• IoT sensors don’t just monitor equipment health—they enforce proprietary lock-in.
• AI diagnostics are useless when manufacturers withhold repair codes.
2. Virtual Testing, Real Waste
• Digital twins optimize for cost-cutting, not longevity.
• The result? Products are designed to barely outlive warranties.
3. The Subscription Model Creep
• Why sell a durable machine when you can rent a "smart" one that auto-depreciates?
• See: John Deere’s tractor software locks, BMW’s heated seat subscriptions.
The Human Cost: When "Predictive" Means "Preemptive"
Behind every "smart factory" dashboard lies a brutal workforce calculus:
• "Predictive maintenance" algorithms don't just flag broken machines—they flag "redundant" workers, triggering preemptive layoffs before failures even occur.
• Automated quality control replaces seasoned inspectors with cameras, destroying hard-won institutional knowledge.
• Flexible production lines mean precarious gig work for humans, while robots get the permanent "jobs."
This creates a perverse "skills obsolescence" cycle: Workers are first deskilled by automation, then deemed obsolete for lacking the very expertise the system eliminated.
The Environmental Lie
Tech giants tout "green manufacturing" while:
• E-waste piles up from non-repairable "smart" devices
• Energy demands explode from always-on AI monitoring
• Supply chains grow more opaque (blockchain-tracked exploitation isn’t ethical)
This isn’t progress—it’s planned waste with a machine learning wrapper.
November 18, 2023
There are good arguments to be made that as we move to a multipolar world, regional integration will have to replace global institutions that have lost American support. This book doesn’t make any of those arguments and, instead, elects to scold the ignorant masses for failing to understand how super terrific globalization has been and will continue to be.
Defense of the Washington Consensus is not unusual, nor necessarily problematic, but there should probably be some recognition that such arguments are going to be met with significant skepticism. Shannon O’Neil’s book isn’t for skeptics. Rather, the book is for people who already agree with the premise and generally lack an interest in reading critically.
O’Neill writes: “U.S. companies often face higher barriers when they go abroad than when their foreign competitors come here.” (p. 160) Most would look at that observation and reasonably conclude that the United States’s preferential treatment of imports has put U.S. businesses at a significant disadvantage both in this market and abroad. Not O’Neill. For her, it is because the United States hasn’t reached enough free trade agreements. Having already opened up its market in the service of globalization, the country can presumably get other nations to match its concessions by asking nicely.
Elsewhere in the book, O’Neill describes China’s efforts to cut imports and become more self-sufficient (pp. 87-88) and then subsequently repurposes this initiative as evidence of retaliation against protectionist measures adopted by the United States (p. 150). This is silly, but at least is an arguable point. However, the lack of any serious critical read of O’Neill’s lazy reasoning means that there are claims presented as fact that are demonstrably false. Per O’Neill, the U.S. federal government “buys only homegrown food for publicly funded school lunch programs.” (p. 145). U.S. law requires school food purchases funded by the USDA to procure domestically grown and processed food “to the maximum extent possible,” but imported food can be purchased whenever the school purchasing authority claims that the food is not available in sufficient and reasonable quantities – a standard so amorphous that it is pretty easy to avoid purchasing domestic food if a purchaser would prefer cheaper imports.
There is no reason to engage in this hyperbole, but this is a feature, not a bug, of O’Neill’s arguments. An example: “Consider the fishing industry, in which almost every step from sea to supermarket now involves automation.” (p. 131) This is so obviously wrong that it made me laugh. Here is an industry that has been repeatedly implicated in horrific forced labor controversies, where U.S. seafood importers openly claim that foreign hand-processed seafood is superior to domestic machine-processed fish, and where processors throughout the world depend upon large supplies of vulnerable populations to provide labor in their factories (H2B workers in the United States; Uyghurs and North Koreans in China; Cambodians and Burmese in Thailand; Dalits in India, etc.) and, yet, O’Neill spotlights this industry based on some promotional material she saw from Marel.
This may seem nitpicky, but the lack of discipline (and seriousness) is likely directly responsible for the chart at page 101 where the total value of trade between Canada and Mexico is depicted as being $0 in every year between 1999 and 2019. Given that Mexico is Canada’s third largest trading partner and Canada is Mexico’s fifth largest trading partner, this is obviously wrong, but the visual is arresting. The error should have jumped out to any reviewer, since it raises the question as to why there is not more engagement between Mexico and Canada and, for O’Neill, why there is so much of a focus on the United States’ failings to better integrate with little attention paid to the relationship between the other two major countries in the region.
Ultimately, the book is a good example of the quality of work that now defines the Council on Foreign Relations. That’s too bad, as there is a pressing need for original, innovative thinking about alternative systems of international organization in the wake of the collapse in confidence in global institutions.
Defense of the Washington Consensus is not unusual, nor necessarily problematic, but there should probably be some recognition that such arguments are going to be met with significant skepticism. Shannon O’Neil’s book isn’t for skeptics. Rather, the book is for people who already agree with the premise and generally lack an interest in reading critically.
O’Neill writes: “U.S. companies often face higher barriers when they go abroad than when their foreign competitors come here.” (p. 160) Most would look at that observation and reasonably conclude that the United States’s preferential treatment of imports has put U.S. businesses at a significant disadvantage both in this market and abroad. Not O’Neill. For her, it is because the United States hasn’t reached enough free trade agreements. Having already opened up its market in the service of globalization, the country can presumably get other nations to match its concessions by asking nicely.
Elsewhere in the book, O’Neill describes China’s efforts to cut imports and become more self-sufficient (pp. 87-88) and then subsequently repurposes this initiative as evidence of retaliation against protectionist measures adopted by the United States (p. 150). This is silly, but at least is an arguable point. However, the lack of any serious critical read of O’Neill’s lazy reasoning means that there are claims presented as fact that are demonstrably false. Per O’Neill, the U.S. federal government “buys only homegrown food for publicly funded school lunch programs.” (p. 145). U.S. law requires school food purchases funded by the USDA to procure domestically grown and processed food “to the maximum extent possible,” but imported food can be purchased whenever the school purchasing authority claims that the food is not available in sufficient and reasonable quantities – a standard so amorphous that it is pretty easy to avoid purchasing domestic food if a purchaser would prefer cheaper imports.
There is no reason to engage in this hyperbole, but this is a feature, not a bug, of O’Neill’s arguments. An example: “Consider the fishing industry, in which almost every step from sea to supermarket now involves automation.” (p. 131) This is so obviously wrong that it made me laugh. Here is an industry that has been repeatedly implicated in horrific forced labor controversies, where U.S. seafood importers openly claim that foreign hand-processed seafood is superior to domestic machine-processed fish, and where processors throughout the world depend upon large supplies of vulnerable populations to provide labor in their factories (H2B workers in the United States; Uyghurs and North Koreans in China; Cambodians and Burmese in Thailand; Dalits in India, etc.) and, yet, O’Neill spotlights this industry based on some promotional material she saw from Marel.
This may seem nitpicky, but the lack of discipline (and seriousness) is likely directly responsible for the chart at page 101 where the total value of trade between Canada and Mexico is depicted as being $0 in every year between 1999 and 2019. Given that Mexico is Canada’s third largest trading partner and Canada is Mexico’s fifth largest trading partner, this is obviously wrong, but the visual is arresting. The error should have jumped out to any reviewer, since it raises the question as to why there is not more engagement between Mexico and Canada and, for O’Neill, why there is so much of a focus on the United States’ failings to better integrate with little attention paid to the relationship between the other two major countries in the region.
Ultimately, the book is a good example of the quality of work that now defines the Council on Foreign Relations. That’s too bad, as there is a pressing need for original, innovative thinking about alternative systems of international organization in the wake of the collapse in confidence in global institutions.
June 29, 2023
As the introduction explains, this book is brought to us by the Council on Foreign Relations, that elitist businessmen's cabal that used to be frequently mentioned as one of the primary actors in any good conspiracy theory. Maybe back the the days of the Dulles Brothers when the Council was founded that might have been half true. Today the Council is proably a bigger organization than it was in its early days, but I don't think it is the power player that it once was. Many years ago when I thought it might be fun to be one of the rulers of the world, I managed to get invited to a couple of meetings of the Los Angeles branch of the Council. The speakers were interesting, but the members were a bunch of old white guys spouting American capitalist imperialist triumphalist platitudes. They weren't smart or interesting. If this was the power elite, I wanted no part of it.
Sadly this book is more of the same from the Council. Its basic point is, I think, correct -- that expansion of trade and business into international markets has been more successful when it has been closer to home, more regional than global. But this is a point that could have been made effectively in fifty pages, so to bulk it up this message is packaged into a full length book that is basically a primer on the glories of free trade and the wonderful opportunities that it offers to American business. Don't get me wrong. I do think that we are all more likely to prosper in a world of free trade. David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage is right. And more trade has added benefits in fostering peace and cross cultural understanding. But that's only part of the story. Offshoring isn't an unalloyed good. Sometimes there are more losers than winners. Our country will be a worse place to live, if the only remaining decent jobs are for highly educated professionals. And there are plenty of people around the world who would have been better off if their lives had never been touched by the glories of American business. But we get none of that side of the story here. This book is all free market pro business Chicago School propaganda.
Sadly this book is more of the same from the Council. Its basic point is, I think, correct -- that expansion of trade and business into international markets has been more successful when it has been closer to home, more regional than global. But this is a point that could have been made effectively in fifty pages, so to bulk it up this message is packaged into a full length book that is basically a primer on the glories of free trade and the wonderful opportunities that it offers to American business. Don't get me wrong. I do think that we are all more likely to prosper in a world of free trade. David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage is right. And more trade has added benefits in fostering peace and cross cultural understanding. But that's only part of the story. Offshoring isn't an unalloyed good. Sometimes there are more losers than winners. Our country will be a worse place to live, if the only remaining decent jobs are for highly educated professionals. And there are plenty of people around the world who would have been better off if their lives had never been touched by the glories of American business. But we get none of that side of the story here. This book is all free market pro business Chicago School propaganda.
March 20, 2025
What an interesting book---About something I was under the impression was very good for us, and the rest of the world. However, I still feel that globalization is helping everyone acquire incredibly low prices and higher quality.
I was pleasantly surprised by the immense amount of very useful information in this book. Fantastic research and data as to the gradual development of the world economy and how it works--and better yet, why it works.
Shannon is amazing at explaining how everything is connected, or not and why. Funny that I am reading this book now--after I read another of her books I was also very happy to learn from. And I can appreciate her perspective as to how we should operate, for the benefit of all countries involved.
I can see an analogy with us if we fight with our neighbors instead of getting to know them and working together, helping each other instead. Do not need to be a genius to figure out what is better.
Now--with Trump at the helm--we really do not know what the future will bring....for USA, Mexico, Canada, and for the rest of the world. However, as always, time will tell.
Thank you, Shannon--you need to help us by working with the UN--helping countries work together, not against each other. You will make the best business diplomat for sure.
I was pleasantly surprised by the immense amount of very useful information in this book. Fantastic research and data as to the gradual development of the world economy and how it works--and better yet, why it works.
Shannon is amazing at explaining how everything is connected, or not and why. Funny that I am reading this book now--after I read another of her books I was also very happy to learn from. And I can appreciate her perspective as to how we should operate, for the benefit of all countries involved.
I can see an analogy with us if we fight with our neighbors instead of getting to know them and working together, helping each other instead. Do not need to be a genius to figure out what is better.
Now--with Trump at the helm--we really do not know what the future will bring....for USA, Mexico, Canada, and for the rest of the world. However, as always, time will tell.
Thank you, Shannon--you need to help us by working with the UN--helping countries work together, not against each other. You will make the best business diplomat for sure.
December 9, 2025
What an interesting book---About something I was under the impression was very good for us, and the rest of the world. However, I still feel that globalization is helping everyone acquire incredibly low prices and higher quality.
I was pleasantly surprised by the immense amount of very useful information in this book. Fantastic research and data as to the gradual development of the world economy and how it works--and better yet, why it works.
Shannon is amazing at explaining how everything is connected, or not and why. Funny that I am reading this book now--after I read another of her books I was also very happy to learn from. And I can appreciate her perspective as to how we should operate, for the benefit of all countries involved.
I can see an analogy with us if we fight with our neighbors instead of getting to know them and working together, helping each other instead. Do not need to be a genius to figure out what is better.
Now--with Trump at the helm--we really do not know what the future will bring....for USA, Mexico, Canada, and for the rest of the world. However, as always, time will tell.
Thank you, Shannon--you need to help us by working with the UN--helping countries work together, not against each other. You will make the best business diplomat for sure.
I was pleasantly surprised by the immense amount of very useful information in this book. Fantastic research and data as to the gradual development of the world economy and how it works--and better yet, why it works.
Shannon is amazing at explaining how everything is connected, or not and why. Funny that I am reading this book now--after I read another of her books I was also very happy to learn from. And I can appreciate her perspective as to how we should operate, for the benefit of all countries involved.
I can see an analogy with us if we fight with our neighbors instead of getting to know them and working together, helping each other instead. Do not need to be a genius to figure out what is better.
Now--with Trump at the helm--we really do not know what the future will bring....for USA, Mexico, Canada, and for the rest of the world. However, as always, time will tell.
Thank you, Shannon--you need to help us by working with the UN--helping countries work together, not against each other. You will make the best business diplomat for sure.
August 15, 2025
Although O’Neil does a good job laying out the path towards regionalization taken by Europe, East Asia and North America, the book feels incomplete in analyzing their differences and completely absent in acknowledging the lack of similar results (despite seemingly similar international organizations) in South America, Africa or West Asia. O’Neil aims to focus the reader on the big part played by regions in what is commonly called globalization, and, particularly, of the smaller companies that thrive in a specific region and chose not to be involved worldwide. While she does point out the difference between the commercially-focused regionalism of North America and East Asia, as compared to the politico-juridical regionalism of Europe, she doesn’t really drill into the consequences of those differences. By her own argument, Europe should be leading the globe in commerce due to its more serious integration, yet that does not seem to be the case. Overall, the book does give the reader a new framework with which to see the regionalization/globalization, even if it feels like ancient history in today’s political climate.
July 4, 2023
In this short book, O'Neil does a good job of explaining the benefits of regionalization (regional trade cooperation and coordination) in a world where globalization is on the decline. After an explanation of why regionalization of trade is on the rise, O'Neil spends a chapter each on the Asian, European, and North American regions. The closing two chapters spell out why regional ties will matter more for everyone and what the United States needs to do now (mainly with Mexico and Canada) to take advantage of the strength of our region. O'Neil's pro-regionalization stance complements Peter Zeihan's thinking about what's going to happen next. They should talk.
November 16, 2025
Frustrating that someone as bright as O'Neil is so willfully blind to any criticism of unfettered free market globalization. At one point she literally complains about restrictions to ISDS — privatized trade courts that almost always rule in favor of big corporations. She never mentions how unregulated free capital flows is perhaps the single greatest contributor to financial crises - that would be relevant. Claims that NAFTA is good bc in the second half of the 90s the US gained industrial jobs even though industrial employment growth slowed very significantly in this period (though more due to US return to strong dollar policy).
O'Neil is not a dimwit, but she has a reality distortion field that ignores anything that doesn't align with her ideological POV. A real letdown of a read.
O'Neil is not a dimwit, but she has a reality distortion field that ignores anything that doesn't align with her ideological POV. A real letdown of a read.
July 3, 2023
A very short book showing exclusively the optimistic overview of the world economies cooperating and making our lives better. I finished it mostly for the novelty of its upbeat tone. The overview is unavoidably shallow and everything is explained like to primary school pupil. Actually, this could be a great primary school textbook.
May 3, 2023
Quick read that lays down the argument for the US to focus regionally in our economic outreach (trade agreements) and the secondary efforts of education and other shaping operations. Very focused on NAFTA and by design Canada and Mexico.
March 27, 2023
Amazing book on how globalization has both positively and negatively impacted nations worldwide. It is also a wake-up-call on how countries can enhance their economic development through trade.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews