Introduction
The September 11 Attacks on the United States serve as a milestone because they obviously and clearly redrew America’s foreign relations. Similarly, the same development brought about an increased focus on the America’s foreign policy with scholars joining in the fray. Among scholars who have delved into the matter are Niall Ferguson, Thomas L. Friedman and Michael Mandelbaum. As a Scottish historian, Niall Ferguson (b. April 18, 1964) in his essay, The Benefits of a Liberal Empire presents ideas that are diametrically opposed to those held by Thomas L. Friedman and Michael Mandelbaum. The differences in opinion primarily concern the role that the post- September 11 United States ought to play in international relations, and are divulged upon in the ensuing discourse.
Thesis statement
When comparing Ferguson and Friedman and Mandelbaum’s standpoint on the role that the post-9/11 America is to dispense in the world, the latter comes out as more plausible, by the virtue of capturing the political realities and dynamics of international relations.
Ferguson sees the US as needing to provide the world with an effective or functioning liberal empire. He continues that this is necessitated by the fact that the US should discharge this duty because it has its own security to discharge this role and because the action will be concomitant with America’s altruism. Ferguson contends that the economy, culture and military might of the United States is strong, but that in order to act as a global liberal empire, there is a need to improve this strength by making structural changes in the politics, economy and political systems of the US (Ferguson, 139-45).
According to him, mending the economy is not difficult because there are many foreign investors who have an insatiable craving for the dollar-dominated securities, irrespective of the prospects of the returns. Ferguson observes that this does not mean that there are no pitfalls that will be encountered in the attempt to revamp the economy through this approach. The drawbacks can nevertheless be managed. The deficit of the in the manpower is underpinned by the hesitance to join the military and even this can be reversed through structural and policy adjustments.
Ferguson divulges that as the present hegemony, the US should appreciate the functional similarity between the present and past life and power of the Anglophone. Even as the British Empire left the unruly world the freedom to do its biding, so should the United States. The US should therefore desist from policing the unruly world, just as Britain never did.
According to Thomas L. Friedman and Michael Mandelbaum, the idea that every generation passes its standard of living to subsequent generations is in effect and cannot adversely affect the United States. This is because the American dream is sacrosanct in America’s ability to perpetuate its power across the globe, in the quest to serve as a stabilizing force and as a model of democracy and capitalism. In fact, so categorical are Friedman and Mandelbaum on the need to perpetuate the American dream that they state that they write the book since they do not want to be taken to task should darkness engulf the American dream (Friedman and Mandelbaum, 160-75).
Friedman and Mandelbaum contend that the need for the US to continue perpetuating its policies and agenda across the globe is informed by the fact that local economy and foreign policy are interdependent and interlocked. In this regard, it is impossible for the United States to concentrate on domestic economy at the expense of foreign policy, and vice versa.
Evaluations on The Strength of Each Argument
The strength on Ferguson’s argument is underpinned by the fact that the concept of state sovereignty cannot be denied. Given the reality of sovereignty, there is need for developed states to accord other states independence.
Friedman and Mandelbaum’s standpoint is very plausible in that, it factors the interconnectedness that exists between local economy and foreign policy. In the event that America concentrates on local politics and economy in lieu of international politics, then it will lose foreign interests and allies. The same will culminate into losses for the internal affairs of the US affairs and therefore undermine the realization of the American dream.
Conclusion: The Essay That Is Most Persuasive
Ferguson fails to factor in the reality of the times in supposing that the US should adopt the strategy of the British Empire. At the time, the British Empire was faced with different political realities such as military competition, the scramble for colonies and protectorates, the consequences stemming from the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the balance of power in Europe. The War on Terror on the other hand is ideological and is catapulted by technological advancements. This renders America’s safety and stability too sensitive to be easily assumed (Zaretsky, 333).
Works Cited
Ferguson, Niall. Colossus: The Price of America's Empire. NY: Penguin Books, 2005. Print
Friedman, L. Thomas and Mandelbaum, Michael. That Used to Be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How We Can Come Back. NY/London: Picador Publishing, 2013. Print
Zaretsky, Natasha. Major Problems in American History since 1945: Documents and Essays. Wadsworth Inc Fulfillment, 2013. Print
