Friday, February 28, 2014

The Downfall Of Money





Title: The Downfall of Money
Author: Frederick Taylor
Publisher: Bloomsbury, 2013 (First)
ISBN: 978-1-4088-3991-1
Pages: 370

War bestows on its participants more than what they ask for. Especially so in the case of the initiators of the Armageddon. Nowhere is the maxim more worthy of application than post-first world war Germany and its finances that doomed a generation of its people to immense hardships and loss of self esteem. Germany lost the war and was burdened with reparations to be paid to the victors. At the same time, the country’s ages-old monarchy crumbled and weak administrations having fickle roots on leftism alternated at the federal level. Money was demanded from all quarters and the government opted for the easy way – printing money whenever it is necessary without any valuable reserve to shore up the currency. Hyperinflation raged in the country, along with incalculable suffering for the middle class who depended on fixed income. The mark, which ruled at 4.2 to a dollar before the war, tumbled to a level of 4.2 trillion by December 1923. This book gives the history of Germany after the war, its travails facing the economic meltdown and how it came out of it, miraculously it may seem. The author, Frederick Taylor is a fellow of the Royal Historical Society and is a prominent author of three acclaimed books of narrative history, Dresden, The Berlin Wall and Exorcising Hitler.

The book provides a decent explanation of why Germany entered the world war riding on unmatched economic growth since German unification and victory over France in 1871. The society was behind the government in its war effort. Burdened with the costs of war, Germany abandoned the gold standard and the ‘mark’ – its currency – lost any foundation on solid ground. War bonds were issued to the public at 5% interest rate, repayable after the war. Patriots subscribed to the scheme in huge numbers, trusting the government with their life savings. The regime also persuaded its citizens to surrender their gold to the exchequer on the condition of remunerating them after the war. This loan gold enabled the authorities to bring out ‘bureau notes’, which soon acquired the status of currency notes. State authorities could purchase war bonds using these instruments and the positive feedback boded ill for the economy in the long term. The war dragged on and on incessantly at great cost in terms of men and material. German navy soon lost its edge, which resulted in a total naval blockade of the country by the British. After fighting 4 years, Germany signed the armistice in November 1918. The long suffering people took to the streets, the king abdicated and fled to Holland. Germany was inaugurated as a republic. In a bitterly fought civil war, the social democrats attained power.

Germany found itself in a daunting situation. The victorious allies were baying for reparations, not just for damage inflicted on economies under German occupation, but also for the war costs of British, France and Belgium. Burdened with unstable socialist governments and a weak mark, the country was not in a position to pay reparations. The victors were no better too. They owed a large sum to America as the war debt which the creditor wanted them to repay, who had no other option than to tighten the screw on Germany. The country slipped more and more into inflation, when the stage reached that prices increased more than 50% month on month, the term ‘hyper inflation’ described the ground realities. But still, Germany had Europe’s second largest economy and unemployment was all time low. Then why did Germany fall into the trap and Britain didn’t, even though both were teetering on the edge when armistice was signed? Here, we see the power of democracy established well on the ground. Britain embarked on austerity measures, even risking public resentment, to tide over the crisis. This was not an option in Germany. Militant labour was threatening to run over the country. Unpopular ministers and administrators were being assassinated, not just being deposed. The government was not sure, whether the Reichswehr (army) would stand by them in the face of harsh measures. The Weimar Republic was afraid of the citizens; it tried to appease them by increasing wages to adjust for inflation and paid them in paper marks not backed by gold. Paper notes were printed by the billions and it soon reached a stage when the currency was not even worth the paper on which it was printed. A tipping point was the assassination of Walther Rathenau, the foreign minister who was dealing earnestly with the Allies to negotiate a settlement, at the hands of a Rightist militant. The world lost all confidence in Germany. This was complicated by the occupation of Ruhr by France which was incensed at the non-payment of reparations.

German trauma at the huge depreciation of their currency was intense. During the months of September – October 1923, when the paper mark reached its lowest, a single note of denomination 100 trillion was introduced, which was the largest denomination printed ever. Most of the notes were printed only on one side for ease and to save ink. Unemployment soured in 1923, causing further resentment and aiding the propaganda of Hitler’s far right party. People bought up provisions as soon as they had currency and tried to live off a week or month on the stock. Prostitution and auctioning of family heirlooms flourished. A heartrending story of an aged literary figure reflects true conditions in Berlin. He had a pre-war investment of 1,00,000 marks which was enough for a comfortable old age. But the hyperinflation wiped out the value of the investment, when even food items were quoted in the millions. The man bought a tram ticket with the money and traveled the full day to his heart’s content. Then he locked in to his apartment and died of starvation.

The solution to the currency issue came rather fast. Germany understood in 1923 that a polity strongly influenced by socialists and communists would always stop shy of anti-populist, strong fiscal measures to stabilize the currency. A temporary dictatorship was proclaimed in October 1923 and the regime moved decisively in. A new currency, Rentenmark, was introduced with the pre-war exchange rate. This currency was issued in regulated quantities and the old currency was stopped in circulation. The economy was gradually tamed. The reparations were paid in part by ambitious American loan plans till the country plunged into the Second World War. It was divided into the East and the West. Formal reparation payments were stopped till Germany was reunified again; the thinking at that time was it to be a very remote possibility. But in 1990, Germany was united again. It issued bonds with 20-year tenure for the repayment, and in 2010, fully paid up its due of the First World War!

Taylor’s narrative is intense and faithfully reports the ground reality, but lacks attractiveness. The aloofness of a bank statement pervades the book. You get a lot of information, but the cheery asides which adds value to a historical exposition is sorely lacking. The few plates on post-war Germany are good, but they are very few in number. Some of them are irrelevant, too.

Taylor brings out comparison with modern day’s poor nations in Europe, like Greece, to draw conclusions on the policies that need to be addressed by the debtor to move forward. It provides informative reading, as does the quoted warning of John Maynard Keynes that inflation is a device for the regime to rob its people. Governments anywhere may feel tempted to create inflation to wipe off its internal debt. The worst case happened in post-war Germany. The total amount collected in war bonds was 154 billion marks from its citizens, but at the height of hyperinflation, its value stood at just 15.4 pfennigs!

The book is recommended.

Rating: 3 Star

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Travels in the Mogul Empire

















Title: Travels in the Mogul Empire
Author: Francois Bernier
Editor: Archibald Constable
Publisher: S. Chand, 1972 (First published 1891)
ISBN: 978-81-2061-169-6 (new edition)
Pages: 478

Travelogues were prominent attention-grabbers in ancient days when newspapers and television were not part of people’s everyday lives. Learned men craved for information on far away places and exotic kingdoms. Since Marco Polo’s famous travel, Europe was a fertile ground for books of such genre. Francois Bernier was medical practitioner from Montpellier University who undertook a 12-year travel through India at the time of Mogul succession war that was raging among the four sons of Emperor Shah Jehan. Bernier got assimilated among the courtiers attending Danechmend Khan, a noble in Aurangzeb’s court. The author had traveled through a number of Indian provinces and obtained a first-rate impression of the country’s wherewithal. The book covers all aspects of the country’s political, economic, social and religious lives, along with a dramatic presentation of the succession war in which Aurangzeb emerged successful. Plays had been created in Paris based on the text of this book. Such is the lucidity and drama with which Bernier tells the story. From 1656 to 1668, Bernier saw India emerging to a new era which sowed the seeds of destruction of the Mogul empire.

A first hand sketch of the tumultuous events that eventually led to Aurangzeb decimating all his brothers to ascend the Mogul throne is dexterously presented. There were times when Bernier also became a constituent of the storyline, as he worked as Dara Shukoh’s personal physician during his flight to Sindh after a heavy loss in his second encounter against his younger brother. Rejected by the governor of Ahmedabad of entry into the city, and plagued by thirst and robbers, Dara entrusted the treatment of his ailing wife to Bernier. Thereafter, we see the author forming part of the spectators in Delhi, when Aurangzeb paraded Dara ignominiously through the streets, after the unlucky prince was treacherously held and handed over by a tribal leader in Balochistan. Bernier is affected with pity at the misery of the most beloved of Shah Jehan’s sons. Again, he witnessed a similar parade of Suleiman Shukoh, Dara’s eldest son, who had sought asylum in the hills of Uttaranchal. He too was grabbed by his protector when it was clear that Dara’s battle was over and Aurangzeb would hold the throne for a considerable time in the future. Notions of honour in medieval times were very flexible as we see cases of Hindu rajas and Muslim sultans alike abandoning their friends or dependant fugitives to their own fates when imperial authority turned against them.

Another point we notice from the narrative is the villainous duplicity of Aurangzeb. Being the most religious of the siblings, he masqueraded a burning lust for power with his protestations of affection towards his brother Murad Baksh whose support he enlisted to defeat Dara’s army. Once Dara was subdued, Aurangzeb captured Murad after inebriating him with wine. His wicked cunningness is evidenced by his refusal to take wine himself as he was a pious fellow. After incarcerating his brother and nephews, this bloodthirsty and cruelest tyrant lost no time in finishing them off one by one. Aurangzeb was the master of lies and dissimulation and his stratagems didn’t end even with the murder of his brothers. After Dara was decapitated on Aurangzeb’s orders, his severed head was brought to him on a platter. Aurangzeb ordered water to be brought and the blood was then washed from the face. When it could no longer be doubted that it was indeed the head of Dara, he shed tears and said, “Ah, wretched one! Let this shocking sight no more offend my eyes” (p.103). If ever there was a comparison to crocodile more apt, it was on this occasion.

Bernier addresses one issue that comes to mind for those who study medieval history, that is, how did the Hindus manage to hold on to their religion, culture and customs in the face of despotic rule by absolute bigots like Aurangzeb. Thousands of temples have been destroyed in the medieval period, many of them during the Mogul era. But Hinduism kept its ground in an astounding spirit of resilience and lived to tell the tale. What was the reason behind this? We read from Bernier’s travels that the Muslims were anything but monolithic and were heavily outnumbered by Hindus, 1 to 100, as the author claims. There were Shias and Sunnis, who were in mortal dread of each other, and there were several factions like Moguls, Afghans, Turks, Uzbeks and other tribes among the Sunnis itself. All these groups plotted against each other for money and royal favours. Naturally the warring parties had to enlist support from whichever quarter it was offered, without regard to that person’s religion. We hear about even Aurangzeb addressing a Rajput king as ‘father’ in an affectionate way to use him against his enemies. Hindus fought in Mogul forces in an admirable way. Rajput princesses were supplied to Mogul harems as wives and concubines, but never the other way round. In this situation, it is normal that the ruler reached a symbiotic understanding with the followers of Hinduism. There was gross discrimination against those Muslims who were third or fourth generation descendants of Afghan or Persian nobles. When their skin tones turned brown, as an indication of mixed blood, they were eliminated from positions of higher responsibility (p. 209).

Bernier not just describes the court of Aurangzeb. He goes into details of polity, economy, religion, philosophy and literature. Even though his descriptions are always thrown in with a haughty comparison with French equivalents, his reviews carry with it elements of truth. He flays the Brahmin priests for their murderous ardour in the case of widow burning, for their lustful duplicity in clandestinely possessing virgins dedicated to the deity of Puri temple and the ignorant exhortations that drive people to rivers and ponds to recite chants designed to save the sun from the clutches of evil spirits at the time of solar eclipse, one of which was witnessed by the author.

Having visited Egypt on his way to India, Bernier expresses no doubt as how to characterize Taj Mahal, the mausoleum that was considered to be wonder of the world immediately after construction. Bernier notes, “the splendid mausoleum is more worthy of a place among the wonders of the world than the unshapen masses and heaps of stones in Egypt” (p.5).

Slavery was prevalent in all Islamic empires and so did the Mogul’s. The state itself bought, sold and gifted slaves to visiting dignitaries. Aurangzeb, though outwardly very pious, was an enthusiastic slave driver. He bought slaves cheap whenever there were famines in the empire. Bernier says about some of the slaves gifted to a Persian ambassador who visited Delhi, “It is certain that the number of slaves was not unreasonable; he had purchased them extremely cheap on account of the famine and it is also said that his servants had stolen a great many children” (p.51).

Bernier’s narration of his travels is the most objective that can be obtained from the medieval period. He is not swayed by considerations of business, as is the case with Tavernier’s memoirs compiled in the same period and reviewed earlier in this blog. He lavishes praise when it is due and don’t forget to heap contempt when the subject deserved it. Bernier’s account of the journey across the Punjab plains to Kashmir in the sweltering heat as part of Aurangzeb’s royal entourage brings out the candour of the author in the grueling journey. It also gives a fine description of the Mogul camp in motion which may contain up to 400,000 souls, but only a few were permitted to enter Kashmir valley as the resources were scarce.      

The book is highly recommended.

Rating: 3 Star

Sunday, February 9, 2014

Colossus





Title: Colossus – The Rise and Fall of the American Empire
Author: Niall Ferguson
Publisher: Penguin, 2005 (First published 2004)
ISBN: 978-0-14-101700-6
Pages: 302

Another book which is written as a sequel to Ferguson’s work, Empire, that described about the rise and fall of the British Empire. In his illuminating style, Niall Ferguson lays threadbare the events that established the primacy of American influence on the world stage and how a shadow of doubt regarding its capability descended on it after its debacle in the Vietnam War. A curious thing the author notes regarding American sentiments about acquiring or controlling territories overseas is the permanent state of denial. Having won its freedom after an armed struggle against an imperial power, the United States naturally want not to don the mantle of another imperial entity. Even though the book is not such a page turner as Empire, the author makes it more than lively by incisive reasoning and carefully tabulated data to support the argument. An extensive section on Notes and Bibliography serve as credentials to Ferguson’s painstaking research in creating this masterly volume. A set of plates is what the author has missed in this tome, but the verbal imagery is thoroughly enlightening. An introduction to the author is not presented here, as Ferguson is a favourite author of mine and many of his books have already been reviewed earlier in this blog.

The book opens with a thorough analysis of how the US expanded its home territory after its independence from the greatest imperial power of all time – Britain. Early Americans paid cash to acquire territory instead of fighting for them as the continent was still empty, save for the indigenous Indians. But the natives never seriously entered the strategical estimates of the white colonists. Thus, Louisiana was purchased from France, Texas from Spain, Alaska from Russia and several other places that constitute states now. These acquisitions may also be liked to colonial possessions, but nobody accounted it so. America was always an Empire in denial as any acts that imitated the colonial powers were thought to run counter to the fundamental principles on which the nation took birth. The 19th century saw more theatres, like Philippines, where this hide and seek drama enacted. The reason cited often for intervening military in a foreign land was to ensure freedom of choice of the government for its people and to establish democratic institutions modeled on American originals. The noteworthy fact was that the colonies were soon integrated in the economic structure of the mother country, from which the colony could not detach itself at a later date. Freedom from American control often connoted unacceptable financial bottlenecks, and it succeeded in cohesion among most of the territories the US acquired in 19th century. Many of them would have been promoted as states, in ancient Roman fashion, but were thwarted by vested interests at home. If a farming territory, became a de jure state, its cheap farm produce were sure to overwhelm the home markets since tariff burdens will not be applicable to them. This made Americans to deny statehood to many territories they acquired.

The first half of the last century saw America establish itself as an undeniable super power. It entered the two world wars rather late, maintaining neutrality in the conflicts raging in the old world. But when it stepped in, or rather forced to step in, the intervention was a decisive turning point in the war. Germany, which led America’s enemies in both wars, was no match for the devastating power of America’s economy and weaponry. But Ferguson points out a crucial difference between it and Britain at this stage. The British were exhausted at the end of two great wars, unable to hold on to its colonies sprawled worldwide. Instead of stepping into the shoes of their former masters, US insisted on granting freedom to British colonies after the war. No amount of dillydallying by Britain got purchase. The new superpower was determined to attach this criterion on a pre-condition to post-War aid. Consequently, British colonies gained independence one by one. But the economic and social plights of the newly freed countries were not enviable. Most of them plunged into dictatorships, civil wars, corruption and decline in every parameter of progress. The author lists a slew of reasons to explain why this happened, but they look like tailor made to suit the arguments for imperialism.

The Second World War was quickly followed by the Cold war, where the US acted upon a policy of containment of communist forces, often intervening militarily. The most disastrous case was Vietnam where they hoped for a limited involvement, most of the fighting to be done by nationalist forces. But the fierce challenge from North Vietnam forced America to involve more and more in the war that turned nastier by the day. As thousands of soldiers fell in the field, public opinion turned against the involvement. Finally, America withdrew ignominiously. Ferguson states that this fiasco overshadowed all future American interventions that aimed at only a short-term engagement at the end of which power was to be handed back to the locals. A contrasting observation between the American talented young men and those of Imperial UK is made here. The promising graduates from the Ivy League have no ambitions to serve anywhere other than their homeland. In fact, very few Americans serve willingly in the Third World. Even though the author does not spell it out in so many words, we may deduce that generations of Americans brought up with utmost comfort unmatched anywhere in the world are not willing to sacrifice it on the call of duty. As compared to this, there was a gulf of difference with the British a hundred years before. Then, young men with high caliber aspired to join the colonial civil service and worked hard to pass the test to join the meritocracy.

Ferguson contemplates on the possibility of another state acting as a counterweight – not rival – to the US in the near future. Though the European Union and China fits the bill superficially, structural problems abound, which prevent them acting as a hegemony, as the Soviets once did. So, if America does not want to be involved for a long term in the countries it invaded – Iraq and Afghanistan – the world may be seeing a lot of apolarity than unipolarity, In fact, he puts forward compelling arguments for the US to stay a long time to make democracy and effective institutions of trade are established.

The author genuinely feels that the Empire was a good thing for the native peoples of Asia and Africa. This was made amply clear from his previous book, ‘Empirereviewed earlier in this blog. But his eulogies exceed allowable limits in some of the remarks he make in this book. We know that whatever may be the political, economic and infrastructural benefits the British Empire conferred on India, there is no counter-argument to the fact that the life and welfare of the Black masses were of no concern to the colonial task masters. Famines were a regular feature in India that occurred regularly, killed thousands of poor people, with the administration standing as a mute spectator. And Ferguson goes onto justify that too as he says, “the famines that beset Indian economy were far more environmental than political in origin and after 1900, the problem was in fact alleviated by the greater integration of the Indian market for food stuffs. The Bengal famine of 1943 arose precisely because improvements introduced under British rule collapsed under the strain of war” (p.195). How convenient is the legitimization! Perhaps the author would care to explain why independent India never saw a famine again, even with its corrupt and inefficient administration?

Even thought the book’s subtitle denotes ‘the rise and fall of the American Empire’, Ferguson had not been successful in illustrating how the fall of the Empire came as yet. In a few decades, maybe, but no one is sure of that.

The book is highly recommended.

Rating: 3 Star

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Empire




Title: Empire – How Britain Made the Modern World
Author: Niall Ferguson
Publisher: Penguin, 2004 (First published 2003)
ISBN: 978-0-14-100754-0
Pages: 381

A superb piece of research from Niall Ferguson, who is considered one of the most brilliant British historians of his generation. Like the popular science books we have seen, this is an attempt at bringing out one of popular history. In a book of encyclopedic nature, it is presumable that the depth will be low, but Ferguson more than compensates for it by bringing in range and accurate and insightful comments. Like ‘The Ascent of Money’ and Virtual History’, two of the same author’s books reviewed earlier in this blog, Empire is also a fast page turner. Ferguson describes the history of how the British Empire came into being after the valiant, but sometimes heartless efforts of many explorers and merchants in a span of 350 years. It was the greatest empire of all time – without any exceptions. A quarter of the world’s landmass and population came under it and Britain made the modern world by exporting commerce, culture, and warfare to various parts of the world. The decline of this behemoth was swift and surprised everyone by its comprehensive elimination of all marks of its former empire. It is true that the political, financial and social structures it built on its colonies still survive and flourish, but the mother country has lost all vestiges of its former glory and is now fully dependant on the US – its own colony once. The book is nicely written with imagination, wit and structure evident in all chapters. This book has convinced me that Niall Ferguson ought to have a category of his own in the labeling system followed in this blog. So fluent and charming is his style of diction.

In his inimitable and witty prose, Ferguson describes how the empire came into being. Columbus’ discoveries marked the birth of a new era in European history. But the British lagged behind in the race. What it could grab was a few islands in the Caribbean. But those were economically far superior to the wilderness of North America where the English had a heart start. At the same time, the English East India Company could obtain a firm footing in India, which they put to good use in edging out all competitors. The power vacuum created by the eclipse of Mughal Empire and the devastating Afghan-Persian raids around the middle of 18th century was ideal for the British to try their luck and try they did. Even though a commercial enterprise, the company reared a private army and employed Indians as sepoys to fight for them. At first, the relations between the conquerors with the conquered went off smoothly. But the evangelist fervor making ground in England was to spell the doom of an easy going Empire. Proselytizing missionaries flocked to India in drones, upsetting the delicate religious balance. Added to this were the apprehensions of the Hindus and Muslims regarding a new rifle, whose cartridges had to be bitten out of the packing covered with grease. The lubricant was made with ingredients of cow and pig fat, which is proscribed for them by religion. The resultant mutiny was put down mercilessly, but the East India Company lost power and India came in royal hands as the jewel in the crown.

But the British lost America due to shortsighted policies. The colonists were loyal subjects of the crown, who vigorously participated in the mother country’s war campaigns. The only bone of contention was that they be provided representation in decision making bodies, which the aristocrats of England were not willing to concede. One thing led to another and Americans hardened their stand not to pay any taxes, however small, without representation. American war of Independence ensued and Britain lost its largest colony forever. The curious thing is that what Britain denied the colonists was exactly what they were prepared to give to others even without asking, just a century later.

18th Century was a time when the British Empire immensely profited out of slave trade. Sugar plantations in the Caribbean required a lot of manual effort, which the Africans were forced to fulfill. The conditions of transportation were inhuman and the galleys treated them like animals. Indignation at the inhuman trade began to be voiced around the turn of the century. Even though the business was lucrative, public outrage and the opinion of the society turned against it and the trade was abolished in 1807. Slavery itself was banned later. This made the British to carry what they termed ‘The White Man’s Burden’ to civilize the Dark Continent. Africa became a virtual hunting ground for missionaries to secure converts. David Livingstone’s preaching and exploring carved out colonies for the English. Business interests closely followed evangelical fervor.

The most dramatic factor to note is that the British Empire, which took three centuries to reach its pinnacle of power by the turn of the last century, took only half a century to disintegrate itself. The two world wars, which was a clash between Britain, which had powerful colonies to support her and Germany, which was a latecomer in the ‘scramble for Africa’ and who was badly in search of establishing an Empire of her own. Britain won both wars, fighting on the shoulders of its colonies in the first and on the economic might of the United States in the second. But it was a Pyrrhic victory that drained the mother country’s resources which had to run to U.S treasury as a supplicant. US were determined to wind up the British Empire at the end of the war as a precondition for economic and military assistance. Thus, Britain lost its Empire through two great wars which was fought to deny the aspirants of Empire in Germany. In a comparison with the imperial administrations of Britain against that of Germany and Japan, the author asserts that British sacrifice of its Empire to destroy the inhuman occupationist aspirations of those two countries is enough to expunge the sins of colonization.

What must definitely be said about the book is the balance it had kept. Normally, English authors go all guns in criticizing the imperialist policies and all the colonists did, anxious to be seen in a progressive light. According to them, anything that had to do with colonialism was to be abhorred. Ferguson takes an equidistant stand and brings out an impartial view of the events. He flays the imperialist regime when the situation warranted it, but does not hesitate to congratulate it for its efforts to stamp out slavery and slave trade. Colonialism must be seen as the first effort at globalization necessitated by the spirit of exploration and discovery of new ideas. His review of the 1857 Indian Independence war is notable for the contrast it brings out with the Indian official version. The author establishes that the mutiny was not at the behest of national sovereignty, but on wounded religious pride. Its organization was haphazard, and the whole country didn’t face the foreigners with united force. The majority of the troops which invaded and finished off the mutineers consisted of Indians themselves.

Ferguson’s narrative is witty and some of his comments caustic. It is the subtle humour that makes this book immensely readable. The undercurrent of satirism is evident from cover to cover. Just to reproduce an instance, we read about the humiliating surrender of the imperial forces stationed in Singapore to the Japanese troops during the Second World War. The 130,000 strong troops comprising British, Australian and Indian soldiers succumbed before a force only half as numerically strong. Then the author continues, mocking Churchill’s famous quip “Never in the history of the British Empire had so many given up so much to so few!” Then again, see Ferguson’s remarks on the Commonwealth in the late 20th century, “It’s only obvious merit being that it save money on professional translators. The English language is the one thing the commonwealth still has in common”.

The book addresses the question of the benefits of imperialism in a sly way, by cloaking it in economic language. During the time of Empire, world capital flowed freely to poor countries than at any other period. Migration of labour was from Britain to the colonies and not the other way round as in post-imperialist era. The colonies were also endowed with social uplift and democratic institutions. Though a great gulf existed between the rulers and the ruled, it was the first step in an effort of globalization which the author terms ‘anglobalization’ (Anglo-Globalization).                                  

The book is highly recommended.

Rating: 4 Star