DISQUS

Louis Berlan · 1 year ago

Amazon.com tells me I should getting my copy tomorrow morning, I definitely look forward to it!

sequenzia · 1 year ago

Great summary and insight. I am a big fan of Fareed Zakaria. I need to read this book.

S.t · 1 year ago

nice pic of Barak H. Obama.
When do you think he'll change his middle name from 'Hussein' to 'How can anyone believe a single word I say'?

fredwilson · 1 year ago

I can't wait for our country to have a president with a middle name of
Hussien and a last name of Obama

It will show the world that we are not intolerant and prove that we are the
melting pot of the world

S.t · 1 year ago

his middle name could be 'Harold' or 'Herman' or 'Hale or 'Habib', ya still can't take anything the guys says seriously.

gregorylent · 1 year ago

:-) huffington post is racking him about diluting his brand of late...

fredwilson · 1 year ago

You can't but I can. That's a democracy. I am sure I can't take a thing your man says seriously either

leigh · 1 year ago

I still hope you end up with a president who can wear a dress (male or female for that matter :)

fredwilson · 1 year ago

That's one of the main reasons I voted for hillary. I thought she was qualified and I think its high time a woman get elected to the highest office in this land

iamverytall · 1 year ago

Interesting article from the Times on the reclamation of "Hussein," which I'll post at the bottom. I have to say, I'm apalled by the willingness of our countrymen to resort to such infantile attacks as "Your middle name happens to be the same as the last name of a dictator that we just took down, ergo you must be a bad person." What does this say about who we are as a people? Should I start thinking that everybody named George is going to lie to me and try to lead me into a senseless war?

We are now living in a world where people of all races, colors and names will be living and meeting side by side. I can only hope that people can get over their prejudices and start voting for candidates based on their positions, rather than their names or their false but heavily rumored religions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/us/politics/2...

gregorylent · 1 year ago

the infantile stuff simply has to be ignored ... polls as news, so much other junior high school thinking in major news media ... do not consume it, tis virulently unhealthy

gregorylent · 1 year ago

oh, i HAVE to post this here, found it on your blog!! great music, fabulous global theme, forget zakaia, this is global life... great great great

http://wherethehellismatt.com/?fbid=B81bL3

David B. · 1 year ago

Yeah, I would seriously like to see that nominated for an Oscar as Best Short Film.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

Here here

Martin Owen · 1 year ago

Was that George III of the House of Hanover you are referring too.... or are other George's like that?

scott crawford · 1 year ago

Smiling.

pg · 1 year ago

How would having a president of mixed racial heritage show that we, as a country, are "not intolerant?" How is the color of someone's skin subject to tolerance? Shouldn't it be treated with indifference, more like a non-issue? The premise would be laughable if it weren't so sad because unfortunately there are many smarmy, know it all, white folks who think along the same lines. TiVoing The Wire on HBO and reading a few books are not qualifiers for social clairvoyance. The belief that having a black president (who happens to be just as much white as he is black) is a panacea for our country's ills is reckless. Like putting lipstick on a pig. I don't like either candidate - I'm voting for Chuck Norris.

iggy · 1 year ago

A nation of brainless muts,thanks to multi culturism.The U.S is no more.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

Multi-culturism is the greatest thing about the US

John · 1 year ago

Regarding the Bush "go it alone" doctrine, this was the case in Iraq (no matter which side you are on) and in some other areas, but I recall in the last election Kerry argued he would negotiate with North Korea bilaterally and strongly criticized Bush for not doing so, while Bush argued for multilateral discussions including South Korea, Japan and China. I personally have always perceived a nuclear armed desperate ("sell anything to anyone") North Korea to have been our largest, thorniest threat. Although there is more work to be done to achieve irreversible, verifiable dismantling of their nuclear program (the goal the administration set), I believe the bilateral talks have resulted in a tangible reduction of the threat. Similar multilateral talks have occurred with Iran as well.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

If the book teaches you anything, it's the value of ³multilateralism²

ErikSchwartz · 1 year ago

I think China is a wild card.

It could all go very well. It could just as easily go very, very wrong.

There are many similarities between current day China and Russia circa 1917. The gap between rich and poor is huge. The economy is moving from agrarian to industrial. Do the Chinese workers try to unionize?

If Tienanmen in 1989 was analogous to St Petersburg in 1905, then is China's 1917 coming?

What happens to the US economy if China has a class based civil war? (Besides me calling my broker and shorting WalMart)

fredwilson · 1 year ago

I don't know that much about China so I am not really qualified to answer
that

But Zakaria suggests that getting people out of poverty and building a
middle class is the chinese government's biggest worry and effort

They don't want that to happen

Charlie Crystle · 1 year ago

getting people out of poverty--now that would be novel. for the US.

Steve Ardire · 1 year ago

Excellent summary post !

Jeff Judge · 1 year ago

Interested in selling your copy? :)

fredwilson · 1 year ago

I'd be happy to give it away to be honest but can't really send it off until
I get back to the US

Mike · 1 year ago

Nice summary Fred. Does he mention anything about the European Union? It (or should I say 'we', being in the UK) has the potential to overtake the US, at least economically, in the near term. There's lots of talk about the rise of China, India et al, but recently the Euro has become really strong.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

He does talk quite a bit about the EU, particularly how it is a model of
sorts for what the entire world could become over time

kidmercury · 1 year ago

zakaria is one of those guys who thinks 9/11 was pulled off by a guy in a cave. which is another way of saying zakaria doesn't know wtf he is talking about.

if you don't understand the most important event in recent history, you're not going to be able to accurately forecast where things are going. what's past is prologue.

people would be better off spending their time watching america: freedom to fascism. you can watch it for free on google video. then you'll see where things are really headed.

PRoales · 1 year ago

"I hope every senator, congressman, staffer, and certainly anyone who wants to govern our country reads it."

I would go beyond even that. I hope every college student dreaming about making an impact on the world reads it. Every entrepreneur, every banker, every non-for-profit employee.

Understanding where the world is today and where it is going will help everyone position their own work for far more success and impact.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

Agreed

pedalpete · 1 year ago

that Obama pic is great!
I saw Fareed on Charlie Rose and he is an amazing presenter, I'm waiting for his book to be returned to the library.

However, you mention the 'greatest higher education system in the world', but the system is only as good as those who use it. It is my understanding that in the US, science, mathematics, and engineering knowledge/education is not being taken advantage of, and that companies are foreseeing a significant drought in the ability to recruit qualified people in these fields in the next 20 years.

Though this may not affect the web as much (myself a self educated programmer/entrepreneur), it could be disastrous to larger scale developments such as Biotech and Energy.

Relying on immigration policies becomes a challenge and numbers game that I suspect in the long term the US does not want to become dependent on. Best to breed the brains AND attract the finest from abroad which I think the US has historically done. Will the US be able to attract the best professors in order to maintain the 'best higher education system in the world'?

Dan Kaplan · 1 year ago

If you're into forward looking books that might actually tell you what you don't already know and perhaps even add a new dimension to your perspective on history, I can't recommend Robert Wright's "Nonzero" enough.

To get it all reduced into 20 minutes, here's Wright's TED Talk: http://is.gd/JUj

And if this sparks your interest, here's the link to Amazon: http://is.gd/JU5

gregorylent · 1 year ago

thanks for this ... i believe you have mentioned it before

moral progress, the virtue of selfishness (it leads to selflessness when fully pursued) the value of non-zero sum interactions ... lovely stuff, a rather broader view than analysis of world political processes ... it is analysis of the entire global dynamic

and it is perhaps beneficial to look at the obvious negative effects of zero-sum thinking in some of our structures and institutions, and see them as damaging .. trading, smart winner sells to dumb loser, not good .. diplomacy american style, my way or the highway, not good ...

the historical process that wright notes, and calls evolution, imply something that zakarias seems to be missing, he is far too linear ... the entire context is changing for what it means to be a human being on earth, and this is the driver of different values, far more than shifting polarities or power balances

good stuff, thanks

Dan Kaplan · 1 year ago

You have a sharp eye.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

Yeah, I am going to get that book too

I love non-zero sum thinking!

naffenuf · 1 year ago

Some great thinking here, but puh-lease: advantages to centrally planned economies? Great -- you have the power to knock down a village to build a city. But what's in the soul of the bureaucrat who does that to people's lives? Really, you can't separate the economic benefits from the human costs. Are we to admire that sort of thing?

fredwilson · 1 year ago

No, of course we shouldn't admire it. But its working for them and expect to see more of it in this world, not less

oren · 1 year ago

"It's the synthesis of all the information, the analysis, and the conclusions that are valuable" -- can be said on your post as well. What a wonderful summary! Thank you.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

I guess that's what's called a 'conversation'

John R. · 1 year ago

Thanks for the summary. I'm just starting his last book "The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home & Abroad" and it should be a winner as well. If you liked his latest I'm sure you'll like his last.

gregorylent · 1 year ago

the ancient eastern cultureshave suggested everything becomes its opposite....

zakaria makes little mention of where democracies are going ... and it does not take too much observation of an everchanging world to see a trend towards a lowest common denominator, towards totalitariansm in the democracy of the usa ... dept of homeland security, tsa, fisa, nsa, border walls, ... land of the monitored and home of the fearful ...

we have some fundamental problems that are larger in ambit than what the current government is being held responsible for ... we have no real opposition party, for one thing, no real rebels to the status quo ...

Steven Kane · 1 year ago

I might tweak your post headline to instead read

"The Post World War II" World

And this is a very very good thing.

First, it has never been an "American World."

Just ask Mao Zedong!

Etc...

But since 1945 it has been a world organized largely by the events and outcomes of WW2, where the victor was almost alone in being stronger *after* than before the conflict.

Fortunately (I believe, anyway) that victor was the USA, which despite all its dark history and faults, is at core committed to pluralism and social mobility and human rights.

And we are now witnessing decades of USA policy bearing fruit. Its NOT that the USA is declining -- its not. Rather its that other huge chunks of the human race and culture are adopting our core values and policies and systems. yes, its a messy and imperfect and sometimes sideways process. but pluralism and social mobility and human rights are taking hold all over the planet, replacing totalitrianism and feudalism and the like.

Recall, in 1945, the 19th century and early 20th century european powers were devastated. as was japan. as was russia, which also pliunged itself into grueling self-mutilation. likewise china. india was ripped apart by emerging from colonialism and internal ethnic racial and religious civil war.

Etc...

The Cold War was basically a nuclear standoff, again, where the strong USA prevailed (basically, again, due to fundamental strengths gained an asserted in WW2 and fundamental weaknesses in the USSR exacerbated by WW2 then ongoing military expenditures - imagine a world where the USSR, like todays China, focused on creating a burgeoning middle class!)

But the USA won WW2 and won the Cold War and now we are winning the post-WW2 and post-Cold War era.

This is fantastic news for the human race.

And we should take a moment to say a word of thanks to 20th century visionaries who helped keep the world moving in this direction like Winston Churchill, Mahatma Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Harry Truman, George Marshall, Margaret Thatcher, Mikhail Gorbochav, Deng Xiaoping, Ronald Reagan and many many others.

The path is long and difficult and bound to be filled with tragedies as well as joys, but I for one am extremely hopeful that our kids an grandkids will live on a planet where the average human being is better off than any time in history -- better educated, healthier, wealthier, more free.

sorry - this now concludes this very longwinded and treacly comment

fredwilson · 1 year ago

Great comment steve

But I still think you'd enjoy the book

BWJones · 1 year ago

What you should know is that we have done major damage to our higher education system over the past few years. We spent the 20 years before Bush encouraging young people to go into science and over the past 7 years, we've pulled the rug out from underneath them. Science funding, particularly in the biosciences has taken it in the shorts. Labs are closing, scientists are leaving the country for others and students do not want to continue in academia.

If we expect to maintain our lead in higher education, we've gotta fix what's been broken.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

What are the most important things to fix?

Gabriel · 1 year ago

Nice review, thanks! One question though, does he say anything about the rise of the multi-national corporation as a rival power to governments? To not cover this subject in relation to discussions of power is to ignore a very large change in international commerce and politics. The corporation is clearly an amazing vehicle for progress and achievement and yet, if left unchecked, can be an equally powerful engine of destruction and ruthlessness. The profit motive is pure and is fueling the global economy. I would be interested to hear how he sees this piece fitting into the puzzle.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

He barely touched on it

The great thing about corporations is they are subject to competition

Even the vast oil businesses that are run by the saudis and the russians face competition from ethanol, other biofuels, and newer forms of alt-energy

So competition keeps corporations honest, at least that's my hope and belief

Gabriel · 1 year ago

That is one of my hopes and beliefs as well. The other is that corporations are run by people, and therefore have the capacity to care about other people and ultimately do the right thing.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

Aren't governments run by people too?

Gabriel · 1 year ago

Ah, yes, of course. And therein lies a big question and yet a bigger hope. What is the proper balance of power between the corporation and the government? The corporation answers to the shareholders, whose chief aim is to make money. A democratic government supposedly answers to the people and can serve as a check and balance to the corporation. If power shifts too far towards the corporations then the profit motive can harm the people. As you so rightly pointed out, competition can play a role, and people can have a say if they can make their voices heard by choosing to take their business elsewhere. But governments are fueled by the economy and where the consumer need is great (real or perceived) and corporations have too much influence, the balance can be shifted in their favor. Witness the beating the environment has taken, much of it in order to serve economic interests. My hope is that democratic governments can play a stronger, more positive role in maintaining the proper balance.

gregorylent · 1 year ago

the profit motive is another word for ego. until this fundamental characteristic is modified in human beings, as happens in some few spiritual practices based in experience rather than in belief, life will continue pretty much as it is.

unless one can change character, one cannot change the world

Gabriel · 1 year ago

That reminds me of an interesting book I read when I was studying global politics called the Evolution of Cooperation, by Robert Axelrod. One of my take aways from the book's many examples of competition vs. cooperation was that until we learn, as a species, how to cooperate to achieve our results, we won't ever end up with the best outcome. For example, the prisoner's dilemma is classic competition vs. cooperation theory, where cooperation leads to the best outcome for each prisoner, but selfish, competitive based behavior leads to a worse outcome for each prisoner. The irony of it all is that we got to the top of the food chain by being the best competitor. But my theory is that unless we can take our competitive drive off this planet and compete with whatever lies out there, we have to learn how to cooperate, or we won't survive.

steve baker · 1 year ago

China second in the world by 2025? I would say they've achieved that already. And I think China's importance will only continue to grow, whether things go very right or very wrong, or (most likely) somewhere in between.

mikedibenedetto · 1 year ago

my big question is this: will this replace the world is flat as the go to book on globalization? it's been a while since i read that one and i would love an update from another point of view but with a similar focus. even if the answer to my question is no, i'll probably still pick it up after reading this post. thanks for the summary...

Lumburg · 1 year ago

That Bush go it alone doctrine is not true as evidenced this week with North Korea. Don't let facts get in the way of ideology. China, Russia, Japan, US, and South Korea had a hand in this. Yet North Korea wanted to talk directly and only with the US.

I guess the commitment by Great Britain to Iraq doesn't count for anything, or Australia, New Zealand, Poland, etc. Yes, the US has the most troops there, but those countries did contribute and participate.

Let's not forget Canada who is right beside us in Afghanistan right now along with NATO troops from other countries.

All of a sudden Columbia is an up and coming prosperous country - How did that happen? Let's not report on that success as Bush foriegn policy had a lot to do with that.

Enough with the labeling, enough with the ideology, let the facts be what they are good and bad.

FYI More children have been shot & killed in Chicago than US soldiers in Iraq so far this year. Over 200+ murders in Chicago. Right now the youth in Chicago would be safer living in Iraq than in Chicago - but let's not talk about that.

This has got to stop. Go ahead and support Obama (as your right to do so), but don't ignore facts.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

Come on Lumberg.

Bush and Cheney have run the most isolated and unilateral foriegn policy in my lifetime and possibly in the modern history of the US

That is fact

Lumberg · 1 year ago

This is how isloated the Bush Administration has been:
1. Got Libya to renounce its ways and denounce terrorism - Repent for Pan AM 103, Berlin bombings
2. With the help of 5 other nations pursued North Korea to give up nuclear ambitions
3. Tripled $9 Billion to African nations to combat AIDS and Malaria
4. Was first World Leader to call Darfur a Genocide
5. Helped turn around Columbia
6. Left door open for Humanitarian cyclone aid to Burma
7. Sent warships money and military personnel to help during Tsunami (Indonesia now retains a positive view of the US even 2 years later).
8. Provide aid to China for Earthquake relief
9. Denounced China's Tibet policies
10. Freed Afghanistan where it was illegal for girls to attend school, and women to work. Women could not be outside without Burkha and male escort for any reason.
11. 15 out of 18 Iraq benchmarks have now been met
12. From America.gov: Bush said with Congress' approval of the $770 million, the administration would be on track to spend $5 billion in fiscal years 2008 and 2009 to fight global hunger. Fiscal year 2009 begins October 1, 2008

Look, I am not a 100% Bush fan. I think he did a poor job of laying out the facts for WMD. But to provide a blanket statement calling him most unilateral and isolationist in a lifetime is an over statement.

I'm not saying he is perfect, but to brush it all with such broad strokes is unfair, and discounts facts that could be relevent in future administrations for good and bad.

So Bush was more isolationist than FDR pre WWII? We was more isolationist than Woodrow Wilson pre WWI? He was more isolationist than LBJ? who went in Vietnam Unilaterally?

BUT - LBJ did not go to Vietnam alone, the UK, Australia, New Zealand and several other countries joined us. The song "Boys Are Back in Town" by Thin Lizzy is a tribute to the soldiers returning from Vietnam (an Irish band).

Example: That isolationist Bush tripled the aid to Africa from Clinton - Tripled it from $3 Billion to $9 Billion

That is fact

Lumberg · 1 year ago

15 Columbian Hostages rescued in Columbia

FARC is on the run Columbia is now pro-American and power of rebel forces have diminished greatly

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/07/02/be...

Nathaniel · 1 year ago

This post seems like selective hearing. No doubt all these things are great but the laundry list of negative impacts is easier to put together. The big picture is that the US invaded Iraq without any justification, botched the response to 9/11 and has lost the respect and cooperation of many close allies. I respect your characterization of the progress we have made but these things are dwarfed by the mistakes. I mean, an additional 6B in food aid is great but we spend that every 2 weeks in Iraq.

Lumberg · 1 year ago

Fact:

Saddam Hussein had Chemical Weapons (WMD). In fact he used WMD 15 times during his reign. he used it during the Iran / Iraq War, and he used it against his own people.

Here are the Location, Weapon Used, Date, Number of Casualties

- Haij Umran Mustard August 1983 fewer than 100 Iranian/Kurdish

- Panjwin Mustard October-November 1983 3,001 Iranian/Kurdish

- Majnoon Island Mustard February-March 1984 2,500 Iranians

- al-Basrah Tabun March 1984 50-100 Iranians

- Hawizah Marsh Mustard & Tabun March 1985 3,000 Iranians

- al-Faw Mustard & Tabun February 1986 8,000 to 10,000 Iranians

- Um ar-Rasas Mustard December 1986 1,000s Iranians

- al-Basrah Mustard & Tabun April 1987 5,000 Iranians

- Sumar/Mehran Mustard & nerve agent October 1987 3,000 Iranians

- Halabjah Mustard & nerve agent March 1988 7,000s Kurdish/Iranian

- al-Faw Mustard & nerve agent April 1988 1,000s Iranians

- Fish Lake Mustard & nerve agent May 1988 100s or 1,000s Iranians

- Majnoon Islands Mustard & nerve agent June 1988 100s or 1,000s Iranians

- South-central border Mustard & nerve agent July 1988 100s or 1,000s Iranians

- an-Najaf -Karbala area Nerve agent & CS March 1991 Shi’a casualties not known

gregorylent · 1 year ago

and democrats let them, helped fund every step of the way ... something is wrong that transcends party ... i think the word is systemic

tpurves · 1 year ago

heh, when do you figure was the last time the cameras caught GW reading a book?

SK · 1 year ago

Great post Fred. I have been reading the book myself albeit slowly over the past few months because I am in the middle of moving myself and my familty to India! After 20 years in the US, including the past few years as a venture capitalist, I am moving. And that for purely economic reasons: I am making more money here (in absolute terms and not by PPP). I also like the growth opportunities for the future here. And every day I run into several of my ex-Sand Hill Road and Boston colleagues at power-lunch tables in Mumbai and Bangalore and Delhi. And expats/repats from Silicon Valley and New York. I also meet smart b-school graduates and engineers who grew up here in India who would never consider moving to the US now regardless of how open our immigration policies get. The US will no doubt continue to attract scrappy entrepreneurs but alternative destinations for the same migrants are now real.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

That is true

But what is also interesting is that this blog and many other places are
pseudo ³power lunch tables² where indians and americans and many other
nationalities can come together to share ideas and build a global economy

fred

antje · 1 year ago

higher education - maybe. But on the lower education rungs, the US is slipping and slipping badly. I have dual US-EU citizenship and have been working in the US (even did a short stint as a substitute teacher in an inner city school district), Germany, Czech, Russia and compare notes with my friends around the world. The US needs to get its act together on public education on the K-12....(I could write a book on this but I'm too lazy!)

jason · 1 year ago

Central planning doesn't always produce negative results. The Soviet Union, for example, utilized central planning and was able to industrialize within a period of 10 years....pretty impressive and all the more so considering that the world was experiencing an economic depression at the time. However, central planning does not work all that well with an economy that is already modernized...too many things to factor in...usu. leading to stagnation and in the case of the Soviet Union complete economic meltdown....Conclusion: central planning can have positive results with under-developed economies (like the USSR in the 1920's) but usu. leads to stagnation and collapse with more mature economies.

Ellen · 1 year ago

Amazing that this picture was sent to me as a ploy to say "don't vote for this guy - look at what he is READING!" - If the blog is true I see no "...is reading 'The Post-American World' -- IT IS THE MUSLIM/ISLAMIC VIEW TO DESTROY AMERICA FROM WITHIN." - I am the type who read the book just to see which is the true interpretation - Even if it is an Islamic view to destroy America it doesn't mean that is why he is reading it - If that is what the book is truly about then it could be just as true he is studying "the enemy" - Also why would he have it open for a photo op if it was a subversive message - Do you think the library has it?

fredwilson · 1 year ago

I hope they do

It's a great book

A ³must read²

perilla · 1 year ago

According to Plato any state undergoes the following stages - 1. Timocracy, 2. Oligarchy, 3. Democracy, 4. Tyranny. This view was elaborated based on what was back then one of cradles of civilization and considering that Plato himself was witnessing Athens turning from totalitarian to democratic rule - the development he came to hate and which conditioned him for his "Republic."

Democracy in my view is not what all the world is moving towards. Admittedly, most of the Western cultures tend to get more and more democratic, but we must not forget that governance must be aligned with culture and tradition of a society. How society is governed must stem from the society's cultural and demographic aspects - at least in the modern world. One cannot readily - America is vocally but unsuccessfully trying to do that - introduce democracy in the Arab world for their mentality is quite different.

One size fits all is not a solution and democracy is conceived in the eyes of the modern world as such, which IMO is wrong.

Ken · 1 year ago

With people named Fareed and Obama we should be very scared. These people are a dangerous threat to our society.

fredwilson · 1 year ago

I hope that's a joke

lynn · 1 year ago

What was it about the photo that made you want to read the book? Was it because Obama appeared to have been reading it? What was your original thought on the photo?

cmp036 · 1 year ago

i think this would be the perfect book for obama to read. he does, after all, say in his book that if he had to chose between muslim or american that he would chose muslim. he would drestroy this country. i blame bill clinton for the economic disaster, not bush. he screwed it up with fannie mae and freddie mac. look it up yourself. get educated.

Wendy · 1 year ago

I have not read the book, however I received an email with this exact picture with a quote saying the book is about when the Muslims take over America from within. Is there any referance to this in the book or is it just political mantra?

Thank you

fredwilson · 1 year ago

That's horseshit to be frank and the kind of awful misinformation and hate that idiots are spewing on the net right now

This an amazing book written by an very bright and smart man who loves america very much. Its about the best thing I've read all year

gmikep · 1 year ago

Since "diversity" is of paramount importance, how does American culture preserve and ultimately protect diversity without some cultural segregation? One cannot honestly propose the importance of diversity without some conjecture of the task of ultimately preserving it. Until the last century world-wide segregation protected diversity well. Through human migrations already though, genetic-archeology suffers from compromised diversity and yields diminished returns for anthropology. Integration ultimately leads to the destruction of diversity.

G. Smith · 1 year ago

Some one sent me this photo with the following:

See what Obama reads: The Post American World
(It is the Muslim/Islamic view to destroy America)

Just more fear tactics

Dan · 11 months ago

Obama is reading up on how he will continue to use us and the world for his own selfish gain.

Obama knows it is all about religion. But he can not say that in the USA. His life has been all about religion. But he can not say this in the United states. It will be the countries that openly say they are all about Atheism, Islam, etc. that will have the passion of their people behind them. Christians are persecuted throughout the world because they are the only threat to China and all other countries but the USA won't tell about it. The USA has become the harlet for the world to use to gain wealth because it's leaders won't stand for anything. Thats right we are the slut of the world that other countries use. Enter Barack Obama the biggest user of them all. Right in our face using every personality at his disposal to get what he wants power and control. We will all feel very used when it is all said and done if you don't already feel this way. He has used the Christian Faith to get where he is because it is powerful. It will be a slow boil but eventually we are going to be the biggest losers. It will never feel so good to be so abused. Obama the ACORN THUG has " done" us all. Just smile and enjoy it.

Name · 4 months ago

What does a muslim know about America? It wasn't his ancestors that fought and died for this country to make it free. He's just like Obama a stinken communist that would like nothing better than to destroy the very fiber of our country, and to bring us into socialisim.

fredwilson · 4 months ago

Whoa. That's a racist comment and I don't like it at all

Megiddo · 3 months ago

Where's is his Birth Certificate...One where the document examiners can determine the validity?