Book Description

'In the triumphant resurgence of capitalism and indeed its global reach, the one thinker who is vindicated is Karl Marx. The demise of the socialist experiment inaugurated by October 1917 would not distress but cheer Marx if, as an atheist, he occupies any part of Hell, Purgatory or Heaven. Indeed, if it came to a choice between whether the Market or the State should rule the economy, the modern libertarians would be shocked as much as the modern socialists to find Marx on the side of the Market.'

In this provocative and enthusiastically revisionist book, the distinguished economist Meghnad Desai argues that capitalism's recent efflorescence is something Karl Marx anticipated and indeed would, in a certain sense, have welcomed. Capitalism, as Marx understood it, would only reach its limits when it was no longer capable of progress. Desai argues that globalization, in bringing the possibility of open competition on world markets to producers in the Third World, has proved that capitalism is still capable of moving forwards. Marx's Revenge opens with a consideration of the ideas of Adam Smith and Hegel. It proceeds to look at the nuances in the work of Marx himself, and concludes with a survey of more recent economists who studied capitalism and attempted to unravel its secrets, including Joseph Schumpeter, John Maynard Keynes and Friedrich Hayek. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

An Admirable Effort--Yet Comes Up Short
Many Leftists, myself included, have spoken against the negative effects that globalization has had on the working classes in both the United States and the Third World. However, if Marx were alive today, what would his position be?

In "Marx's Revenge," Meghnad Desai proposes the startling thesis that Marx would support the current phenomenon of globalization. According to Desai, a truly socialist society can develop only when capitalism exhausts itself as a creative and progressive force. As recent events have shown, this has not yet happened. Capitalism is still a productive and vital force for better or worse.

Desai supports his thesis by discussing three variants of socialism that arose in the 20th Century: Socialism outside Capitalism (SoC), Socialism within Capitalism (SwC), and Socialism beyond Capitalism (SbC).

SoC represents the socialist society that was attempted within the Soviet Union. This version represents the Stalinist "socialism in one country" model which held that socialism and capitalism were destined to compete against each other. The system that was able to produce the most economic benefit to its citizens was to be declared the "winner." However, the corruption endemic in the Soviet system and its inability to produce the surplus capital necessary for economic growth and development led to the demise of this system with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.

SwC represents the attempt by the developed capitalist nations to develop a "humanized" capitalism with a generous welfare state. This system largely worked from 1945 through the end of the 1960s. However, SwC was made possible only through the widespread Keynesian consensus held by the West after World War II that allowed contries to manipulate domestic financial markets for the funding of domestic programs. With the advent of globalization and the resulting liquidity of international capital, this project was dealt a severe blow beginning in the late 1970s.

SbC represents the only true alternative to capitalism. According to Desai, SbC represents a "self-conscious society" that develops when capitalism reaches its limit and can no longer act as a progressive force for the economic betterment of society. What will SbC look like?

This leads me to the central criticism of Desai's book. Desai offers an excellent historical overview of the development of the various competing forms of socialism as well as an intricate discussion of Marx's theories of profit and growth as put forth in Das Kapital. However, he has little to say regarding the pragmatic considerations involving what a true socialist society will look like. In fact, the last sentence in "Marx's Revenge" states: "Will there ever be Socialism beyond Capitalism?" (p. 315). This question remains unanswered.

To get an idea of what such a society would look like, I recommend reading David Schweickart's book "After Capitalism." Both books are important in that they offer hope that the current late, decadent stage of capitalism will be the final one and that a more just and humane order can be built in its place. ... Read more

Book Description

Praise for Who's Afraid of Adam Smith?

"For over two decades as a book editor, Peter Dougherty has brought to the marketplace superb books on economics. Now he has written one of his own. He starts off with the insights of Adam Smith–not just the Adam Smith of The Wealth of Nations with his praise of the free market, but also the Adam Smith of A Theory of Moral Sentiments–who understood that free markets could only flourish in societies with generous amounts of social capital and strong institutions of civil society. Drawing on the work of contemporary economists, Dougherty shows how countries developed and undeveloped can create the moral climate and public institutions in which markets can thrive."
—Michael Barone, Senior Writer, U.S. News & World Report, McLaughlin Group panelist, and author of The New Americans

"In Who’s Afraid of Adam Smith? Peter Dougherty has written a fascinating book that not only shows that economics is as much about society and values as money and self-interest, but also takes noneconomists on a highly readable tour of the discipline as it has evolved in recent decades."
—Francis Fukuyama, author of The End of History and the Last Man and Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity

"Peter Dougherty does the near-impossible in this brilliant book. He humanizes Adam Smith, rediscovers the kinder, gentler soul of Smith’s philosophy, and–wonder of wonders–makes economics engaging and accessible. Students of all ages will love this new interpretation of the proper relationship of economics to politics and civil society."
—Larry J. Sabato, Professor and Director, Center for PoliticsUniversity of Virginia

"In The Wealth of Nations, bible of capitalism, Adam Smith taught us to be better consumers and producers–how to do well. With wit and insight, Peter Dougherty shows why we now must learn from Smith’s more obscure A Theory of Moral Sentiments to be better neighbors–how to do good. If you believe the world has more silicon than soul, read this book. You’ll learn how, in Peter’s words, ‘economics can transform the culture for the better.’"
—Shlomo Maital, Academic Director, Technion Institute of Management, and author of Executive Economics ... Read more

Reviews (5)

How Dougherty Wrote His Book?:How The Book Got Its Title
Throughout the book Peter Dougherty expresses the idea that economists are playing a more important role in the development of today's modern world. As the book progresses Dougherty outlines the basics and morality of the market. Dougherty presents the facts that today the market is running according to the basic rules Adam Smith presented in his works. Throughout the book it's argued that the pursuit of self-interest would not only increase the wealth of society but also teach good habits. Dougherty discusses Smith's ideas on the role of government and other non-economic institutions in society. He argues we need institutions that put our self-interest into service of the common interest, while curving its more destructive elements. This book provides a guided tour through the works of all the authors noted throughout the book. Unfortunately I found this book a little confusing do to some language use and the multiple characters. This book was not the most up beat book I've ever read, but I would highly recommend it to anyone who is truly interested in economics and its many elements.

Adam Smith's Civil Society
Who¡¯s Afraid of Adam Smith? How The Market Got Its Soul! is a book about economics. In the book Peter J. Dougherty portrays many important figures that shaped the history and evolvement of economics. He expresses the idea that economists are playing a more important role in the development of the modern world than what people have realized. However, this book is more about ethics. As the title tells, it is about the moral aspects of economics. With the discussion of Adam Smith¡¯s moral sentiment and how the moral aspects of economics evolved with the development of the modern society, Dougherty outlines the basis and inner morality of free market. He argues that capitalism system and the free market based on it was born with a soul.
Adam Smith¡¯s The Wealth of Nation has long been regarded as the ¡°Bible of capitalism¡±. The focus of Dougherty¡¯s book, however, is on Smith¡¯s less-known book --- The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Published in 1759, The Theory of Moral Sentiments was derived from Adam Smith¡¯s work on moral philosophy. Dougherty believes that the moral dimension of Adam Smith gives market society its soul and it is further revised and updated by several generations of economists and social philosophers to meet the challenges of the changing time.
Dougherty presents the facts that today¡¯s free market is running according to the basic rules Adam Smith articulated in his works. He points out that ¡°the seemingly paradoxical connection between self-love and universal opulence sat at the center of Smith¡¯s system of social philosophy¡­¡± and ¡°Smith connected the pursuit of private interest to service of the public good.¡± He offers several important insights from Smith¡¯s idea of a civil society.
A civil society is built around the assumption ¡°that we are not angels, but rather the very self-interested beings whom we know ourselves to be¡­¡± As observed by Adam Smith it is "not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest". A civil society is built on the basis of the pursuit of self-interest. It promotes individual prosperity.
Adam Smith argued that the pursuit of self-interest would not only increase the wealth of the society but also inculcate good habits such as ¡°economy, industry, discretion, attention and application of thought¡±. As he noted ¡°whenever dealings are frequent, a man does not expect to gain so much by any one contract as by probity and punctuality in the whole, and a prudent dealer, who is sensible of his real interest, would rather choose to lost what he has a right to than give any ground for suspicion¡­¡± In a civil society, these ¡°good habits¡± are not just an option, they are necessary for the maximization of people¡¯s self-interest.
Finally, Dougherty discusses Adam Smith¡¯s idea on the role of government and other non-economic institutions in a society. He writes that ¡°we need institutions that channel our self-interest into service of the common interest while curbing its more destructive elements.¡± Dougherty examines how economists at different times applied Smith¡¯s ideas through advocating government¡¯s role in projects like education, research and development initiatives, and revitalizing poor neighborhood.

Who' s afraid of Adam Smith
I really did'nt like this book at all. I think that it is a very confusing and lame story. Sorry no hard feelings. I mean there was nothing there to keep me motivated and interested in reading it. You talked alot about Econ throughout the story which I thought was very cool, just for the simple fact this is for my Econ class. Its like your telling life time stories about yourself and others. You sure do have alot of characters throughout the book. Overall I think that the book is okay its just not a book for me.

Great introduction to economics but only for open minded !
You have no clue - or almost - about what economics is about but you believe that economists have a very limited "marginal utility". This book might change your point of view.

Not written by economists but by their editor, this book provide a little guided tour through the classical and contemporary authors and their works. The authors key point - and I definitely agree with that - is that economists, from Freeman to friedman, are first and foremost concerned with social progress and in that respect, their contribution is tremendous.

It is definitely not a detailled history of economic though ("the ordinary business of life" by R. Backhouse and edited by the author does it) but the book is full of great anecdotes about famous economists that deserve the purchase.

In other word, if you are an economics graduate and do not dare to tell it to your girlfriend, you can offer her this book and she will push you to get the Ph.D ...

For more advance reader the fantastic "the mind and the market" by Jerry Z. Muller, to whom the author - and the reader - acknowledged a big credit is also recomended

One comment nevertheless : the author makes an excellent pitch for a few books but the one I looked for is not anymore available from the Princeton University Press, where the author works. The good point of that story, is that it confirms to me that this book is also driven by moral sentiments.

Unplugging a new Prometheus
Economics has been a large part of everyone's political expectations lately. In WHO'S AFRAID OF ADAM SMITH? / HOW THE MARKET GOT ITS SOUL by Peter J. Dougherty, there is a section called "Prometheus Unplugged" at the end of Chapter 1, ..., in which we are expected "to watch economists expand impressively on the technical side of Adam Smith's legacy. Continuing breakthroughs in the analytical apparatus of fields such as finance, strategy, growth, organizations, trade, and money promise to charge the wealth of nations in untold ways, to fuel the fire of economic growth . . ." (p. 19). That is not what is happening. I just read HAYEK ON HAYEK, (1994) on how THE ROAD TO SERFDOM (1944) by F. A. Hayek tried to demonstrate that modern methods will not dominate any market by political means because of the complexity of systems in which no one knows what is coming next. People who plan big budget surpluses always have them snatched away before the national debt is reduced to a pittance. Cutting taxes is a political stunt, in this context, in which even WHO'S AFRAID OF ADAM SMITH? is trying to tell us, "As economist Paul Romer has said of the connection between innovation and growth, `No amount of savings and investment, no policy of macroeconomic finetuning, no set of tax and spending incentives can generate sustained economic growth unless it is accompanied by countless large and small discoveries that are required to create more value . . .' . . . history instructs us that the real leaps forward--those that yield true progress--come from those new intellectual breakthroughs, not political logrolling." (pp. 39-40). Neither party is going to learn how to save a geopolitical economy by reading this book, as long as the recent growth in the amount of money available for investment has driven the rate of interest, the return for money market funds, to almost zero.

What is going on? Individual addictions have become so therapeutic for people in American society that it doesn't take long for most people to get what they want. Smokers are currently in the process of being saved from their road to serfdom, and they might get stomped out for openly enjoying something that is almost condemned in this book. "Note the number of rich and middle-class kids who still head to the psychic hinterlands or into drugs or sex or music in search of Meaning or something that closely resembles it." (p. 34). I have tried to argue with those people, and have discovered that most of them would rather not argue about economics at the level currently utilized in U.S. politics, but they applaud Ralph Nader for saying, *The future of the economy of this country is industrial hemp.* Check with Ralph on that quote. It always seems to be funnier, somehow, when he says it.

Allow me to call the author of this brisk little book P.J. This has shades on the cover, informally, I'm sure, but the Preface ends with thanks "To Grady Klein, cunning designer, my thanks for a jacket that so beautifully captures the spirit of this work." (p. xiv). Chapter 1 blends economics with P.J.'s knowledge of publishing books, a profession which has allowed P.J. to associate with Nobel prize winners. Chapter 2 is short, on the success of Paul A. Samuelson's textbook on economics, introducing the ideas of Keynes on smoothing out business cycles to a generation of college students since 1948. Selling more than 750,000 copies established a common outlook among professional people concerned with wealth, and P.J. would like to see a consensus on growth preserved. But at the beginning of Chapter 3, The Warning, is Robert Heilbroner, "If socialism failed, it was for political, more than economic, reasons; and if capitalism is to succeed it will be because it finds the political will and means to tame its economic forces." (p. 30). American troops wiping out a convoy of smugglers at the border of Iraq and Syria is not something that John Maynard Keynes was contemplating when he wrote the other quote, about capitalism trying to be "as efficient as possible without offending our notion of a satisfactory way of life." (p. 30). The old people who have grown used to being a growing part of the consumers of American society, and whose numbers are about to boom like the children of those who believed in the economic growth that became standard in 1948, while P.J. reports that modern economics, "in the wake of the catastrophic events of September 11, 2001--" (p. 186) is shifting to "a new and bewildering set of concepts that include slinky terms like . . . information cascades, adaptive behavior, market friction, diffusion rates, and other such exotica." (p. 187).

I don't actually think that growth is the ticket that is taking the global economic community anywhere that it wants to go, though it is easy to see why political speeches still try to push audiences in that direction. Effective economic organizations, a safety net, and even P.J.'s concern for the moral side of Adam Smith's legacy need to be preserved longer than the smokers. ... Read more

Book Description

This book is a description, explanation and expose of the poverty that currently afflicts large swathes of people in both developed and less-developed nations.It examines and illustrates the shocking extent, the kinds and the results of poverty from both societal and individual perspectives.The origins of poverty in attitudes and ideologies, and the societal norms and structures that currently keep billions of people poor, are examined.

Methods of determining statistical poverty lines, and their uses in hiding the extent of real poverty, are explained, as well as some little-known aspects of the poverty lines used in various countries. The subterfuges used by most governments in counting the poor are also examined.

Particular attention is paid to the most recent and widespread causes of poverty, namely, privatization and globalization, with their emphasis on the need for a market-driven economy, in which greed is posited as goal, guide and god. The market-driven society that they serve to strengthen is discussed in terms of its effect on medical services, education and social welfare, usually resulting in two-tiered systems, one for the rich and the other for the poor.The social results of privatization and globalization – including lack of accountability, wage depression, corruption, and the growth of inequality – are also outlined.

Efforts to reduce or eliminate poverty are illustrated, ranging from international activities to local programs, including efforts to achieve full employment, better and wider education, social welfare reform, microenterprises and a guaranteed minimum income, none of which seem to work to any significant degree, since inequality within nations and between nations is demonstratedly growing.

The possibility of widespread changes leading to a drastic reduction in worldwide poverty is examined, including charismatic leaders, unforeseen crises, rising popular discontent, a civil society, and world government.Using various accepted methods of prediction, the future of poverty is postulated. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (3)

A brilliant analysis of the Global World Order!
Samir Amin's analysis of the political economy of the world system is as precise as a set of mathematical theorems and, indeed, if any work in the field of IPE can lay claim to being a work of science, this is it. This is not an easy book to be casually read in the hope of securing instant gratification or wisdom; it is a serious work which the reader will have to read through quite a few times, and think through even more. At the end, though, the reader will be rewarded with a profound understanding of the reasons behind the societal collapse in large parts of the third, fourth and Soviet worlds; of why Europe remains, and could continue to remain, politically a pygmy; of why the "free market" will keep the majority of the world's peoples and nations "free to stagnate"; and why the folks living in "God's own country" can bid goodbye to the good old days of carefree plenty.

incomprehensible
a feast of inspirational ideas and theories hidden in an incomprehensible text.

Dominant mind in IPE
In this offering Samir solidifies his position in the field of IPE. Center/periphery polarization is concomitant with an antidemocratic constuction of a global political system that subverts the once auto-centerd nation state. By virtue of the five monopolies, the West has controlled both the political and economic development of the world and given rise to a market economy that, in collusion with the political sphere, has subverted political rights and powers to the advantage of capital and its minnions. Hope can only be found when democratic and auto-centered political influence reigns in it's bastard son- the market, and defines it's parameters. ... Read more

Book Description

This classic work is an exhaustive philosophical, historical, and religious look at the relationship between Catholic and Protestant religious doctrine and both the historical and ideological growth of capitalism. Starting with a definition of capitalism, Fanfani examines how that definition squares with Catholic and Protestant teaching. He then looks at the historical development of the capitalistic mindset or mentality, and examines the growth of the mindset historically in light of both the Protestant and Catholic doctrine on economic life. This text will be of interest to all students of economic thought, philosophy, and Catholic or Christian studies. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

The posthumous edition of Amintore Fanfani's seminal study
Catholicism, Protestantism, And Capitalism by the late Amintore Fanfani (1908-1999), is an impressively comprehensive and scholarly presentation between traditional Catholic doctrine and the spirit of economic capitalism. This posthumous edition of Amintore Fanfani's seminal and ground breaking study is enhanced for contemporary readers by an informed and informative foreword by Charles M.A. Clark (Professor of Economics, Tobin College of Business, and Senior Fellow, Vincentian Center for Church and Society at St. John's University, New York) and Giorgio Campanini (Professor of the History of Political Thought, University of Parma, Italy). Catholicism, Protestantism, And Capitalism is an uncomplicated read and especially commended to the attention the those of the Christian community with an interest in economics and theology.

Deeply Penetrating
For anyone who is interested in why our culture has produced the Enron's, WorldCom's and the like; or why increasingly our society is becoming one big hommage to corporate giants, have a look at this classic work of Catholic economic history.

The kind of economy existing up until the Protestant Reformation placed the economy at the service of persons, families and local communities. Today, it is the economy that is the lord of us all. We are "consumers" and "human resources." For anyone who hopes and dreams of a better way, this classic work of scholarship will give you the threads to understanding how we got to where we are and provide glimmers of what we must do to recover a person centered economy.

UTTERLY MUDDLED..
This book never comes to a solid conclusion about anything; it winds up with a paragraph hypothesizing about nations' economic systems and a possible relation to the size of people's heads. I joke not. It's that bad. No, no, no! ... Read more

Amazon.com

The Hungry Spirit, by esteemed British businessperson-philosopher Charles Handy, is an extraordinarily eloquent and original treatise on the discomfort that many feel as a result of the overriding quest for corporate profit and personal advancement. Offering a carefully considered and compelling alternative vision, the book challenges the status quo on everything from capitalism and organization to goal-setting and morality. With nods to Kant,Keynes, Sartre, and Drucker, The Hungry Spirit is not your usual business tome, but that, of course, also seems to be part of Handy's plan. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

An interesting look at what capitalism could/should be.
In this book, Charles Handy lays out a thoughtful philosophy of how we should shape capitalism if we want to lead more meaningful lives.

This is yet another reminder that communities have to form around some larger purpose than mere economic exchange.

His references to the British think tank Demos is particularly interesting.

Handy's Best Work .... A Gem of a Masterpiece
Charles Handy is one of the most literate and eloquent writers in the English language. A lifetime of business experience and a tremendous intellectual depth make his books a tremendous pleasure to read. I've always found his books about 10 years prescient of profound trends in society. The Hungry Spirit gave me an important insight into interesting books I have not read, spiritual insights I had not yet confronted and in the end, a glimpse of spiritual strength I have not yet achieved. A rare and beautiful book. Scholars for several decades will look back on publication of this book as an important event.

Inadequate Understanding of Contemporary Capitalism
The Hungry Spirit is often confusing. The author freely acknowledges that modern capitalism operates according to the unrelenting market demands of efficiency and competitiveness, which maximizes the self-interests of an upper layer of market players but is detrimental to the financial and psychological well-being of the less well-placed who have either remained under corporate umbrellas or who have been discarded as redundant. Yet, on the other hand, he suggests that 'anyone with any intelligence and a bit of get-up-and-go can make money.' And for those who don't succeed, it must be because they have failed to develop 'an eye for a customer, the market, and a useful skill.' This is the understanding of an individual who early in life received both an elite education and a lucrative job posting for which he was admittedly mostly unqualified who has now decided in later years to both mildly point out the flaws of capitalistic society and chide those who haven't single-handedly overcome those economic forces.

The author attempts to fuse an emphasis on personal sovereignty, or what he sometimes calls 'proper selfishness,' and the need for community especially within business enterprises. Recognizing that it is increasingly likely that he or she will be left to fend for themselves in the harsh environment of free markets, the individual should not seek employment, per se, but should develop 'employability.' Of course, backpedaling, the author recognizes that the educational system as well as other institutions does little to develop and sustain a society of entrepreneurs. The 'one-shot' chance at an education of forgettable facts is largely useless to those who desire/must operate service businesses. But this harsh reality is not all bad; the author insists that there is a widespread 'hunger' for personal growth that will be a part of developing employability. Work that has a greater purpose will increasingly be sought. Does walking the dogs or trimming the grass of elites qualify?

This line of thinking also has ramifications within corporations. These newly 'inner-directed' employees will reject being regarded as 'human resources' or managed as some kind of business cost. They will settle for nothing less than being viewed as citizens of their companies with 'rights of residence, justice, free speech, a share of the wealth ', and a say in the governance of their [companies].' The author correctly acknowledges that the democratic reorganization of companies seems like a 'trade union manifesto,' which does not comport well with his expressed anti-union convictions. Other than through the insistence of these newly redirected employees, the author is unclear as to how the major redistribution of power that will be required to establish 'companies of citizens' will occur. Of course, the compelling question is why the author is concerned about businesses as communities. Properly selfish, self-employed, citizens no longer need to work for corporations, right?

Despite the fact that the author generally regards laissez-faire economics as troublesome for the greater society, he seems unwilling to advocate for political processes to exert much control over its excesses. In fact, he suggests that major issues are best decided outside the political process beyond the level of the nation-state by pressures from global markets or by international economic (WTO) and military alliances. Citizens/voters should confine themselves to local issues of roads and schools and police and hospitals. This minimalist view of politics and government is hardly adequate to address the effects of the 'bottom line' thinking of modern capitalism for which the author expresses concern. The revamping of educational systems to include life-long learning with replacement income during schooling and the restructuring of corporations will require greater, not lesser, political intervention.

As a critique of capitalistic society, this book is marginal at best. The author's focus on the drive for money and the workings of market forces doesn't begin to explain the structure of capitalistic societies. Absent are virtually any descriptions of the power structures in society and, most importantly, the domination of contemporary culture and the control of information by media empires. It is clear that the author has little appreciation for the profound role of citizen empowerment whether that is through the political process or such bodies as unions that will be necessary to counter the forces of modern capitalism. The idea that half of society becoming entrepreneurs trying to sell services to each other or to a layer of elites without significantly countering present economic forces will represent a general advancement for society is dubious at best. If anything, it seems a certain path for a First-World country to become a Second- or Third-World country.

Wonderfully challenging
Handy is an incredible author. Reading this book was like sitting at the feet of one of the elders at the gate. He's incredible insightful and thought provoking. I highly recommend this book.

Thought Provoking!
Mr Handy has some very thought provoking ideas about capitalism, work and meaning of life. It was his 'Personal Preface' that attracted me to buy the book. As he said in the conclusion, "Life without hope is dismal."; I wanted to find out what he meant. In Part A of the book he talks about the impact of capitalism on the capitalist society . He explores the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the marketplace and competition. It is in Part B where the main substance of the book is. It is about the self and how individuals should respond. He profiles the changing world of work over the years and its impact on individuals. In reading the section on self-knowledge and self-awareness, I found the 'obituary exercise' took a new meaning in the context of what I had read; although I had done this exercise several times previously. Learning to live with others and discovering connectivity with society is an important aspect of living. This is very vividly brought out by Mr Handy. It is here I found hope that we could live more meaningful lifes. In Part C, there are some possible solutions to the dilemmas we face. It is in this part, Mr Handy elaborates on the 7 cardinal principles of trust. In the context of career management, the idea of of a school for life and work is a valuable concept. His chapter on the role of government mentions about the I's - information, involvement, individuality and infrastructure. He concludes in the epilogue with seven trends and indicators for the future. I would consider the book as required reading for anyone who wants to add value or meaning to their life, actively contribute to society or is interested in people. Unknown to us, I think all us have a 'Hungry Spirit' within us. Mr Handy's book may meet some of this hunger! ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Econ Class Review
JMJ IHM

Thorstein Veblen gives a very detailed, logical account of the business enterprise as he saw it in the 1900's. He places an emphasis on the individual buisness man, the powers he holds and what he can accomplish with those powers, as well as his effect on the economic and social community as a whole. He looks at the world community as it enters into the industrial age, dominated by what he calls the "machine process." He places intense importance on the subject of machines and how they relate to business enterprise. His Theory is very well-written and comprehensive, linking all aspects of his thought together in an organized, essay-like book.

A hop, skip, and a jump from hell.
I have an old hardcover copy of this book, copyright 1904, reprinted in 1936, when times had been hard and weren't getting much better. The Preface had proclaimed a unique point of view: "the aims, motives, and means that condition current business traffic. This choice of a point of view is itself given by the current economic situation, in that the situation plainly is primarily a business situation." (p. v). Later on, considering the nature of technological society, Veblen adopts a view of thinking that is very much like the thoughts of Karl Marx on people who try to survive by having a job in such a system. "His place is to take thought of the machine and its work in terms given him by the process that is going forward. His thinking in the premises is reduced to standard units of gauge and grade. If he fails of the precise measure, by more or less, the exigencies of the process check the aberration and drive home the absolute need of conformity." (p. 308). This is not particularly appealing to anyone who has had the misfortune to see the results of such thinking in military pacification procedures, strategic bombing campaigns, politics, philosophy, psychology, religion, and the practice of law as a professional occupation. People who cannot see a connection here never read anything like this book. ... Read more

Reviews (86)

Should Morals and Philosophy Guide Our Society and Economy?
Being a collection of essays written in the 1960s by Objectivist, novelist and non-academic philosopher Ayn Rand and certain of her like-minded associates (including Alan Greenspan, prior to his arrival at the Fed), this book reads in part as a reasoned exposition of the moral and philosophical foundations of an ideal capitalist society based on individual rights and freedom, and in part as an emotionally charged, pejorative criticism of modern society for being misguided, amoral and a-philosophical.

Ever wonder what's behind the truly remarkable economic success of the U.S. over the past two centuries? Ms. Rand explains that the U.S. began as the "first moral society in history," uniquely founded on a Constitution that explicitly places limitations on government while guaranteeing the rights of private individuals. According to her thinking, inherent in man's nature (metaphysics) is his faculty of reasoning (epistemology). Only through having the freedom (politics) to reason, judge, choose and act can man exercise his individual rights (ethics), including his economic rights to acquire property and trade it freely with others. The purpose of government (police, armed services and court system) in laissez faire capitalism is reduced to that of protector of individual rights.

As the authors' analysis goes, it is no surprise that the individual rights and freedom on which capitalism is based vaulted the U.S. economy ahead of all others in the world during the 19th and 20th centuries. However, as advocates of pure laissez faire capitalism instead of today's mixed economy (i.e., laissez faire capitalism mixed with government controls), the authors find themselves at odds with virtually everyone else--liberals, conservatives, altruists, collectivists, academic philosophers, pragmatists, logical positivists, the press, Berkeley activists, the Federal Reserve (note the irony of Greenspan as longstanding Fed Chairman), and the Pope. The authors even chide the business community for compromising capitalism by supporting antitrust legislation, the Sherman Act, in 1890.

The authors' ideal society is an as-yet-unrealized world with no antitrust laws, no government intervention in the capital markets, neither tariffs nor subsidies, no compulsory education for children, no minimum wage laws, no inheritance tax, privatization of communication airwaves, no building codes, no FDA, no SEC, etc. Could such a world with moral law placed above society ("No society is better than its philosophical foundation") reasonably lead, as the authors insist, to a higher standard of living, more prosperity and more fulfilling lives for all of us? If so, they've got quite a tantalizing proposition, at least in theory. . . .

Myth mashing of the highest order.
This book is a wonderful collection of 26 articles written by Ayn Rand (20 articles total), Nathaniel Branden (2), Alan Greenspan (3) and Robert Hessen (1). The 26 count includes the two articles in the appendix by Ayn Rand: "MAN'S RIGHTS" and "THE NATURE OF GOVERNMENT". I do have one criticism of this book but I will save it until the end here. All 26 articles relate in one way or another to the theme that 100% Laissez-faire Capitalism is the best Political-Economic system for mankind and that this fact is unknown to most people in the World --including most people in the United States. The first 13 articles deal with the THEORY AND HISTORY of Capitalism along with the opening article being true to form Ayn Rand: she defines her terms right away. Here she does it by positing and then answering the question: "WHAT IS CAPITALISM?". The next 12 articles deal with and destroy so many myths about capitalism that it is probably safe to say that anyone who reads this book will find at least 12 of their own myths about capitalism somewhere within the book. The next 11 articles (#14 through #24) deal with the CURRENT STATE of the United States in the mid 1960's and it is amazing how pertinent and informative these articles still are today. For example, for pertinence see article #20, "THE NEW FASCISM: RULE BY CONSENSUS", and for the informative see and discover the correct definition of 'freedom' on the first page of the article titled "CONSERVATISM: AN OBITUARY". There is simply too much good in this book to cover it all in one short review. It is a must read for anyone who is serious about politics and economics. Even if you disagree you will be compelled to think about your own position and attempt to solidify your thoughts about it after reading this book. The two ending (APPENDIX) articles speak for themselves and either alone is worth the price of the book. All the articles in the book were written and copyrighted in the 1960's and the book itself as collection of these articles was first published in 1967. Back then, and this is my only criticism, back then Capitalism WAS an Unknown Ideal, but today thanks to Ayn Rand and others, including the contributors to this book, Capitalism is now the KNOWN ideal, consequently the books title is not quite as accurate as it was when first published.

A Utopian Ideal?
I first read "Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal" as a high-school sophomore in 1969, a couple years after its initial publication.

Back in the '60s, it was controversial simply to argue that capitalism was more economically efficient than socialism; to claim, as Rand did, that capitalism was morally superior to socialism was revolutionary.

Times have changed. Nowadays it would require an invincible ignorance to believe that socialism can compete economically with capitalism. And to believe that socialism is morally superior to capitalism, now that everyone knows the truth about actually existing socialism in the former Soviet Union, would be morally depraved.

Intellectually, the battle is over. Capitalism has won; socialism has lost. Capitalism is no longer an "unknown" ideal.

Our new historical situation makes it possible to look more clearly at Ayn Rand's political writings.

Rand was unquestionably right about the moral and economic superiority of capitalism.

But was she also right about the political, cultural, and historical conditions required to create and preserve a free, capitalistic social order?

Rand consistently argued that the motive force of history was ideas. Ultimately, it was intellectuals who control the course of human events.

For example, in the second essay in this book, "The Roots of War," Rand declares:

"Just as the destruction of capitalism and the rise of the totalitarian state were not caused by business or labor or any economic interest, but by the dominant statist ideology of the intellectuals -- so the resurgence of the doctrines of military conquest and armed crusades for political 'ideals' were the product of the same intellectuals' belief that 'the good' is to be achieved by force."

In the same essay, she explains that it was not economic interest but rather collectivist intellectuals who pushed America into involvement in both World Wars. (True to her principles, Rand opposed the military draft and the American involvement in Vietnam.)

However, Rand and her followers, by focusing on the contribution collectivists have made to militarism have tended to neglect the other side of the coin, the contribution militarism, war, and imperialism have made to advancing the power of government.

As Randolph Bourne said, "War is the health of the state." War provides an unparalleled opportunity for government to increase taxes, expand its control over the economy, suppress civil liberties, and pump up popular faith in the state.

While intellectuals facilitated the destruction of Constitutional government in America during the twentieth century, the primary proximate cause of the growth of Big Government was the two World Wars and the Cold War.

Rand failed to convey this lesson to her followers, most of whom have supported the current American imperial adventure in the Mideast.

What then of Rand's basic analysis of the nature and purpose of government, laid out in two appendices, "Man's Rights" and "The Nature of Government"?

Rand defines "government" as "an institution that holds the exclusive power to _enforce_ certain rules of social conduct in a given geographical area." Note that government is defined abstractly as "an institution," even though any actual government must consist of particular, concrete human beings.

A couple pages later, Rand declares, "A government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control."

Really?

Given the historical record of war, militarism, imperialism, rape, pillaging, slavery, taxation, and mass murder in which governments have routinely engaged, is there any "institution" that is _less_ credible as a means of placing "objective control" over "physical force" than government?

It would make as much sense to define the Mafia or street gangs as "the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control"!

Even the officials of a minimal government, endowed only with a monopoly over legislative, judicial, and peacekeeping functions, as Rand advocated, have already, by virtue of that very monopoly, been given powers not possessed by their fellow citizens.

Rand argues for a written constitution "as a means of limiting and restricting the power of government." But of course, it is government officials who will interpret the provisions of the constitution, and they will have both the power and every incentive to use their power so as to evade any restrictions embodied in the constitution.

This is not idle speculation. Precisely this experiment was carried out in 1787 in Philadelphia. Two hundred years later, we know the result -- a massively rapacious, militaristic, and imperialistic government which imperils the civil liberties of the American people, buries us in taxes, and claims the right to invade and dominate any other country anywhere in the world.

If Madison, Franklin, Washington et al. could not make Rand's program work, it is fair to dismiss her program of limited constitutional government as a Utopian fantasy.

A better definition than Rand's would be "a government is a bunch of guys that have managed to get themselves in a position where they can get away with things (bombing, taxation, etc.) that most people could never get away with." That accurately describes pretty much all governments in the real world (and subsumes Rand's definition of government as a privileged monopoly over legislative, judicial, and peacekeeping functions as a special case -- since most ordinary people could not get away with seizing such a monopoly).

Of course, any society does need some minimal consensus on how to deal with and generally avoid violent conflict. All human societies do in fact have various means for maintaining the peace, most of which have nothing to do with government. Ask yourself: how many times have you peacefully settled a serious disagreement with a friend, relative, or neighbor without involving the government at all?

It is not in the nature of government to be successfully limited. Government has never existed to serve the governed. If we want a free, prosperous, and peaceful society, government must go.

For more realistic, less Utopian views on government, I recommend Murray Rothbard's "The Ethics of Liberty," H. Hoppe's "Democracy: The God That Failed," and A. John Simmons' "On the Edge of Anarchy."

Outstanding
Having been a fan of Ayn Rand since reading Atlas Shrugged, I eagerly dove into this volume. In a word---OUTSTANDING. If you need a reason to validate the importance of capitalism, it's play in creating FREEDOM and what the real root of all evil (it's not capitalism), then read Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. It may not only change your thinking, but also change your life.

From an Ayn Rand Burnout
A friend of mine gave me a copy of Rand's "The Anti-Industrial Revolution." I devoured it in a day, and from then on I was hooked. This was GREAT STUFF! It made sense like nothing I'd ever read before. Next came Atlas Shrugged, then the Fountainhead. Then I moved on to Anthem and The Virtue of Selfishness. At this point, I started to annoy friends and realtives, who always lost arguments with me when I retorted with an objectivist bromide. For example, someone would complain about how technology was ruining the world, and I'd then explain how it was actually saving the world. One friend said to me that I starting talking like a sound byte instead of a human being.

When I finally worked my way to Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal, I began to realize something. The world is not a world of Howard Roarks (Human Super Beings) and Elsworth Tooheys (No Good Looters). Though Objectivism is brilliant, (as was its author) I doubt that people can live this way %100 of the time. You really can't undestand what I mean unless you read a large chunk of Rand's philosophy.

Capitalism is a great book because its more "grounded," if that makes any sense. But if you've read all of the "big ones" (Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead), then this book will seem all too familiar. It's really not her best, or even close, IMHO. But for die hard fans, well . . . . ... Read more

Book Description

This is a new edition of Susan George's acclaimed satire on capitalism. Fictional experts recruited by world leaders to discuss the future of global capitalism provide their assessment of the dire state of the current economy and put forward new ideas for ensuring the survival of the system. But at what cost? Susan George provides a brilliant and chilling vision of the way the winners in the globalisation game profit from poverty and reveals, with relentless logic, the dark future that lies ahead under capitalism.

This new edition features a new introduction from the author. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Shockingly Real
This document, more that a "report" is a cold blood, cynical guide to enslave, decimate and exterminate the surplus or the human population using methods as birth control, contagious diseases, political, religious and ethnic conflicts and wars, famines, low salaries, etc. This "report" that may be see for many people as a science fiction novel or a Malthus write is a nowaday reality. If we pay attention to everyday news, we could see that most of the formulas mentioned in this "report" have being applied around the world in a systematic way as isolated cases successfully with none or few opposition by the victims. I strongly recommend this book to those people that in some way or another can do something to stop this systematic plan already running.

A frightening look at the logic of capitalism.
Susan George uses her impressize knowledge of global capitalism to and its effects on the many to look at the picture from the side of the few. The report presents a frightening look at what would be required to preserve the current capitalist order in the face of the increasing impoveritization of an increasingly populous and ecologically strained world.

The report was originally written as a hoax (she was not going to claim authorship), however, for reasons she declines to elaborate on she chose not go through with it. I actually wish she had released it as real, to see the reaction of the elite pundits and media who will now feel secure in ignoring the book.

Even so, it is a worthwile read, primarily as it helps us see what kind of reforms of the global economy would simply tame the excesses of capitalism and thereby make the system only stronger, and what reforms would truely challenge the powers that be. ... Read more

Book Description

There is a widespread perception that the structural reforms implemented in Latin America in the 1990s have failed to spur employment growth. This perception is fueled by rising unemployment, slow wage growth, rising wage inequalities and a heightened sense of economic insecurity. This year’s edition of Economic and Social Progress in Latin America investigates whether this disappointing outcome can be explained by an abnormal adjustment to rapid changes in goods and capital markets, increased female participation in the workplace, technological change, and secular changes in the sector composition of output. In particular, the book examines whether there are important demands for change that are being thwarted by inappropriate institutions and rigidities.

The report documents unemployment and underemployment, employment creation and destruction, productivity growth, and the wage level and inequality. It includes a CD-ROM with data on labor markets in the region. ... Read more

Book Description

A remarkable history of the idea of capitalism in Western thought–—from its origins in classical Greece and Rome and in medieval Christianity, through its flowering from 1700 to the present day—that examines the most significant thinkers who have influenced our views on how the market can (and should or should not) affect the way society is organized.

Capitalism is too complex a subject to be left to economists, and achieving a critical comprehension of it requires perspectives beyond those characteristic of modern economics. European thinkershave debated the cultural, moral, and political effects of capitalism for centuries, and their claims have been many and diverse. Historian Jerry Muller tracks this fascinating thread, setting out what the best and brightest—from Hobbes to Hayek, and across the ideological spectrum, including Voltaire, Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, Hegel, Marx, and Matthew Arnold, as well as twentieth-century communist, fascist, and neoliberal intellectuals—have thought about the ramifications of capitalism and its future implications. In doing so, he also shows how antisemitic stereotypes about Jews and their relationship to money have played an ongoing role in the interpretation of capitalism.

The result is a compelling history of ideas and a riveting exploration of questions—about wealth and poverty, capitalism and culture, the individual and the state, and the role of intellectuals within market societies—that still compel our attention. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Superb
This is simply a superb history of European thinking about markets. Muller does a magnificent job of weaving together different thinkers, presenting their ideas clearly and powerfully. This is accessible but sophisticated stuff, a series of brilliant short intellectual portraits that provides a deep sense of the controversies that capitalism has provoked over the centuries. Just great.

A sweeping overview of modern economic thought
Jerry Muller's objective is to trace the origin and evolution of a central tenet of economics: the market. But rather than start with Adam Smith (he comes second), Muller reaches back to Voltaire and the Enlightenment: he sees Voltaire's criticism of religion as a crucial step toward acceptance of capitalism. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the evolution of ideas and the role of individual thinkers, ranging from the famous (Karl Marx) to the less famous (Justus Möser??).

Quite simply amazing
This is not a book I would have read six months ago since I am typically not very interested in economics or political theory. But a required class in modern political economy helped change my outlook and introduced me to what thinkers such as Adam Smith actually said, which is quite different from what libertarians claim today. Muller's book fed my new found interest and then some.

Muller examines how some of western civilization's greatest minds have thought about capitalism and the market. He includes thinkers that are both traditionally viewed as economists (Smith, Hayek, Schumpeter) and others not usually identified with economics (Burke, Voltaire, and Arnold). Each chapter provides an excellant summary of these thinkers and can be read alone or out of order if one wishes. One has to admire Muller for his objectivity, he studies the individuals according to their own terms and doesn't seek to judge them. Every theorist has identifiable faults and Muller points these out without bias. My personal favorite chapters were those on Smith, Hayek and Matthew Arnold.

My only (minor) criticism is that I thought Muller could have dealt with Keynes in more detail. I feel he short-changed the man who in many ways defined much of the mid-20th century. I also thought a chapter on Amartya Sen might have been interesting, but it makes since to pick those theorists who are dead since their work can't develop any futher.

The course you always wanted to take
THE MIND AND THE MARKET is a compulsively readable history of economic thought which deserves to be a best-seller. I am not an economist or a political philosopher but rather a writer about the arts and culture, and I am devouring this book. The chapters on Hegel, Marx, and Matthew Arnold are each alone worth the price of admission. Muller carries his erudition lightly, and his prose has the calm, effortless, sparkling lucidity of a great teacher lecturing in his prime.

A Great Economic, Political, Social, and Cultural Tapestry
Capitalism is the world's most powerful idea about political, economic and moral relationships between people, enterprises and the state. It has brought immense opulence to hundreds of millions of people and hope for economic liberation to hundreds of millions more. But capitalism is not just a way of doing business. No culture nor any state can harness capitalism with a management school curriculum. Capitalism is a complex tapestry of economic arrangements, governmental obligations, cultural traditions, personal behavioral norms, concepts for production enterprises, methods of management, public acceptance of investment, encourage of competition, religious and ethnic tolerance and ideas of personal property. It is a historical fact that secular states with individual economic liberty and free markets harvest the most from capitalism. Capitalism is not just economics.

Capitalism, as a global culture that defines our modern civilization, is therefore too important to be left to the economists. Jerry Z. Muller, a historian, has given us a book which in its sweep and breadth is up to the task of giving us a deeply thoughtful and insightful analysis of the evolution of capitalism's political, economic, social, ethical and psychological threads from early European thinking through the big intellectual ideas of the late Twentieth Century. He tells the story of the idea of the market, as it is formed and transformed by the great socio-politico-economic intellectuals - Voltaire, Adam Smith, Burke, Hegel, Marx, Simmell, Schumpeter, Keynes, Marcuse, Hayek, and others. As a historian, Muller interprets each man in the context of his time and culture. Muller's analysis is even handed, one of the great virtues of the book. There are thousands of political economy books, each with its own agenda if not unground axe. For me, The Mind and the Market is a level-headed guide through that thicket of thought. Muller coolly lays out the case for each ideology and clinically assesses its successes and failures, giving the devil his due, even if that devil is Marx, who while foisting the evil idea of collectivism upon the world did have empathy and voice for the terrible treatment of workers under early capitalism. Muller's trip through the minds of the great thinkers gives us the insights we need to understand how today?s manic anti-competition forces diminish our personal wealth and how governments with moral agendas weaken capitalism.

Even while Muller brings us tidal historical and economic insights, he also salts this book with one liners and anecdotes that illustrate the anatomy of capitalism. Here are a couple I liked.

- "Cultures that favor equality in poverty over greater but unequally distributed affluence tend to be less market oriented." Muller

- From Schumpeter: "The capitalist achievement does not typically consist in providing more silk stockings for the queen but in bringing them within reach of factory girls in return for steadily decreasing amounts of effort."

- Burke voicing the dilemma of capitalism: "It is hard to persuade us that everything that is got by another is not taken from ourselves."

- Fascists and socialists exploit resentment of those who succeed under market systems. Muller relates how Hungarian communists took control in 1919. The Hungarian Soviet nationalized private enterprises, made wages uniform and guaranteed employment. Labor discipline and productivity declined steeply. The communist experiment failed after 133 days. I gather from subsequent world events that no one was paying attention.

The Mind and the Market should be read by every world citizen to understand how we got the flow of wealth we enjoy and the roles of the state, individual liberty and market competition necessary to sustain our affluence. Capitalism is fragile. It does not come automatically with democracy. US capitalism is buffeted daily by well funded or popular pleas for the state to intervene in the market. They come under banners of anti-globalism, criticisms of the World Trade Organization, preserving the American family farm, special tax breaks to lower costs of domestic producers, Buy American Act, requirements for domestic content, special tariffs, quotas or restrictions on foreign-made products, protection against exporting jobs, closed shops, sustaining the American manufacturing base, regressive income taxes, and dispensations to monopolize trade, among other anti-liberal policies. Jerry Muller's marvelously well-written and colorful story of the road to capitalism helps us understand the essential roles played by open, competitive markets, personal liberties and a secular state in preserving and expanding our wealth.

I commend The Mind and the Market to you without reservation. ... Read more

Book Description

What does imperialism mean in the absence of colonial conquest and imperial rule?

"What we are seeing today, as the Bush administration pursues its reckless policies, may be a special kind of madness; but, if so, it is a madness firmly rooted not only in the past half-century of US history but in the systemic logic of imperialism."—from the Preface

In this era of globalization, we hear a great deal about a new imperialism and its chief enforcer, the United States. Today, with the US promising an endless war against terrorism and promoting a policy of preemptive defense, this notion seems more plausible than ever.

But what does imperialism mean in the absence of colonial conquest and direct imperial rule? In this lucid and lively book Ellen Meiksins Wood explores the new imperialism against the contrasting background of older forms, from ancient Rome, through medieval Europe, the Arab Muslim world, the Spanish conquests, and the Dutch commercial empire. Tracing the birth of a capitalist imperialism back to the English domination of Ireland, Wood follows its development through the British Empire in America and India.

The book brings into sharp relief the nature of today’s new capitalist empire, in which the political reach of imperial power cannot match its economic hegemony, and the global economy is administered not by a global state but by a system of multiple local states, policed by the most disproportionately powerful military force the world has ever known and enforced according to a new military doctrine of war without end, in purpose or time. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Empire of Capital
Marketed as a critique of American imperialism, this book offers fragments. Part comparative history of empires, part treatise on political economy, part analysis of globalization, and part polemic against the Bush administration's war on terrorism, the parts do not add up to a coherent whole. Using odd categories, Wood (York Univ., Canada) compares "empires of property" and "empires of commerce" with the British colonial empire, originating in Ireland. She asserts throughout the book that the coercive power of state always undergirds economic relations, a familiar theme to students of hegemony. Toward the end, she turns abruptly to the issue of globalization, arguing that antiglobalists are not radical enough: they oppose "capital's global reach rather than ... the capitalist system itself." The final chapter asserts that the Bush doctrine attempts to protect global capitalist interests. The war against Afghanistan "was undertaken with an eye to the huge oil and gas reserves of Central Asia." The war against Iraq, impending at the time of publication, was to control oil. Like many in the Marxist tradition, Wood reduces political or security concerns to economic ones. The analysis is unconvincing and adds little to previous knowledge.

Timely Response
To quote from p. 5 of the book:
" The argument here is not that of capital in conditions of 'globalization' has escaped the control of the state and made the territorial state increasingly irrelevant. On the contrary, my argument is that the state is more essential than ever to capital, even, or especially, in its global form. The political form of globalization is not a global state but a system of multiple states, and the new imperialism takes its specific shape from the complex and contradictory relationship between capital's expansive economic power and the more limited reach of the extra-economic force that sustains it."

In a nutshell, this is the book's thesis, and it addresses the timely question of what form globalization will ultimately take. Against the de-centered, monolithically global state of the sort detailed in Hardt & Negri's fashionable work *Empire*, Wood argues that the only possible outcome is a multi-state system, presumably like the one already in place. For that reason alone her book is worth the read, given the wide popularity of H&N's thesis. Of the two perspectives, Wood's is certainly on firmer empirical ground. As currently experienced, globalization is very much a product of a multi-state system, led by American capital and the state's capacity to maintain financial and military hegemony. (In fact, much of current middle-east policy can be understood from that strategic standpoint.) On the other hand, H & N's fluid leviathan appears more visionary than contemporary, more theoretical than factual, and more the result of shrewd extrapolation and darkly compelling fantasy than of historical necessity.

Nonetheless, Wood at times goes too far in her insistance on a multi-state alternative. "Yet global capitalism without a system of multiple territorial statesis all but inconceivable." (p.24). Now whatever the shortcomings of Hardt & Negri's book, it appears that despite Wood's assertion, this is precisely what H & N succeed in conceptualizing. Their deterritorialized empire is predicated precisely on the rise of a complex, etherialized framework of international capitalist controls, supra-national in scope and monolithic in nature. In short, the emergence of a single, invisible empire of capital, beyond the confines of nation-state, and operating on post-modern cultural and political trends. It's possible to argue the likelihood of this scenario or, given the contradictions of capital, how long it could last, but as an alternative to a multi-state system, it is scarcely inconceivable.

Overall, Wood's slender volume remains deceptively accessible, with none of the heavy weather of Hardt & Negri, and, despite the thematic association, is quite useful apart from the latter. Her brief history of imperialism is informative, with a revealing emphasis on Locke, and I especially like her observations on the role of corporations in the modern world of capital; anti-corporate activists should take heed. And though I think she fails in showing the necessity of multi-state globalization, she does succeed in putting the focus of empire back where it belongs -- on the global role of state-sponsored capital, particularly that of American capital. For that alone, she's owed a debt of thanks.

Amazing book
This is a wonderful book that deserves to be read widely. It works its way through the history of empires and seeks to establish what is distinctive about the present 'Empire of Capital'. For Wood, the current form of imperialism is not simply a new US imperialism, but she manages in a glorious way to show the contradictions that result from the universalization of capitalism (which creates a new type of world market imperialism) on the one hand, and the pursuit of global domination by the US on the other. This book, grounded in real historical understanding, offers so much more if you want to understand the nature of the present than the currently popular discussions of empire and imperialism by ideologues like Max Boot, Niall Ferguson and Robert Kagan.

Useful, interesting Marxist history of imperialism
Wood is one of a rare breed--a jargon-free Marxist academic. In this short, thoughtful book, she discusses the political and economic basis of "empire" through history. The point is, of course, to better understand the nature of 21st century American imperialism. She achieves that goal. One word of caution--an understanding of Marxism, if not an acceptance of it, is probably a necessary starting point. ... Read more

Book Description

This updated and expanded edition of The Battle of Seattle invites readers to join the intensive debates within the antiglobalization movement. The uprising against the World Trade Organization in 1999 was the most visible and dramatic protest in the United States since the Vietnam War. Subsequent protests in Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Prague, Cancun, and other cities have shown that there is a growing movement opposing globalization. The book roots these events globally in an anticapitalist history that includes the resistance to the IMF, the mass organizing campaigns of the nuclear-freeze movement in the 1980s, and the innovative tactics of environmentalists in the United States. Confronting Capitalism tackles the questions raised by the antiglobalization movement: How can a movement that claims to be global root itself in local communities? What happens to nonviolent tactics in an environment of increasingly ruthless policing? Can NGOs be agents of social transformation? Photographs, illustrations, and contributions from Naomi Klein, Stanley Aronowitz, Noam Chomsky, Barbara Ehrenreich, and others are featured. ... Read more