Rating: 
Summary: "Dead Hand" is Dead On
Review: I highly recommend this book. Lindsey achieves what many of his contemporaries have tried, and failed, to do: to write an insightful, unbiased account of the past, present and future of the global economy that is not only dead-on, but also actually ENTERTAINING. Lindsey expertly weaves the history and philosophy underlying the struggle between collectivism and capitalism with interesting first-person analogies and easily identifiable current events. The result is a must-read book that clearly explains the present state of the global economy and globalization's role therein.Lindsey's analysis shows us that globalization and the recent free-market movement is not the culture-destroying, poverty-exploiting Frankenstein monster as portrayed by the anti-trade globalphobes. However, it also isn't, as many pro-market idealists optimistically assert, a new and inevitable force that will effortlessly carry us all to the "Promised Land" of wealth and prosperity. The reality is much less rosy and clear, for as Lindsey deftly demonstrates, the current state of the world's economy is a crazy mixture of new, pro-market reforms and remnants of collectivist policies clinging desperately to a failed past. And when these policies clash, as the economic collapses in Mexico, Asia, and most recently Argentina indicate, the results are anything but nice and neat. The "solution" for these nations and others is neither the abolition of free-market policies nor the maintenance of the status quo, but rather the slow, careful, and sometimes painful move away from the proven failures of anti-market ideals to the proven results of the free market and rule of law. The world hasn't arrived in the Promised Land, and, really, a lot of it is not even close. But at least now we have a good map.
Rating:
Summary: Economics & history that is plainspoken and factual
Review: I'm not surprised that preceding customer reviews are love-or-hate. Lindsey is a free-market advocate, trying to zap anything that remotely resembles marxist, top-down central planning. He clearly advocates a strong and responsible role for government, for important duties such as: protecting individual rights (including orderly transfers of property), centralized functions that cannot compete with market driven processes (e.g. defense), and providing economically sustainable safety nets for those who need help and care and have no resources. It might be hard to see if Lindsey's heart is a youthful 16 or 20--he definitely doesn't come across as a socialist. But his principles have anecdotal, qualitative and quantitative truths from more than a century of history, so his brain is certainly working just fine. For example, Lindsey presents a compelling case on protectionism leading to trade wars and world war. His equating pay-as-you-go entitlement systems (legislated by leaders such as Bismarck, chiefly concerned with opiating the masses) with Ponzi or pyramid schemes (deemed illegal by the same governments) is unassailable. If you care about shaping the socioeconomic world that our children and grandchildren will be inheriting, and if you are concerned about what fiction will be taught to them in most universities (e.g. liberally spun Keynesian economics, without contrasting neoclassical or monetarist economics, or even historical resultants of collectivist policies), this is a great book. If you want to revisit the Dark Ages, then disparage this book and its commendable author.
Rating:
Summary: Economics & history that is plainspoken and factual
Review: I'm not surprised that preceding customer reviews are love-or-hate. Lindsey is a free-market advocate, trying to zap anything that remotely resembles marxist, top-down central planning. He clearly advocates a strong and responsible role for government, for important duties such as: protecting individual rights (including orderly transfers of property), centralized functions that cannot compete with market driven processes (e.g. defense), and providing economically sustainable safety nets for those who need help and care and have no resources. It might be hard to see if Lindsey's heart is a youthful 16 or 20--he definitely doesn't come across as a socialist. But his principles have anecdotal, qualitative and quantitative truths from more than a century of history, so his brain is certainly working just fine. For example, Lindsey presents a compelling case on protectionism leading to trade wars and world war. His equating pay-as-you-go entitlement systems (legislated by leaders such as Bismarck, chiefly concerned with opiating the masses) with Ponzi or pyramid schemes (deemed illegal by the same governments) is unassailable. If you care about shaping the socioeconomic world that our children and grandchildren will be inheriting, and if you are concerned about what fiction will be taught to them in most universities (e.g. liberally spun Keynesian economics, without contrasting neoclassical or monetarist economics, or even historical resultants of collectivist policies), this is a great book. If you want to revisit the Dark Ages, then disparage this book and its commendable author.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent book
Review: If people are going to work--and they must, even in the most traditional society--they ought to work in the most efficient manner, and that means free trade and a worldwide division of labour. Lindsey gives an anecdote about mechanics in India that, due to auto tariffs, are forced to make little $1000 autos by hand. They have been reduced by India's trade policy to a pre-mass production manufacturing operation. What Lindsey argues for is essentially the spread of the most efficient, rational division of labour across the world. Anything else--any obstacles to this division of labour, whether political, cultural, religious, etc.--is what Lindsey calls a "cruel hoax," cruel because it is just a front for the particular interests of one particular group dressed up in traditional finery. The Industrial Counterrevolution is for Lindsey synonymous with a longing for "gemeinschaft," for the certainties of pre-industrial life, before all that was solid melted into air. The only criticism I will make is that what Lindsey calls the "Industrial Counterrevolution" owes more to capitalism than Lindsey is willing to allow, or that it shares the same ideals as capitalism, just in a more advanced form. Marx, for instance, does not bear any nostalgia for gemeinschaft, nor does he intend to recreate gemeinschaft once capitalism is destroyed. Marx instead stands for a fulfillment of the promise of freedom inherent in liberalism, for the "leap to freedom." Marx was just as much "against the the dead hand" as Lindsey, except that Marx identified the "dead hand" with the what he called the "nightmare of the past" which rests on the brains of the present, including the legacy of private property. Communism is an attempt to improve on capitalism, to eliminate the inefficiencies in capitalism, such as advertising, duplication, the lack of central planning, excess capacity, monopoly, etc. The Soviets, for instance, believed that if they just had a big enough computer . . .
Rating:
Summary: To (the) market!
Review: If recent news stories--especially those dispatched from enlightened European capitals--are any indication, the term "globalization" is not only misunderstood in modern parlance, it's infinitely adaptable. In addition to its economic significance, it also apparently applies to (take your pick): Middle Eastern hegemony, genetically modified foods, labor disputes, environmental disasters, third world debt, and just about anything else worth protesting with large numbers of people and colorful banners (and maybe a little mayhem). With "Against the Dead Hand," Brink Lindsey not only brings the term back to earth, but succeeds where countless others have failed with economically-tinged books: making his subject exciting and frighteningly relevant. Defining globalization (for the record, "the general ... reduction of barriers to international trade and investment") allows the author to sound alarms for both the detractors and proponents of this phenomenon--who apparently agree on nothing except what Lindsey disproves: that the white-hot engine of globalization cannot even by slowed down, much less stopped. Given his pessimism, Lindsey might be mistaken for encouraging globalization's detractors. Au contraire: many of his book's arguments expose anti-market forces as reactionary conservatives longing for a safe, controlled--even authoritarian--past. The book's high points range from general arguments--including refreshing angles on why globalizations detractors betray so much *fear*--to very specific examples of how the dead hand of central planning and "market management" continues to strangle national economies from Japan to Russia to Argentina. Lindsey's historical survey shows how economic centralization got its start: the unprecedented turmoil of the Industrial Revolution breeding a longing for economic and social authority ("someone has to be in charge!") that had literally vaporized overnight. This "counter-revolution" set in quickly--starting from Germany in the late nineteenth century--and spread to literally every corner of the world. Tracking this plague of centralization forms the centerpiece of the book, and makes for harrowing reading--especially when Lindsey uncovers the up-to-the-minute modern culprits: Japanese bankers, corrupt Latin American bureaucrats, cosseted Europeans and Americans, and even the macroeconomic monarchs at the WTO and World Bank. The faults I found in "Dead Hand" seem niggling compared to its strengths. Some of Lindsey's arguments could use a more rigorous philosophical basis; for example, why free trade represents a moral and ethical good, not just good economic sense. He backslides a bit on the welfare state ("It is perfectly consistent with liberal precepts for government to supplement the charitable efforts of civil society with a more comprehensive and systematic social safety net"), certainly weakening his arguments against ever-meddling government. And his overall tone often harangues and feels defensive--more concerned about what's wrong than what's right--though, to be fair, since his thesis represents a warning that's often the point. "Against the Dead Hand" is nevertheless a brilliant effort. Brink Lindsey has defined his terms, defended an unpopular (or at least suspiciously regarded) ideal, and exposed his opponents as arch-conservative nostalgiacs. He has further issued a dire warning for friends of free trade and open markets: despite popular misconceptions, the true task of globalization has barely begun. The enemy is entrenched, wily and often ruthless. But the author--and obviously this reader--find optimism in the loud, chaotic, ever-innovating market that has created more wealth than all the central planners of history put together--and needs its champions now more than ever.
Rating:
Summary: simply excellent!
Review: in this book brink lindsay shows why globalisation is the outcome of the breakdown of the statist political economy of the last 100 years. especially interesting is his account of the socalled katheder-sozialisten of the german empire who in many ways are the architects of todays welfare and interventionist state. as the author makes us see world war I, the depression and world war II were all results of the destructive sozialpolitik of the germans starting in the 1880s which culminated with the social and economic policies of the national socialists. in this he ecchoes friedrich hayeks 'the road to serfdom'. furthermore the german historical schools 'progressive' policies were utterly conservative and a rebirth of the mercantilism that adam smith and the classical economists had so hard tried to debunk once and for all. thinkers such as adolf wagner and gustav schmoller who called themeselves monarchical socialists and the intellectual bodyguard of the hohenzollerns were utterly nationalists and militarists. also interesting that the central marxist historian werner sombart started as an orthodox marxist, took over the seat of the kathedersocialists (at the university of berlin) after the ultra-conservative gustav schmoller and ended up as a true beleiver of national socialism. 'against the dead hand' is indispensable intellectual history and the best introduction to understanding globalisation as a benign process and a result of what hayek refers to as 'spontaneous order'. further reading should be friedrich hayeks 'the road to serfdom' and ludwig von mises 'omnipotent government - the rise of the total state and total war'.
Rating:
Summary: superb historical perspective
Review: just the kind of book i like--one that gives me an enormous wealth of historical information while explaining, in very readable terms, the economic forces that were and are in conflict with one another. my only criticism is that the book does not take social and psychological factors into enough account in describing the reasons for the various economic decisions. perhaps this excellent book should not take on such a role, but the reader ought to be cognizant of the other, non-economic reasons that play a major role in moving world leaders towards their economic policies. nevertheless, i strongly and highly recommend this superb book.
Rating: 
Summary: Wide-ranging but one-eyed.
Review: Lindsey is a neo-conservative and this book represents a wide-ranging but finally unsatisfactory addition to the non-debate about globalisation. It divides the world into two groups - the free marketers, who are good, and the collectivists, who are anti-modern and the cause of most if not all the failings of the current highly imperfect free markets. Anyone who can lump George Soros' concept of the Open Society with collectivism, really has a bad dose of the current tendency to declare 'if you are not with us, you are against us'. Read the book for a sometimes fascinating excursion into history, politics, the informal economy, the failings of collectivism and state control (but not the failings of the market), but do not expect to have much light cast on the underlying issues of wealth and poverty, sustainability and the proper place of money in judging the progress of society. Equally, do not expect to see useful engagement with the issue of the role of great international economic agencies (WTO, IMF, World Bank) and the processes by which nations, corporates and the common people influence their decisions.
Rating:
Summary: Most Comprehensive, Passionate Case For Free Trade Available
Review: Of all the books on the politics of international trade, this one stands out because it offers a big picture view of how the collapse of communism changed everything. Unlike other international economists and trade scholars, Brink Lindsey begins from the premise that, because critics of open trade lost the war of ideas, it is only a matter of time before liberal civil society flourishes. His book details problems caused by lingering flawed ideas that still exist - particularly the defense of non-tariff barriers to trade - and how those problems can be overcome. Lindsey's point is that, because the global movement toward market liberalism is occurring amid the remnants of the failed economic apparatus that opposed it, its journey continues to be marked by skirmishes with proponents of the discredited system. The leaders of that system - which Lindsey calls the "Dead Hand" - are the root of much of the global poverty witnessed today because of their long-standing efforts to block the spread of reliable security for property rights and the rule of law. They prevent people in poor nations from making long-term investments and obtaining the windfall gains of congregating in economic spheres in which they hold a comparative advantage. The Dead Hand's fatal mistake was its failure to understand the concept of economic uncertainty. Its belief that a small set of central planners could bring together all of the information necessary to make sound decisions to govern people's lives stifled the creative process throughout much of the less-developed world. People victimized by the notion that their leaders should run their society are now rejecting that system. As Lindsey states, "Hostility to markets remains, and remains formidable, but only as a force of reaction." He bases his argument on the fact that open trade produces sustained, long run economic growth. The success of Richard Cobden and John Bright's Anti-Corn Law League in securing free trade in staple food products in nineteenth century Great Britain was the world's first step toward building an international economic framework that enables poor people to obtain the products they need. Cobden and Bright's vision took hold over the last few decades as trade barriers for goods, services, and capital began to fall around the globe. Over time, a larger and larger share of domestic economic activity was exposed to foreign competition, creating net benefits for consumers in every nation involved. The evolution of legal institutions in many nations facilitated the development of markets in which the costs of finding trading partners, setting the terms of trade, and enforcing agreements were reduced. This increased productivity in most sectors of these nations and raised living standards. Lindsey believes that, historically, leaders who rejected the benefits free trade offers tended to resort to warfare to obtain wealth. Politicians who actively stifle the development of new products and innovations cannot stay in power without somehow placating the desires of their constituents. Lindsey endorses Noble Laureate Friedrich Hayek's view that dictatorship is the natural result of efforts to adopt socialism on a large scale. Because drastic measures are necessary to spur people to engage in productive activities when incentives for doing so are removed, only the most ruthless dictators can perpetuate socialism's existence over time. In a way, the Dead Hand is a refusal by intellectuals in wealthy nations to admit that Hayek is correct. Until they do, corrupt leaders in less-developed nations will continue to pursue socialism under the rubric of "self-sufficiency" or "community-based growth" and stifle their people's enormous creative potential. The global economic instability witnessed today is not the result of the international spread of capitalism, but rather, of the international collapse of socialism. The new problem for those who advocate market competition is that the Dead Hand has convinced many people that the opposite is true - that the only cure to the alleged problems of global capitalism is global socialism. Combating this grossly distorted worldview will take time. Because of this, stability in the global economic order is still many years away. My only criticism of Lindsey is that he chooses not to include a detailed discussion of rent seeking. In the debate over trade, it is important for people to understand that certain companies and industries utilize the legal apparatus to stifle their competition. They frequently disguise their efforts as promotion of "market-based mechanisms." Explaining why this problem has the same effects as non-tariff barriers to trade is key to shedding light on much of what takes place on the K Street corridor today. Overall, Lindsey does an exceptional job detailing why the intellectual war over trade has ended and what will occur as a result. His words will serve to inspire the courageous trade ministers who rejected then-President Clinton's demands for increased protectionism during the WTO's failed summit in Seattle in 1999. More importantly, his advice to young defenders of free trade - to keep pummeling away at their critics - will only accelerate the onset of the global liberal economic order.
Rating:
Summary: A Worthwhile Read if You Are Interested in Globalization
Review: So far, Lindsey's "Against the Dead Hand" may be the best book I have read about globalization. Lindsey does not beat around the bush--he is clearly a classical liberal who favors market forces. One would not expect anything less from a senior researcher at the Cato Institute. But the fact that he is a researcher clearly shows. The book has far more of a research base than any other text I have read on this subject. There is certainly more than mere anecdotal evidence in each chapter. But at the same, it is not a boring research text. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book. Lindsey takes an extremely broad perspective and looks at globalization within a 150 year window. From this perspective, Lindsey argues that globalization is not a recent phenomenon. Instead, he claims that we are only beginning to approach the levels of global trade that existed prior to World War I. Achieving that same level of globalization is, however, quite a struggle. The "dead hand" of centralized, collectivist, and protectionist government/philosophy still exerts considerable force on the politics and policies of today. Lindsey is convinced that collectivist government, in multiple forms, has failed and that a return to market-oriented practices is really the only viable choice remaining. Overall, I find Lindsey's arguments persuasive, researched, and sensical. He makes a strong case. On the other hand, I had great difficulty with the final two chapters of this book. In these chapters Lindsey discusses the social safety net and labor. I was both disappointed and troubled by Lindsey's discussion. His notion of a social safety net, based on Chapter Ten, seems to be providing retirement funds for those who work all their life. While I agree that retirment is important (I work too), Lindsey simply ignores and avoids the many people and issues that a social safety net should address. I was left asking about children who are ignored by their parents. What about the homeless? What about our vets? I could not help think of my recent experiences with poverty in Argentina or war-torn cities like Sarajevo. It is impossible to say what Lindsey would think about these concerns because he simply ignores them. I was left with the impression that he "simply does not get it." He risks presenting market-forces as a cure-all, which it clearly is not. This book would have been five stars, in my view, had Lindsey eliminated Chapters Ten and Eleven. The rest of the book is superb, well thought out, and well written. I highly recommend this book. I find that it makes a nice complement to Friedman's "The Lexus and the Olive Tree." The contrasts are many and at times explicit. Lindsey takes a clear stance and, regardless of whether or not you agree, I think most reasonable readers will have to admit he has made his case well. I am glad I read this book.
| 
