Rating: 
Summary: Loved the e-book version
Review: ...Read the book and you might be pleasantly surprise by what you get... unless you're an investment banker!
Rating:
Summary: Pay Attention or Pay the Price
Review:
This book begins with a very fine introduction by Robert McChesney, who defines neoliberalism as an economic paradigm that leaves a small number of private parties in control and able to maximize their profit (at the expense of the people). He goes on to note that a distracted or apathetic or depoliticized public essentially "goes along" with this, resulting in the loss of community and the rise of consumerism.
Chomsky himself, over the course of 167 pages, points out the damages of neo-liberalism (public abdicating power to corporations), not just to underdeveloped nations and their peoples, but to the American people themselves, who are suffering, today, from a fifteen year decline in education, health, and increased inequality between the richest and the poorest. Over the course of several chapters, he discusses various U.S. policies, including the U.S. policy of using "security" as a pretext for subsidizing the transfer of taxpayer funds to major arms dealers. The declaration of Cuba as a threat to U.S. national security is one that Mexico could not support--as one of their diplomats explained at the time: "if we publicly declare that Cuba is a threat to our security, forty million Mexicans will die laughing." At the end of it all, Chomsky comes down to the simple matter of protecting both civilization and the civilians from their own governments in cahoots with corporations. His observations on the deaths by disease, starvation, and so on, at the same time that billions are being spent on arms which perpetuate the cycles of violence, are relevant. So also are his observations on the dramatic increase in both the extent and the damages caused by increasingly unregulated financial markets. He singles out the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) as an especially pernicious organization whose machinations are invisible to the public and harmful as well. I note with interest a review of this book that seeks to call Chomsky a liar, uninformed, and a laughingstock among "serious" scholars. I wish to address that point of view kindly. I can understand, when scholarship consists largely of going through the motions, reading a limited number of works, and answering by rote with the prescribed thought, how so many of our allegedly educated people in business and government are simply socially tuned in. I have myself come to the conclusion that Washington runs on 2% of the available international information (and is largely witless about the 75% or so that is in foreign languages), and I also agree with Howard Bloom's observation in "Global Brain,", to wit, that half one's brain cells are killed off by the time one is an adult, due to normal biological adjustments to accommodate the prescribed social, cultural, and intellectual parameters that are demanded if one is to "get along." In that light, I view Chomsky as one of our more important vaccinations against premature stupidity among our loosely-educated adult policymakers. For myself, with considerable reading and a 25-year national security career behind me, I find that while Chomsky is repetitious, he is generally meticulous about foot-noting (something that cannot be said for the lazy authors residing in most think tanks, all of them being paid to think along very specifically prescribed directions). The bottom line for me is clear: citizens must read and think, or perish from the earth as slaves to those who control money. There is only one thing that matters more than money in this world, and that is the vote. In a representative democracy, the vote can be bought with ease *until* the moment comes when citizens realize that they can combine the use of public sources to reach conclusions (open source intelligence) with self-organization via the Internet, with civil action (cyber-advocacy, street-advocacy, communication and voting) to *take back the power.* It is not terrorism that scares the corporate carpetbaggers, it is something much more powerful: thinking citizens willing to spend the time keeping their corporate servants in line. Chomsky has labored for over fifty years to keep that part of our brain alive that our schools, seeking to train obedient factory workers, have worked so hard to kill. It can be disheartening, to see citizens so freely give up their rights and their powers, but I do believe, that with the Radical Center (Halstead and Lind), Cultural Creatives (Rya and Anderson) and other books I have reviewed, there is, without question, a tipping point. The Internet has changed everything-now we need for the people to notice, and act. Chomsky sheds light in a way that no prostituted scholar or preppy business acolyte will respect-but if the workers wish to begin reading for the future salvation of their children's rights, Chomsky is as good a place as any from which to step off into true democracy.
Rating: 
Summary: Chomsky's damning disection of global capitalism
Review: Chomsky's "Profit over People" is a careful and thought provoking (not to mention exhaustive) examination of the ultimate goals of the world of private business: profit, power, and the maintance of the status quo and the class system at any cost. If that cost is to be paid in human lives and soles, (as in East Timor and elsewhere); so be it. Of particular interest in this work by Chomsky are the sections in which he examines the recent changes from 'real' business, viz., business linked to production etc., to modern 'speculative' business, i.e, gamblers buying and selling foreign currencies etc., and the effect this has had (and will continue to have) on a global economy obsessed with nothing but profit, profit, and more profit. Do yourself a favour and read this book. Forget Clancy, Archer, etc. That's released on to the market simply to distract the peasants of society (i.e. non-millionaires). Read instead Chomsky, Herman, Orwell, Wells, Said, Huxley, et al. Gain an insight into how much harm we, as citizens of democratic societies, are inflicting on the Third World. In addition, ponder on why you have not seen this (or any other) book by Chomsky reviewed in the main stream press. If Professor Chomsky's observations and views are as easy to dismiss as his critics would have us believe, why don't they?
Rating:
Summary: A Categorical Wrecking of 'Free' Market Propaganda
Review: Here comes another fascinating compilation of clarifications courtesy of Noam Chomsky. Focusing on the topic of Neoliberalism and the modern yarns fabricated to promote it, Chomsky tirelessly demonstrates how countries demanding trade 'liberalization' today, underwent (and still do) 150 years of protectionism. How same countries deploy artificial barriers and legitimize their tariffs via a compliant business and media elite.
The book discusses the dejected citizenry, the dangers this poses to real democracy and how governments methodically accentuate this trend. Chomsky exhorts the reader to participate in democracy as the only way to rescue it and details how America has been derailed into a kind of oligopoly of corporations due to the population's ignorance and non-participation. As is often the case with Chomsky, moments of unintended hilarity are not in short supply either. One example sites how what is accepted and given wisdom in America regarding Cuba, would have "forty million Mexicans will die laughing" according to one Mexican diplomat. The book does suggest ways for people to improve themselves, yet falls short on detail and lucidity. As a post script and for the sake of readers trapped in the pits (geographic and mental) let it be known that Noam Chomsky refuses royalty for his books. Having placed his work in trust, he hopes that, in this way, his work will be made available more cheaply to readers.
Rating:
Summary: Chomsky on politics and economics
Review: I can call him an iconoclast but a brave voice in this world which is inexorably allowing itself to be swallowed up by 'freedom'. The most important thing about this book is that it makes a reader think about the 'norms' of our society which are taken for granted as truths or standard of practice. I am sure its going to disturb people like Mr.Kamm whose reaction to this book is evident by his searing remarks. It tells me that this book has shook him in a way he is not allowing himself to feel because it means he has to come out of his cocoon thinking.
Rating:
Summary: I Don't know if it is good or bad, but...
Review: I dont'know if Chomsky is so ignorant or a expert in Economics. The fact is that the subjects described in his book are real: profits are growing, wages are getting low, the THird World is a slave to the Monetary International Fund, unregulated and especulative capital is destroying countries all around. Everyones know that.
So the reviewers that say that Chomsky is a "liar", must be in the rich side of the coin, no doubt about that...
And to asy that CHomsky is a hyupocrite just because he writes books and then sell them, must be a joke. CHomsky do not fire employees at will. Chomsky do not play schemes behind the scenes with politicians and investors. CHomsdsky do no threat syndicates and simple workers. CHomsky never told that one should get money without deserving it and working for it. And his job is to write books. Of course he's smart enough to know that his kind of book has a determined audience, and he will write for them. No trouble about that!
Rating:
Summary: If It PO's CEO's It Must Be Good?
Review: I find it amusing a "CEO" of a typical corporate junk dot.com (from that conservative bastion of Salt Lake City) has such a tirade over Chomsky. What a surprise, I guess. And even using an "argument from authority" ("teaching undergrads"), how impressive! Chomsky's views on PPS/23 are hardly unique to him; and it's pretty obvious that it outlined US policy from Korea through the Phillippines through East Timor. And PPS/23 is stamped "Top Secret," was finally brought to light in 1984, so how can this CEO claim that it really wasn't that secret? I'd say that being hidden for 35 years is pretty darn. But then what does Chomsky know as compared to a CEO of a run-of-the-mill shopping cart dot.com who has actually taught undergraduates!
Rating:
Summary: Leave Economics to the Economists?!?!?
Review: I first learned about Chomsky through The Chomsky Reader. Although rather dense, and suffering from a tendency to assume familiarity with both Chomsky and the details of his sunjects, I found it to be a truly mind opening book. For me Chomsky provided a framework for many of the observations that I had been making to myself for years about America and the inconsistencies and contradictions I saw in its politics, actions, and rhetoric. This is the first collection of Chomsky's writings that I have read beyond the reader and I was thrilled to find a more streamlined and direct presentation for Chomsky's overall themes and their relation to international diplomacy, corporate concerns, and the point where the two more often than not meet in alarming and exploitive spectacles. Despite the opinions of Mr. Oliver Kamm, this is indeed a very worthwhile and timely book. If you are trying to understand the Seatle and Canada WTO demonstrations or are puzzled by the outcry against the forms of globablization that are currently being pushed by the Bush administration, this book will go a long way towards presenting a very strong case for the dissident voice. I would also like to address Mr. Kramm's claim that Chomsky's background as a world renown linguist makes him unqualified to analyze politics or economics. Because Chomsky does not possess a piece of paper from a college recognizing a few years spent in a classroom learning about a subject should in no way be used to judge his qualifications to analyse economics. Nor should his voice be ignored because he never worked for a company that included the word economics in his job description. Noam Chomsky has spent the last four decades of his life studying economics, media, and domestic and international policy with such an intense scrutiny that to say he is simply not qualified to write about economics is just ignorant. His statements are meticulously referenced and are usually backed up by several independent sources. As far as his use of questionable sources, I think it is safe to assume that nearly every writer who has penned a damning and dissedent political text has had this charge thrown at them. For those who reproach Chomsky's works for pushing his opinions so strongly let me say that you have missed the point. Of course he is pushing his ideas as being correct, this is not an objective encyclopedia of political ideas made tame by pluralism, it is a persuasive text. Funny how no one ever seems to slam Thomas Paine or James Madison for being biased towards their cause in their writings. It is unfortunate that we live in a world where the informed dissident voices are viewed as being the overreactive ravings of crackpots obsessed with back room conspiracy theories and shadowy illuminati running our lives. The truth is that there are flaws in the system that have been taken advantage of gradually and systematically by diverse and countless forces over several hundred years. Many of these flaws are seen as ingrained truths of economics (such as the many flawed or perverted dogmas of the Keynesian school) and international relations. The problem is that people have grown so accustomed to living with the unethical "bugs" in our system that they have grown blind to them as well as to the reality that change is both possible and necessary if we truly want to strive towards living in a just and ethical world. Probably the best criticism that can be thrown at Chomsky is that he is simply a dreamer who thinks that ethics, freedom, and human rights should play as strong a role in international and corporate actions as the chase for the almighty dollar. But if that is so, then it might be worthwhile to take a glance at his "dreams" and ask if they are things that can and should be strived towards.
Rating:
Summary: Wide-ranging but powerful
Review: In this collection of essays that examines the dynamics of globalization and democracy, Chomsky makes clear that the "profit" imperative of private corporations are clearly triumphing over the needs of the vast majority of "people" in the world. The superb intro written by Robert McChesney discusses how neoliberalism threatens democractic institutions. McChesney lauds Chomsky for his many contributions to public understanding of how the economic system works and for whom, and for encouraging citizens to demand greater accountability from the unelected corporate elites. Chapter one is a brief history of the modern world order. Chomsky explains that protectionism has been often used by the U.S. and Britain to nurture their nascent industries to health and prosperity. Yet, Chomsky points out that the dogma of "free trade" has been used to economically colonize weaker countries. For example, Great Britain helped impoverish India's citizens by enforcing trade restrictions, but the captive Indian market served to greatly enrich investors in Britain. In Chapter two, Chomsky asserts that despite repeated attempts to condition the people to accept the neoliberal doctrine, opinion polls consistently show that people still believe in democratic principles such as fair levels of taxation, ample spending on public programs, etc. This article suggests that people cherish democractic ideals and therefore might have the capacity to successfully demand and win change -- even against entrenched corporate interests with far greater resources at their disposal. Chapter three examines inconcistencies in U.S. policy with respect to free trade. Chomsky claims that Ronald Reagan was the most protectionist of all U.S. presidents (despite his rhetoric to the contrary). In short, the U.S. supports free trade when it is seen as a benefit but against it when foreigners have comparative advantage (such as when the Japanese automakers had superior high-mileage cars on the market in the early 1980s). Chomsky also discusses U.S. policy with Cuba. The author argues that the real motivation for the U.S. embargo is not to encourage democracy in Cuba but to stifle the appeal of Cuba's redistributive policies and prevent them from spreading to other countries. Chapter four examines U.S. policy throughout the hemisphere. Chomsky reveals a consistent pattern of preference for protecting the rights of investors and repressing the human rights of citizens in countries that dare to opt for greater democracy. In Chapter five, Chomsky links the Zapatista rebellion in Chiapas, Mexico with the declining living standards wrought by unregulated corporate access to third world resources and labor markets. Chapter six discusses the MAI agreement. Chomsky stresses that this misguided treaty was negotiated in secret in order not to alarm democratic populations of the treaty's overt favortism to private capital over people and the environment. The seventh and final article was written after the MAI proposal was defeated by concerned citizens groups, who made the secret text of the proposal public using the Internet. Chomsky cites this victory as evidence that democracy is "the ultimate weapon" that can be used to protect the rights of the people. However, Chomsky warns that the people must be forever vigilant if we want to prevent further concentration of wealth and power in private corporations. Throughout, Chomsky ties his lessons back to the Founding Fathers to show how far our country has strayed from its original ideals. Whether you agree or disagree with the conclusions drawn, Profit Over People should at least give readers pause to consider the state of our democracy and what might be required to fix it. Highly recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: A poor treatment of complex global issues
Review: In this polemic Chomsky attacks `neo-liberalism' in international political economy. To that effect, he damns every supranational economic organisation and agreement that he can think of (the IMF, the World Bank, the World Trade Organisation, NAFTA, MAI etc.), charging them with being the agents or instruments of US multinational corporations intent on pillaging the Third World, despoiling the environment, and various other sins. The book is not so much an argument as an expostulation; and it is undermined at almost every turn by extravagant rhetoric and weak reasoning. International political economy is - like all economics - a discipline about trade-offs and the assessment of costs and benefits. There are various criticisms that can plausibly be levelled at all of the bodies or treaties that Chomsky fulminates against, but it is important in formulating them to have a mind to what these institutions or agreements are designed for. To put mildly, the targets Chomsky denounces are not the same thing and do not pursue the same ends. It serves no purpose and does violence to critical inquiry merely to denounce them all as agents of US big business and of free-market fanaticism. The IMF, for example - a prime villain in Chomsky's account - has received much criticism from the school of free market economists that Chomsky believes it represents. These economists (see, for example, Money and the Nation State, edited by Kevin Dowd & Richard Timberlake, and published by the libertarian Independent Institute in 1998) charge the IMF with creating `moral hazard' in international lending, and wish to see the institution abolished. A different view, which I hold, is that the IMF performs a valuable service in allowing troubled economies a breathing space to sort out their difficulties, as was clearly the case with the `tequila crisis' in Mexico in 1994-5, and in fact ought to be more active in its prescriptions than it has been - consider the case of Argentina's ruinous currency peg, which the IMF was highly sceptical of and ought to have stood out against. There is room for discussion and disagreement about how far the IMF should loosen conditionality for its loans (and I am something of a dove in this respect), but these are inevitable debates about how to make effective a necessary and valuable part of the global economy. Similarly, the World Trade Organisation has nothing whatever to do with free-market fundamentalism or US big business: it is neither more nor less than a commercial court that tries to eliminate discrimination on grounds of nationality. It is a thoroughly progressive institution whose effectiveness is greatly in the interests of the developing world, as evidenced by its first major ruling when it upheld Venezuela's complaint against a US levy on foreign petroleum producers. The World Bank, which under its current management - much to my regret - has veered very far from the cause of globalisation, went to immense lengths to support Third World socialist projects (such as the `ujaama' projects of President Nyerere's Tanzania), with extremely bad results for the impoverished peoples of the countries concerned. To subsume these differing institutions, aims and approaches into a catch-all damnation of the machinations of big business is neither a profound nor a reliable guide to the modern global economy. Quite how Chomsky reaches his conclusions is of some interest, however, for it indicates quite a lot about the economic reasoning of the anti-globalisation movement. In short, Chomsky just hasn't acquainted himself with the normative arguments and positive findings of those he attacks; this is just not good enough in a book that aims to scrutinise the global economic order, for economics is a rigorously technical and empirical discipline, and not a matter of opinion. I give just two instances if the book's deficiencies in this respect, but they could be multiplied at great length. Chomsky attacks the advocates of NAFTA, the North America Free Trade Agreement, for supposedly claiming the it would create jobs. In this, Chomsky has just not understood the point - a very fundamental one - about trade. The basic Ricardian argument for trade does not depend on its effect on aggregate employment (which is virtually unaffected by trade: what matters in the short run is the level of aggregate demand, and in the long run is the so-called NAIRU, or Non-Accelerating-Inflation Rate of Unemployment); trade raises not employment but living standards. The chronic poverty that has afflicted Third World nations like Tanzania under a policy of 'self-reliance' demonstrates the point. My second instance of the weakness of this book's treatment of economics is Chomsky's throwaway reference to William Greider's anti-globalisation polemic One World, Ready or Not. The Greider thesis that Chomsky has latched on to is that there is excess supply in the global economy owing to workers' not receiving enough to buy the goods capitalism produces. This claim is absolutely untenable in theory and in practice: wages are not set abstractly, but are pinned to the marginal product of labour. To put it simply, an additional dollar of output must represent an additional dollar of income to someone. The only way the `excess supply' nostrum could hold is if you claim that the additional dollar of income goes to someone with a higher marginal propensity to save - and that conclusion requires a study of the facts. This book doesn't trouble with the facts, which are that savings rates in most industrial economies have been falling for years, while in the developing countries they have been growing less quickly than investment demand. Enough already. Chomsky is not an international economist, and his book is depressingly short on empirical research and economic logic. Indeed the book is almost a logical fallacy itself, for it exemplifies the anthropomorphic fallacy that one may attribute personality - in this case a wicked and grasping avarice - to an abstraction, namely the `capitalist system'. At any rate, it is a poor book that does nothing to enhance its author's reputation in his chosen personal interest - far from his specialist field - of politics and economics.
| 
