Product Description

A radical look by a leading economist at the issues surrounding globalization.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #28123 in Books
• Published on: 2007-07-05
• Binding: Hardcover
• 288 pages

Joseph E. Stiglitz, Nobel Laureate in Economics, 2001
'A smart, lively and provocative book that offers us compelling
new ways to look at globalization'

Martin Wolf, Financial Times, author of 'Why Globalization Works'
'Every orthodoxy needs effective critics. Ha-Joon Chang is
probably the world's most effective critic of globalization'

Larry Elliott, Economics Editor, Guardian
'a marvellous book. Well researched, panoramic in its scope and
beautifully written... I strongly urge you to read it'

Customer Reviews

Bad Samaritans
This is one economics text that should be read by everyone. Ha-Joon Chang the author(Prof. at Cambridge), puts Free Trade and unfettered Capitalism within a historical and even political perspective. Along with an earlier book, "Kicking Away the Ladder" he gives sufficient and tangible real world examples of how developing nations and infant & growing industries need tariffs & import substitution to both thrive and survive. An alternative title might be; Genuine & Honest Free Trade Maybe BUT Only Between Economic Equals.

[Amazon UK: See my review at www.Amazon.com]

a very misleading book
This book is highly polemic in opposing "neo-liberal" economics. But the author often puts ideology above history like many "neo-liberal" opponents.

Chang argues that developing countries were actually in a much better shape in 1960s and 1970s when they embraced "statist" strategy than they are now after they embraced "neo-liberal" recipes. Now the interesting question is: If they were having such a good time with "statist approach", why would they want to change? Because the evil IMF, WB and WTO intend to ruin the beautiful gardens of socialism? Was it not true that Bolivia/Argentia etc were forced to control budget because they were having 2000% inflation? Was it not true that socialism failed to lift Africa out of poverty so socialism was at least as much a failure as "neo-liberalism" in Africa? Was it not true that people in East Europe and the Soviet Union had to stand in line for two hours for a piece of meat? Was it not true that the radical socialism in China's Great Leap Forward had caused deaths of about 30 millions?

The fundamental problem of Chang's argument is he didn't see or didn't want to see that the embracement of the "neo-liberal" recipe was much more driven by the prevalent and INTERNAL economic crises that "state socialism" has inflicted on many developing countries than by some outside lunatics whose agenda was to promote an ideology at the cost of people's welfare being.

The reason of this cognitive problem is Chang fails to admit (like many others who advocate "statist" approach to development) that "statist approach" might be able to create a fast jump-start for development because state has a strong ability of mobilizing resources, BUT such an approach is never successful in creating SUSTAINABLE development, which is why almost all countries that experimented socialism encountered crises after late 1970s. When these developing countries turn to "neo-liberal" approach, some succeeded like China and India, and some failed like Argentina and Bolivia, but if they didn't turn to "neo-liberal" approach, ALL would fail (as they were already failing).

Regarding why the neo-liberalism succeeds in some countries and fails in others, it's too large a topic to elaborate here.

Chang might argue that what's happening in China, India, UK, US is not neo-liberalism because these countries still keep some protectionism, subsidies, SOEs... BUT, aren't Deng Xiaping, Reagon, Thatcher... seen representatives of "neo-liberals"? If they are NOT, who are those PURE neo-liberal who are allegedly advocating zero-tariff, zero-SOEs, zero-regulation and zero-public spending? Are these PURE neo-liberals just monsters created by Chang's imagination so that the argument against them is so easy to make that it doesn't take intelligence? Sadly, when Chang's right, he is arguing against an imagined enemy; and when he is arguing against the neo-liberals in reality, he is wrong.

must read!!
This book is epic! Shows the true history of globalisation and how the now developed countries used government protectionism, tariffs and subsidies to get rich.

The hypocrisy is unbelievable. Poor nations are now told by the IMF, World Bank and WTO that neo-liberal policies should be promoted and it's the only way thay will modernise.

Ofcourse as an economist, Chang doesnt realise that development does not always have to be economic development. Society can change for the better by means of social, cultural, and econimic equality. Is the society we live in all that perfect? Do we want poorer countries to "westernise", become increasingly materialistic and serve their their time in representative democracies? These questions need to be raised, debate concerning moving towards a participatory democracy where people have a say in how their lives are run, not just voting every few years.

For what he set out to achieve though, he did it with excellent efficiency.