Hirschman mania continues

Aha! One of the first four titles in a new series of reissues of classic titles from Princeton University Press is Albert Hirschman’s [amazon_link id=”0691160252″ target=”_blank” ]The Passions and The Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism Before its Triumph[/amazon_link].

[amazon_image id=”0691160252″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]The Passions and the Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism before Its Triumph (New in Paperback) (Princeton Classics)[/amazon_image]

Two histories of publishing

Courtesy of a link tweeted by @TheLitPlatform comes the splendid History of Publishing infographic below.

It merits reading in conjunction with this optimistic article in The New Republic about the future of books. When I linked to this recently, there were some comments suggesting I was being delusionally optimistic about the outlook for the industry. Maybe, although I still think it is encouraging to see how innovative the industry has been compared to the early days of the digital tidal wave washing over the music industry, for example. There are other optimists – this in the Virginia Quarterly Review is another fascinating take on getting people to pay for value in books.

Anyway, the point is that the infographic above is a technology history, and it needs a business history alongside it. Publishing has always been a technology business, and lies at the intersection of monetary and non-monetary values.

A Brief History Of PublishingInfographic by Finvy

 

A blank slate on political economy

A question: what would you put in a hypothetical brand new public policy/political economy course for undergraduates (mainly studying economics, mainly with a good maths A level)? What are the essential readings? Are there any examples of existing courses you would recommend?

My first thoughts – and this is very much off the top of my head – are: a bit of James Scott’s [amazon_link id=”0300078153″ target=”_blank” ]Seeing Like A State[/amazon_link]; [amazon_link id=”0141047976″ target=”_blank” ]23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism[/amazon_link], Ha-Joon Chang and/or Joe Studwell’s [amazon_link id=”1846682428″ target=”_blank” ]How Asia Works[/amazon_link] (reviewed here); definitely some Hume, always wise about the messiness of the world – maybe ‘Of A Particular Providence and A Future State’ from [amazon_link id=”002353110X” target=”_blank” ]An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding[/amazon_link]; Hirschman on possibilism (from [amazon_link id=”0691159904″ target=”_blank” ]The Essential Hirschman[/amazon_link] which I reviewed here yesterday);

[amazon_image id=”0300078153″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (Yale Agrarian Studies)[/amazon_image]

[amazon_image id=”1846682428″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]How Asia Works: Success and Failure in the World’s Most Dynamic Region[/amazon_image]

Case studies, from competition, immigration, education, energy policy, areas where economics and politics so often appear to conflict – it’s papers rather than books that come to mind, such as the excellent paper by Rufus Pollock on the liberalisation of directory enquiries. But also Daniel Bell in [amazon_link id=”0465097138″ target=”_blank” ]The Coming of Post Industrial Society[/amazon_link] on the conflict between technocratic decisions in a complex society and popular/populist democracy.

But there are many possibilities. Other suggestions?

Antifragile – an update

This morning Nassim Taleb took to Twitter to berate me for being mathematically stupid, ‘flustered’, and “not even wrong”. I suspect my fault is not so much making a mistake in the maths as having preferred his first two bestsellers to this one – I enjoyed reading his book but was a bit lukewarm. You can look at the Twitter discussion if you can be bothered (he’s @nntaleb, I’m @diane1859 on Twitter). A couple of his tweets below.

Meanwhile, you can also decide:

(a) How stupid I was in my original blog post – I haven’t changed it and there is an error (clue – an inversion, my excuse being that it was the result of writing in haste before going out that day);

(b) How mathematically skilful readers ought to be before they are allowed to read a book issued as a mass market paperback and then review it in a mildly positive way;

(c) Whether Mr Taleb’s tweeting makes you more or less inclined to buy and read [amazon_link id=”0141038225″ target=”_blank” ]Antifragile[/amazon_link].

nntaleb
@diane1859 Lesson 1) read books v. attentively w/a pencil 2) only comment within your expertise 3) expect to be treated by author same way
19/10/2013 14:40

 

nntaleb
Once again for nonmathematiciansnonbiologists like @diane1859 bloviating on the biological math in AF, a primer: http://t.co/V7PPRh6GLA
18/10/2013 22:46

Essays by the worldly philosopher

[amazon_link id=”0691159904″ target=”_blank” ]The Essential Hirschman[/amazon_link] edited by his prize-winning biographer Jeremy Adelman ([amazon_link id=”0691155674″ target=”_blank” ]Worldly Philosopher)[/amazon_link] is a collection of essays well worth reading by anbody who, like me, was not very familiar with Hirschman’s work. The book is divided into three sections covering Hirschman’s work on development economics, essays on market societies, and essays on democracy including his thinking on political rhetoric.

[amazon_image id=”0691159904″ link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]The Essential Hirschman[/amazon_image]

I particularly like the combination of economic analysis (rarely expressed mathematically, but nonetheless rigorous) with an awareness of the difficulties of implementation, of political constraints, and of the role of the emotions in people’s decisions. For example, the first essay, ‘Political Economics and Possibilism’, looks specifically at the role of optimism and political leadership in bringing about change, and the scope for the same economic policies to have vastly different outcomes depending on political characteristics of the society in which they are introduced. For example, trade-offs that are possible in a relatively homogeneous society may not be feasible in one divided on religious or ethnic grounds, of might even lead to civil war. As Adelman puts it in his excellent introduction, “It is rare to find a writer in our times so at ease with the modern tools of the social scientist and yet so concerned with the complexity of the human condition that he or she can bring to life the frictions and tensions that come from looking at our world at the junctions of political, economic and emotional life.”

Hirschman, it is evident from this book and Adelman’s superb biography, Worldly Philosopher, was increasingly out of tune with the economics of his times. The subject became increasingly abstract and generalised, and inclined to require mathematical rigour everywhere. Hirschman was focused on the specifics of each situation. In ‘Search for Paradigms’, he argues that the highly analytical, paradigm-seeking frame of mind led either to undue conservatism about the prospects for things to improve, or its opposite, a revolutionary bias. In the essay on possibilism, he wrote: “Most social scientists conceive it as their exclusive task to discover and stress regularities, stable relationships and uniform sequences. This is obviously an essential search, one in which no thinking person can refrain from participating. But in social sciences there is a special room for the opposite type of endeavour: to underline the multiplicity and creative disorder of the human adventure, to bring out the uniqueness of a certain occurrence, and to perceive a new way of turning a historical corner.” And it is this last that makes him such an optimistic, encouraging thinker too.

I least enjoyed, however, a couple of the essays on development, which may well be because I am entirely unfamiliar with his theory of linkages – these essays didn’t mean much to me out of context. Still, even in those, the emphasis on tensions and conflicts as motors of change, and the inevitable messiness of the process, is clear.

The book also has a nice evaluation of Hirschman by Emma Rothschild and Amartya Sen as an afterword. They say his work cannot be neatly mapped onto any of the normal distinctions we tend to make, between orthodox and heterodox, between theoretical and empirical, between state and market – “he aspired to both and embraced the conflict between them,” they conclude. It is well worth reading some of Hirschman’s classic books such as [amazon_link id=”0674276604″ target=”_blank” ]Exit, Voice and Loyalty[/amazon_link] of course, but this book of essays is a terrific overview of his work.