SAN FRANCISCO - Today, the "market" is said to be either utterly triumphant or a grave threat. Politicians everywhere quest for a "third way" around its rigors, yearning for "national champions" in industries like telecoms capable of holding off globalization. The market, however, is simply a mechanism that can be mobilized for any number of purposes. Depending on the way it is used, the market may contribute to social and economic development or inhibit it.
Using or not using the market is not the crucial distinction. Every society - communist, socialist, or capitalist - uses the market. The crucial distinction is private property. Who are the participants in the market and on whose behalf are they operating? Are the participants government bureaucrats operating on behalf of "the state"? Or are they individuals operating on their own behalf?
Once, on a visit to China, a deputy minister asked "Who in the America is in charge of materials distribution?" The question took me aback, yet it was natural. For it was almost inconceivable that a citizen from a command economy could understand how markets distribute materials among millions of people for thousands of uses untouched by political hands.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
While facing an uphill political battle at home, Turkey’s recently re-elected President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan handily won the diaspora vote. He did so by capitalizing on the resentment and alienation felt by second- and third-generation Turkish immigrants who often feel estranged in the countries where they were born.
explains how displacement can make expatriates and minorities more susceptible to extremist ideologies.
Calls at this year’s Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore to improve military-to-military communication between the US and China, especially in light of increasingly aggressive encounters at sea and in the air, fell on deaf ears. Despite the best efforts of the US and its allies, China is in no hurry to re-engage.
considers the implications of the complete collapse of defense diplomacy between the US and China.
To think that technology will save us from climate change is to invite riskier behavior, or moral hazard. Whether a climate solution creates new problems has little to do with the solution, and everything to do with us.
offers lessons for navigating a field that is fraught with hype, unintended consequences, and other pitfalls.
SAN FRANCISCO - Today, the "market" is said to be either utterly triumphant or a grave threat. Politicians everywhere quest for a "third way" around its rigors, yearning for "national champions" in industries like telecoms capable of holding off globalization. The market, however, is simply a mechanism that can be mobilized for any number of purposes. Depending on the way it is used, the market may contribute to social and economic development or inhibit it.
Using or not using the market is not the crucial distinction. Every society - communist, socialist, or capitalist - uses the market. The crucial distinction is private property. Who are the participants in the market and on whose behalf are they operating? Are the participants government bureaucrats operating on behalf of "the state"? Or are they individuals operating on their own behalf?
Once, on a visit to China, a deputy minister asked "Who in the America is in charge of materials distribution?" The question took me aback, yet it was natural. For it was almost inconceivable that a citizen from a command economy could understand how markets distribute materials among millions of people for thousands of uses untouched by political hands.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Subscribe
As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.
Register
Already have an account? Log in