Leveling the global playing field?

Joseph Stiglitz has written a new book entitled “Making Globalization Work”. The New York Times book review, however, contains a particularly troublesome quote:

“Rich countries,” he writes, “should simply open up their markets to poorer ones, without reciprocity.”

A man such as Dr. Stiglitz should know better to make such a comment. A basic concept of economics is that in order for a transaction to take place, it must benefit each party. While I am certainly an advocate of free markets and free trade, this statement ignores important political and social factors associated with doing so and is strikingly idealistic.

It gets worse:

As for global enforcement of rules, “what is needed is an international tribunal.” Would its judges be appointed or elected? Would there be some disincentives, too, for global class-action suits? Details omitted.

What could possibly be worse that a world bureaucracy and tribunal?

Still, the reviewer finds more troubling comments:

Intent on championing regulation over an “unfettered” market, he turns to postwar Japan and South Korea as examples of how governments can pilot an economic boom, though this view has been undermined on empirical grounds. He commends China for go-slow liberalization, without noting that the late-70’s dismantling of peasant communes was a liberalizing big bang or that critics inside China today accuse the central government of abandoning economic liberalization, under the guise of gradualism, to gorge on the spoils of office. The rigor and nuance of his economics work are not as evident in his handling of recent world history.

From this review one can only assume that Dr. Stiglitz’s book is meant to appeal to his cult of liberal followers. He takes a noble topic such as free trade and turns it into a deplorable concept filled with world governments and regulations. Ironically, his ideas for making globalization work are exactly the types of policies that slow down the growth of the western European countries.

Perhaps I should have known better than to continuing reading after this opening sentence:

If a prize in politics were awarded for self-righteousness, Joseph E. Stiglitz, despite stiff competition, might be near the top of the list.

You learn from your mistakes.

UPDATE: Tyler Cowen writes:

Joe Stiglitz’s new book claims the main problem is that “we” have not “managed” globalization very well. It has benefited mainly the rich and not the poor. Funny me, I thought the main problems were tyranny, dictators, corruption, and low-quality and weak governments.