E*******r
发帖数: 308 | 1 http://www.economist.com/node/21564533
我本人虽然不通文、理，因为近世两位德语作家的关系对奥地利，奥匈帝国［＊］文化
在20c的命运、作用一直有兴趣，我对socially influential，seminal的理论也一直仰慕
，因此看到这篇书评后，就去amazon买了kindle version，bedtime一目十行了一下，
完全忘记前，挖个小坑。
我个人印象本书主要两部分，哲学思潮的发展，及其影响下transatlantic （汉译是跨
大西洋么？英美?）policy making的变迁。前1/3概述neoliberalism背后哲学思潮：也
是我比较感兴趣的所谓Austrain school下学者对WWI,II inter-war期间collectivism
，即包括德国national socialism和俄国totalaritarism的反思、批判；介绍最知名三位
Hayek, Popper, 还有一位稍年长的Mises的观点、影响；接下来本书大部分时间讨论
transatlantic policy making，主要有战后50，60Keynenism盛行（在美国大概和战前
new deal政策有关），70年代开始转向neoliberalism鼓吹的曾盛行19c的free market
，neoliberalism最终于从思想运动进入policy making
，开始左右政治、经济。转折期间关键党派、人物比如不列颠的labor party，
thatcher，美国的republican，reagon等（90年代后一向偏socialism的democratic
party，以clinton作为标志也adopt neoliberalism的建议，主要关于housing policy
）。在非常专业充分的政治纪录（有时候读起来简直象年表，结合全书谋篇，很像加长
phd thesis。。。）之外是思想、经济领域几位卓著有效的推动者，ie，hayek，
friedman和他们的transatlantic network。总合起来，本书书名非常恰当，概述了本
书主题－－一部从思想界发端最终向主流政治经济生活渗透的英美20c历史，这部历史
，按照作者本人话讲－－Luck, opportunism, and a set of contingent
circumstances played by the most crucial roles. Above all, it was far from
inevitable.
另一方面，这书虽然写的很专业，作为大众读物出版，被门外行拿来做床头读物，我觉
得也不是完全无益，大致令我对20c anglo－saxsons世界的思想、政治变化有了第一张
big picture. 这个意义上，本书标题仍然非常贴切：Masters of the Universe:
Hayek,
Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics
这里出现的两位hayek和friedman才是真正influence，shape今日英美（又或者小部分
德国？）世界的核心人物。而非其他重要人物比如Karl Popper或John Keynes。
然而作为有私见的大众读者，本书给我留下最难忘印象的两人也正是Karl Popper和
John Keynes.
Popper是1945年与Hayek持相似观点的好友。同年，Hayek名作《the road to serdom》
首先出版，popper随后有《the open society and its enemies》，《the open
society》定名前，popper与hayek商议中，hayek表示倾向别寻它命－－这样相似的书
名对后来者popper而言未必最佳。Hayek对这位用他的话讲“我们观点曾经非常接近”
（大意，不记得了，囧）的好友的担忧，从后来发展看，大概多余了。比如，全书在我
草草翻来，不觉占据最重要地位同时没有出现在title的popper却占据本书封面和书评
头像。anyway，两位重要学者学术不在我能理解或比较范围内，这里只引用两则小掌故
，我以为很称两本书阴阳两面的书名：
《the road to serdom》成功之外，readers digest出了缩写版（我去翻了一下，不在
这里赘述）中提到Hayek及其在lse的最大rival keynes的一则小故事，1936 Keynes大
作《general theory of employment, interest, and money》出版前二年，keynes曾
收到hayek“有力”批驳，对此keynes had shrugged off the attack with a smile,
saying as they passed ...: 'Oh, never mind; I no longer believe all that'...
1970年代，也就战后凯恩斯经济措在黄金20年失效之后，hayek鼓吹的neoliberalism
刚刚开始被接纳进入主流政治生活之际，hayek表示自己在1936 keynes才出版之际没有
repeat the demolition job on "The general theory"而遗憾。[**]
对应的是《the open society》开篇，popper的话：“If in this book harsh words
are spoken about some of the greatest among the intellectual leaders of
mankind, my motive is not, I hope, the wish to belittle them. It springs
rather from my conviction that, if our civilization is to survive, we must
break with the habit of dference to great men.”
第二位John Keynes－－相比popper，全书中我最敬仰这位最终被neoliberalism取代的
阴影里的王者. Keynes长期作为neoliberalism尤其是friderich hayek的前辈和（将被
挑下王座的）biggest rival的背景出现。他本人不是全书主题，其理论也没有被介绍
（我因此也连一丝耳闻都无），除了第一次在书中出场－－作者为了区分keyens其人和
keyneism其理论及追随者时satire描写的第一句话“Keynes died prematurely in
1946, exhausted by his efforts to negotiate a loan from the Americans”－－
在这句令我当时哭笑不得，什么？盖世大英雄的开场就是谢幕？继而在作者dead pen侧
面描述中越来越灼灼生光，而这句话读完全书再看，也别有趣味［***］.
我对他的敬仰不是出于对他的见解或曾经促成的繁荣（WWII直至britton woods system
破产的黄金二十年如果可以部分归入其名下的话），而在于他是全书中少有对待社会问
题，不采用destructive的批判（比如popper和hayek），而是采取建设态度，着手设计
解决问题－－即使他发明的工具－－宏观经济学，今日看来多么过时。这太厉害了！
同时，作为英国人，keynes本人私下务实谦逊之余对自己的理论持怀疑态度－－按照本
书作者讲法。这样对照，hayek所述－－按照reader digest版本－－对于hayek的批评
，keynes的shrug可能全无傲慢，倒是有些真诚。
另外，Keynes对Austrain school的评价很有趣，他被引用的文字中使用了两个词－－
nihilism, cruel。直中要害啊。nihilism方面，neoliberalism等鼓吹competitive
system （free market） as the sole solution, rejecting any social/state
interevene; 至于cruel，这个看法在远在neoliberalism能影响社会前几十年真是一针
见血，事实证明，neoliberalism policy tends to be harshest on the most
vunarable in the society. (顺便引用下，80，90年代美国在neoliberalism全盛后，
税收长期劫贫济富)
本书结尾，作者讨论2007-08房贷危机，比较和同由free maket引发的1930s危机说有两
大区别，一是这一次policy makers are merciless, 二是（我当时心想这回没有新的
救世者了）没有新的keynes了。
最后一点我心有戚戚的是neoliberlism对free market的深信不疑，尤其将其视为排斥
其他可能的唯一救世手段。这种unconditional faith和neoliberalism当初反对的
totalitarianism－－德国纳粹和俄国共产党－－和popper，hayek反对的utopia本质有
何不同？作者引用的一位记者John Cassidy has called "Utopian economics," the
unthinking and uncritical acceptance of the free market.
［＊］刚看到的几句话特别称我对奥匈帝国的好奇－－“Yet the Europe which
moulded this ... has been lost; it was torn at the seams by the First World
War and .... Today the ... Europe barely exists in the lands ... knew and
the multilingual Habsburg Europe of Austria-Hungary long ago gave way to ...”
[**] 这里hayek的形象ws的难以置信，格调之低令我怀疑和reader digest这个
commercial institution有关，恐怕要更多了解hayek本人才行。。。
[***] 战后transatlantic，或者说狭义英美policy making，本书给我的印象是，英国
往往是brain storm和激进试验场（直到今日cameron继续neoliberalism的healthcare
，education privitization），而后英风西渐进入美国决策圈。 | E*******r
发帖数: 308 | 2 囧，干活procrastination之余挖了个大面积坑－－罪过、罪过，为无益事，谴有涯生，
disclaim一下哈。专业的同学们包含一下。冒犯了，呵呵，大众读者看完忽悠两句－－
乱讲在所难免。为无益事，因此谈不上抛砖引玉，不过批评指教总归欢迎，拜谢先。
这本书小贵，我兴致勃勃买了翻开一看contents就觉得象thesis（读完了觉得这个文风
其实很不错，即使最为消遣－－干净、有效），还发现。。。总之感觉很坑爹；不过读
完倒觉得很不错，big picture之外（副作用比如，觉得法国在欧洲，夹在英德俄之间
真是独立不群。。。），给了我不少读书的pointers。除了所谓宏观经济学之外，主坑
没有提到还有微观经济学，数学模型。。。arrow同学云云。。。
顺便感叹世风日下，policy making和娱乐业比如电影工业一样，一代不如一代：记得
读到一段chapter篇首的引文，一般都是牛人么，扫了下，厉害、佩服！赶紧highlight
，highlight完翻个页，落款是president reagon XXX 发言，囧，大家拼代笔也一样拼
不过reagon哈。。。政治衰落的同时也是（neoliberalism）学派发展到后来的衰弱－
－这与作者描述的not at all inevitable的历史进程不同，衰落恐怕在所难免。。。
匆匆跟着作者见证这些之后，再回头看popper深入浅出大作比如《unended quest》令
我这样少年时鄙视古典的无知小辈顿生仰慕和感动。
仰慕
collectivism
三位
【在 E*******r 的大作中提到】
: http://www.economist.com/node/21564533
: 我本人虽然不通文、理，因为近世两位德语作家的关系对奥地利，奥匈帝国［＊］文化
: 在20c的命运、作用一直有兴趣，我对socially influential，seminal的理论也一直仰慕
: ，因此看到这篇书评后，就去amazon买了kindle version，bedtime一目十行了一下，
: 完全忘记前，挖个小坑。
: 我个人印象本书主要两部分，哲学思潮的发展，及其影响下transatlantic （汉译是跨
: 大西洋么？英美?）policy making的变迁。前1/3概述neoliberalism背后哲学思潮：也
: 是我比较感兴趣的所谓Austrain school下学者对WWI,II inter-war期间collectivism
: ，即包括德国national socialism和俄国totalaritarism的反思、批判；介绍最知名三位
: Hayek, Popper, 还有一位稍年长的Mises的观点、影响；接下来本书大部分时间讨论
| P*****s
发帖数: 2150 | 3 你是鹅mm吗
行文风格说话口气都挺像。。呵呵
仰慕
collectivism
三位
【在 E*******r 的大作中提到】
: http://www.economist.com/node/21564533
: 我本人虽然不通文、理，因为近世两位德语作家的关系对奥地利，奥匈帝国［＊］文化
: 在20c的命运、作用一直有兴趣，我对socially influential，seminal的理论也一直仰慕
: ，因此看到这篇书评后，就去amazon买了kindle version，bedtime一目十行了一下，
: 完全忘记前，挖个小坑。
: 我个人印象本书主要两部分，哲学思潮的发展，及其影响下transatlantic （汉译是跨
: 大西洋么？英美?）policy making的变迁。前1/3概述neoliberalism背后哲学思潮：也
: 是我比较感兴趣的所谓Austrain school下学者对WWI,II inter-war期间collectivism
: ，即包括德国national socialism和俄国totalaritarism的反思、批判；介绍最知名三位
: Hayek, Popper, 还有一位稍年长的Mises的观点、影响；接下来本书大部分时间讨论
| j******n
发帖数: 21641 | 4 刚看你主贴正疑惑怎么没提微经数模..
生，
highlight
【在 E*******r 的大作中提到】
: 囧，干活procrastination之余挖了个大面积坑－－罪过、罪过，为无益事，谴有涯生，
: disclaim一下哈。专业的同学们包含一下。冒犯了，呵呵，大众读者看完忽悠两句－－
: 乱讲在所难免。为无益事，因此谈不上抛砖引玉，不过批评指教总归欢迎，拜谢先。
: 这本书小贵，我兴致勃勃买了翻开一看contents就觉得象thesis（读完了觉得这个文风
: 其实很不错，即使最为消遣－－干净、有效），还发现。。。总之感觉很坑爹；不过读
: 完倒觉得很不错，big picture之外（副作用比如，觉得法国在欧洲，夹在英德俄之间
: 真是独立不群。。。），给了我不少读书的pointers。除了所谓宏观经济学之外，主坑
: 没有提到还有微观经济学，数学模型。。。arrow同学云云。。。
: 顺便感叹世风日下，policy making和娱乐业比如电影工业一样，一代不如一代：记得
: 读到一段chapter篇首的引文，一般都是牛人么，扫了下，厉害、佩服！赶紧highlight
| E*******r
发帖数: 308 | 5 en, me, poorly written as always, among many others, one unforgivable typo:
book title "the road to serdom" should be "the road to serfdom"
【在 P*****s 的大作中提到】
: 你是鹅mm吗
: 行文风格说话口气都挺像。。呵呵
:
: 仰慕
: collectivism
: 三位
| E*******r
发帖数: 308 | 6 the road to serfdom的condensed version，窃以为格调太低，无奈一直找不到好排版
（ps. amazon上此书definite edition的1-score review很有趣，讲了一则hayek
的ws 8g，姑妄听之姑妄听之）。最近发现hayek一本论文集"a tiger by the tail"（
3rd ed)，饶有兴味的是它的出版时间－－2009年。Introduction中说:'Our current
downturn is fast becoming the lengthiest and most severe of the post-WWII
era. Entering its fourteenth month, it has already surpassed the average
length of the last six recessions ...'这一情景下hayek追随者的立场、努力引起
我巨大的好奇。
被这好奇激发，再灌点小水。
F.A.Hayek，老套的说，the most consequential mainstream right thinker, period
. 面对、反思二战间被摧残的individual freedom，Hayek坚定鼓吹individual
liberty grounded in the free market...认为经济自由的丧失是个体自由丧失的原因
。然而Hayek反对导致经济自由丧失的central planning的一大缘由，即所谓“不可能
收集到足够充分信息作出optimal决策，必须以来autonomous的free market”，我十分
不满。假如存在某种途径，借助它我们能够预先获取足够社会supply／production信息
，是否可以允许suppress individual的central planning呢；假如我们有能力作出
optimal 的central decision，totalitarianism是否也是合理的呢？
我因此怀疑hayek是否切中collectivism要害。
一方面，相比之下，popper的（所谓）历史观点的对collectivism的批评对我的吸引力
大许多。比如这里断章取义的引文们［1］
另一方面，hayek在the road to serfdom condensed version中鼓吹free market
based liberty这一方案完全不能令我信服，比如
"The constant changing conditions of demand and supply of different
commodities can never be fully known or quickly enough disseminated by any
one center. Under competition --- and under no other economic order --- the
price system automatically records the relevant data."
此处漏洞甚多，free market是否是唯一autonomous system可行的方案很不显然；实际
上free market本身没有magic，它所以能协同individual participant，重要手段是
price --- a globally established/enforced entity.
但同时又不乏许多敏锐讲法，比如:
"Freedom in this sense is, of course, merely another name for power or
wealth. The demand for the new freedom are thus only another name for the
old demand for a redistribution of wealth."
这里的redistribution of wealth不仅敏锐，简直深刻！[3]
尤其对collectivsim和central planning的作为体制的弱点的观察，非常有趣：
Planning leads to dictatorship because dictatorship is the most effective
instrument of coercion and, as such, essential if central planning on a
large scale is to be possible。又如[2]
最后，hayek反对central planning的重要（逻辑）依据，所谓我们无法收集足够
planning所需信息，或更广泛说 Our knowledge is inherently and severely
limited wherever it concerns complex phenomena，单独从我的cs背景看，很有实际
意义启发，具体比如今日Internet，宽泛比如distributed computer system，某种意
义上说我们都着手同一个问题--- In an network of independent nodes, how to
achieve some global goal, through the (cooperation, competition of)
collection of autonomous nodes without enforcing global constraints, in
particular, without the invention of a central controller?
Hayek虽未直接推动cs，在cognitive science确有直接贡献：he is "recognized as
having invented, contemporaneously with but independently of D.O.Hebb, the
connectionist or parallel distributed processing model of the mind"
[1]
“Plato, Popper argued, was the first to set up the collective greater
than the individual. The collective was embodied in the state, which was
the vehicle of human development or disintegration. ... Plato revealed
himself, according to Popper, not as a progressive but as a totalitarian
whose ruling class was based, like others, on racial, tribal, and economic
interests.
Why did Plato try to attack individualism? I think he knew very well what he
was doing when he trained his guns upon this position, for individualism,
perhaps even more than equalitarianism [which Popper distinguished from
egalitarianism, ...] was a stronghold in the defenses of the new
humanitarian creed. The emancipation of the individual was indeed the great
spiritual revolution which had led to the breakdown of tribalism and to the
rise of democracy. Plato's uncanny sociological intuition shows itself in
the way in which he invariably discerned the enemy whenever he met him.
Popper's other quarry were Hegel and Marx, who in his view built on the
tradition begun by Plato and Aristotle. ..."
Hegel's success was the beginning of the "age of dishonesty" (as
Schopenhauerdescribed the period of German Idealism) and of the "age of
irresonposibility" (as K. Heiden characterizes the age of modern
totalitarianism); first of intellectual, and later, as one of its
consequences, of moral irresponsiblity; of a new age controlled by the magic
of high-sounding words, and by the power of jargon.
It seems as if historicist ideas easily become prominent in times of great
social change. There can be little doubt, I believe, that Heraclitus's
philosophy is an expression of a feeling of drift; ... It appears to be more
than a mere coincidence that Hegel, who adopted so much of Heraclitus'
thought and passed it on to all modern historicist movements, was a
mouthpiece of reaction against the French Revolution.
If Hegel's dialectics provided the intellectual cover for a virulent new
form of totalitarianism through its effacement of contradiction through
synthesis, Marx had mounted an attack on the modern and open mode of
economic organization: capitalism."
[2]... the unscrupulous are likely to be more successful in a society
tending toward totalitarianism. ... The old socialist parties were inhibited
by their democratic ideals; they did not possess the ruthlessness required
for the performance of their chosen task. It is characteristic that both in
Germany and in Italy the success of fascism was preceded by the refusal of
the socialists parties to take over the responsibilities of government. ...
to weld together a closely coherent body of supporters, the leader must
appeal to a common human weakness.
[3] distribution of wealth方面，想起希腊人对democracy的见解，觉得有趣，引用
一下:"Oligarchy was a conspiracy of the rich to rob the poor and the
democracy a conspiracy of the poor to rob the rich."顺便提一下他们对power的
见解“Power was there to be used to further one's own interests or the
interets of the group to which one belonged.”
本书结尾，作者讨论2007-08房贷危机，比较和同由free maket引发的1930s危机说有两
大区别，一是这一次policy makers are merciless, 二是（我当时心想这回没有新的
救世者了）没有新的keynes了。
【在 E*******r 的大作中提到】
: en, me, poorly written as always, among many others, one unforgivable typo:
: book title "the road to serdom" should be "the road to serfdom"
|
|
