A Panglossian pitch for the dubious proposition that Japan's so-called humanistic capitalism sets a classic example for Western industrial powers. Ozaki (Economics/California State at Hayward) may be on to something; at best, however, his tract earns a Scotch verdict, i.e., not proven. A naturalized American citizen, the author advances Japan's collaborative and consensual approach to commerce as a practicable alternative to the Darwinian ethos of traditional capitalism. By Ozaki's account, the paradigmatic system features corporations that compete as well as cooperate in organized rather than wholly free markets. Further, management and labor behave as though they, not stockholders, own the companies that employ them; executive pay-rates do not outstrip those of lower-echelon personnel by substantive margins; and decision-making is viewed as a shared responsibility, with every effort made to avoid layoffs. But Ozaki undermines his case with errors of omission and commission. For openers, he argues against concentrating economic power in the hands of the assumedly small number of fat cats who supply capital to business, overlooking the fact that most Americans are shareholders, if only by proxy. The author also has an outmoded concept of labor, largely ignoring the reality that brawny blue-collar workers are an endangered species. Nor does he mention his homeland's elite civil service, W. Edwards Deming, incomes policy, and other individuals or institutions that deserve credit for making Japan Inc. a feared global competitor. As recent scandals in the Japanese banking, electronics, and securities industries attest, moreover, the island nation's capitalists may have to clean up their act before they take it on the road. Lastly, Ozaki's prose style is decidedly irritating, tending toward what could be characterized as the unattributed passive voice (``It may be held...''; ``We may argue...''; ``It is often pointed out..,'' etc.). An ingenuous but utterly unpersuasive exercise that uses neoclassical economic theory as a stalking horse for greater egalitarianism in the US workplace and marketplace.

Pub Date: Sept. 27, 1991

ISBN: 4-7700-1549-6

Page Count: 212

Publisher: Kodansha

Review Posted Online: May 20, 2010

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 15, 1991

Did you like this book?

No Comments Yet

Striking research showing the immense complexity of ordinary thought and revealing the identities of the gatekeepers in our...


A psychologist and Nobel Prize winner summarizes and synthesizes the recent decades of research on intuition and systematic thinking.

The author of several scholarly texts, Kahneman (Emeritus Psychology and Public Affairs/Princeton Univ.) now offers general readers not just the findings of psychological research but also a better understanding of how research questions arise and how scholars systematically frame and answer them. He begins with the distinction between System 1 and System 2 mental operations, the former referring to quick, automatic thought, the latter to more effortful, overt thinking. We rely heavily, writes, on System 1, resorting to the higher-energy System 2 only when we need or want to. Kahneman continually refers to System 2 as “lazy”: We don’t want to think rigorously about something. The author then explores the nuances of our two-system minds, showing how they perform in various situations. Psychological experiments have repeatedly revealed that our intuitions are generally wrong, that our assessments are based on biases and that our System 1 hates doubt and despises ambiguity. Kahneman largely avoids jargon; when he does use some (“heuristics,” for example), he argues that such terms really ought to join our everyday vocabulary. He reviews many fundamental concepts in psychology and statistics (regression to the mean, the narrative fallacy, the optimistic bias), showing how they relate to his overall concerns about how we think and why we make the decisions that we do. Some of the later chapters (dealing with risk-taking and statistics and probabilities) are denser than others (some readers may resent such demands on System 2!), but the passages that deal with the economic and political implications of the research are gripping.

Striking research showing the immense complexity of ordinary thought and revealing the identities of the gatekeepers in our minds.

Pub Date: Nov. 1, 2011

ISBN: 978-0-374-27563-1

Page Count: 512

Publisher: Farrar, Straus and Giroux

Review Posted Online: Sept. 4, 2011

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Sept. 15, 2011

Did you like this book?

A deftly argued case for a new kind of socialism that, while sure to inspire controversy, bears widespread discussion.


A massive investigation of economic history in the service of proposing a political order to overcome inequality.

Readers who like their political manifestoes in manageable sizes, à la Common Sense or The Communist Manifesto, may be overwhelmed by the latest from famed French economist Piketty (Top Incomes in France in the Twentieth Century: Inequality and Redistribution, 1901-1998, 2014, etc.), but it’s a significant work. The author interrogates the principal forms of economic organization over time, from slavery to “non-European trifunctional societies,” Chinese-style communism, and “hypercapitalist” orders, in order to examine relative levels of inequality and its evolution. Each system is founded on an ideology, and “every ideology, no matter how extreme it may seem in its defense of inequality, expresses a certain idea of social justice.” In the present era, at least in the U.S., that idea of social justice would seem to be only that the big ones eat the little ones, the principal justification being that the wealthiest people became rich because they are “the most enterprising, deserving, and useful.” In fact, as Piketty demonstrates, there’s more to inequality than the mere “size of the income gap.” Contrary to hypercapitalist ideology and its defenders, the playing field is not level, the market is not self-regulating, and access is not evenly distributed. Against this, Piketty arrives at a proposed system that, among other things, would redistribute wealth across societies by heavy taxation, especially of inheritances, to create a “participatory socialism” in which power is widely shared and trade across nations is truly free. The word “socialism,” he allows, is a kind of Pandora’s box that can scare people off—and, he further acknowledges, “the Russian and Czech oligarchs who buy athletic teams and newspapers may not be the most savory characters, but the Soviet system was a nightmare and had to go.” Yet so, too, writes the author, is a capitalism that rewards so few at the expense of so many.

A deftly argued case for a new kind of socialism that, while sure to inspire controversy, bears widespread discussion.

Pub Date: March 10, 2020

ISBN: 978-0-674-98082-2

Page Count: 976

Publisher: Belknap/Harvard Univ.

Review Posted Online: Dec. 22, 2019

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Jan. 15, 2020

Did you like this book?

No Comments Yet