The Poverty Of Communism
Most of the articles brought together here, all previously published in Commentary and elsewhere, are intended to show how badly communist countries (the U.S.S.R., China and Cuba as prime examples) have done in raising living standards and eradicating poverty, as compared both with their own public professions and with the record of noncommunist developing countries. The case is well argued, with full and critical use of available statistics. One of the principal pieces, however, is on a quite different topic: a critique of Seweryn Bialer, both of his career and of his book The Soviet Paradox. It fits Eberstadt's general thought, or bias, that many who write on communist policy and performance are either purveyors or victims of deceit.
Related
The conventional wisdom is that U.S. multinationals exploit foreign workers, but the glare of 1990s publicity is driving many firms to export human rights.
The disappearance of work and widespread dislocation in Europe and the United States pose once again the nineteenth-century "Social Question": how to secure economic progress in light of the political and moral threat posed by the condition of the working class? The solution then was state action, which, contrary to today's neoliberal orthodoxy, fostered economic growth. The state cannot be abandoned now; Europeans won't go for it. It is the only protection from global market forces and the only forum for politics. But the left must stop protecting the status quo and give up unaffordable policies if it is to bring in the excluded and avert extremism.
In his new book, Amartya Sen adds a moral dimension to development economics that gives broader meaning to the term "quality of life."

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.