Overall I very much enjoyed reading Lind's book. My main complaint is he is overly technologically deterministic. Thus, I do have a squabble with what Lind believes drives history, but I do not have any squabble with his primary argument, i.e. the historical emergence of contradictions and inconsistencies between social institutions, on one the hand, and regulations, laws and legislations of social protection on the other.
The book sets out to demonstrate that Henry Ford was wrong to declare: "History is more or less bunk" (p. 17). Lind argues that history is crucial for understanding United States today. Lind follows Joseph Schumpeter in arguing that there have been three major technological transformations in U.S. history (p. 5). According to Lind each technological transformation has changed the republic itself. The initial American republic was preindustrial, but quickly gave way to the first industrial revolution founded on water and steam power, fueled by cotton production (pp. 81 - 186). The second industrial revolution ushered in the third American "republic" and was driven by the automobile, electricity and mass communication (pp. 187 - 392). The third industrial revolution occurred with the emergence of information technology (pp. 393ff), and seems to be ushering in a transformation toward a fourth republic.
The essence of Lind's book is that eras of technological change correspond to eras of political change with respect to regulations, laws and political institutions. However, whereas Schumpeter argued that technological change happens abruptly, Lind emphasizes changes in regulations, laws, and institutions do not! Instead, regulations, laws, and institutions lag behind the technological change for several decades, manifesting social crises (p. 453). Respectively, the transition from a preindustrial to industrial economy was mediated by the American revolution; the transition from the first industrial revolution to the second by the American civil war and first great depression; and the second industrial revolution to the thrid mediated by WWI, the (second) Great Depression, and WWII.
Key for Lind is that contemporary United States is on the verge of another great transformation. The policy reforms from the New Deal, Bretton Woods, etc. have become obsolete, but new and adequate reforms, laws, regulations and institutions have not yet emerged. The regulator systems, the welfare state, and the ways by which we governor the macroeconomy are rooted in the 1930 New Deal/Bretton Woods, while the economy has radically transformed.
Lind underscores the fact that our laws governing corporations were developed first in 1890 and amended in the 1940s when banking and manufacturing were national in character. Today finance and production are international and transnational in character. Likewise, the New Deal unemployment compensation was designed for mass production, whereby layoffs were literally "layoffs", i.e. temporary, and unemployment compensation adequate. Today layoffs are not layoffs at all, but permanent firings and New Deal unemployment compensation completely inadequate and often inappropriate. This is mainly because the duration of unemployment today is far greater than in the past, but also because laid-off workers today often need new training to find new employment.
The relationship between transnational corporations, government, and citizens are in the process of a great transformation. Lind urges that we not view government and transnational corporations as adversaries, but as partners to enrich the quality of life of citizens.
The United States needs a new infrastructure (p. 466) for which business, government and citizens will need to cooperate to get this accomplished successfully. Relatedly, "America's decisions about how to treat corporations must be influenced by the polices of other countries" and the relationships these other countries have between their corporations and public agencies. "If other nations rely on state-owned enterprises or national champions, the United States may have no choice but to compete by using similar methods" (p. 464) or suffer the fate of a competitive disadvantage.
This is a well presented and well-argued book. The argument is provocative and interesting. Nonetheless, the argument need not be so overly technologically deterministic. History and its development and change is far more political and social then Lind would have it. This however does not change the manifestation of historical contradictions and inconsistencies between political institutions, on the one hand, and the regulations, laws, and political production legislations for citizens on the other hand, which Lind is underscoring in this book.
I also find important Lind's emphasis that political reaction, to these manifest contradictions and inconsistencies, tend to be nostalgic and reactionary. This institutionalizes regulations, laws, and protections appropriate for a previous era, but not necessarily appropriate for new social circumstances. In other words, a call for a New New Deal or a call for political favor for small business may be highly inadequate. History is not likely to inform us to the policy and institutions to we should implement for the future, but it can inform us of a strong reactionary bias we may want to avoid.
Very enjoyable read.
