Rose D. Friedman (–2009)

I decided to revisit Free to Choose almost four decades after first reading it because Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism strongly suggested that Milton Friedman, or at least the ideas and policies he championed, had some explaining to do.

At the time Free was published, several events recounted in Klein’s book already lay in the recent past. I wondered, did Free talk at all about them? If so, would it claim that the acts described in Shock were expressive show more of Free’s sunny capitalistic optimism? Worth finding out, I thought, since the events Klein described were less than sunny and more like extinction of national independence, more like deploying any means possible to achieve arguable goals, more like the dungeon of a violent medieval torturer laboring at behest of a capitalist cabal.

Now, I’ve long been influenced by what Free to Choose advocates because free market capitalism can be more dynamic, creative, and rewarding than the results of central economic planning. But I am appalled at what Klein catalogues in The Shock Doctrine.

In the Introduction to Free to Choose, Milton and Rose Friedman note that “Adam Smith’s key insight was that both parties to an exchange can benefit and that, so long as cooperation is strictly voluntary, no exchange will take place unless both parties do benefit. No external force, no coercion, no violation of that freedom is necessary to produce cooperation among individuals all of whom can benefit.” They go on to say that “The combination of economic and political power in the same hands is a sure recipe for tyranny.” A good warning.

However, the “shock doctrine” criticized by Klein violates “Adam Smith’s key insight” in the most extreme way by applying violence or its threat against all parties who do not want to cooperate. Instead of being “strictly voluntary,” it is strictly coercive. As the Friedmans write, “The armed robbers’ ‘Your money or your life’ offers me a choice, but no one would describe it as a free choice, or the subsequent exchange as voluntary.” Yet that is the effect of acts described in The Shock Doctrine. The purpose of the violations Klein reports are to lodge economic power with those who do the violating, or with corporate entities or plutocrats on whose behalf the violations are executed. It is not an ethos of cooperative benefit; it is an ethos to permit creating victims when asserting the will of the powerful. That Friedman and allied policy gurus have supported such measures is central to Klein’s book and must be part of the reckoning a concerned person undertakes.

As it happens, Free to Choose is not the right book with which to make that reckoning. It focuses on domestic economic issues rather more than the issues in other countries. While that made my second reading less fruitful than hoped, it remains a good book for understanding the Friedmans’ thought. Well presented, chatty rather than academic, the Friedmans seem like friendly if persistent relatives who just want you to understand their version of a better world. You could emerge from it a cheerleader for free market capitalism. If you do, I’d still urge that you attend to Naomi Klein’s assertions and the questions she raises. Does supporting free market capitalism in our own country require that we coercively interfere with economic decisions other countries make when pursuing their own aims, even if we think they could do better for themselves by doing what we want? Is that respecting the ideals of freedom? Of sovereignty? Of independence? Or peace? Can one simultaneously be for peace and for free markets in a corporatist world? If yes, how make it happen? Not, I’ll protest, by doing the horrific things described in The Shock Doctrine. show less

This has been part of my self-education on the roots and vacillations of the American financial eco-system. I was amazed to learn how such "hot topics" as school vouchers, etc. were so well thought out and analyzed even in the time of this book. The indictment of our government-directed economy as drifting socialist and toward inflation was particularly enlightening.

These troubling economic times are making me go back and see what went wrong. The ideas of school vouchers and welfare reform, show more I had no idea they were so well-defined for so long! I long for real, small, unobtrusive government. show less

A super super book, packed with fantastic insight into how greater personal freedom and smaller government leads to a more prosperous people. Better even than Henry Hazlett's book. which was written some thirty years prior to this one. As this one was written thirty years ago, we must be due for another one soon. Each chapter packed with interesting information which is easy to digest. If only I had read this when it was published - I was studying economics at the time at A level and it show more could have made a huge impact bringing the syllabus to life. Some highlights would include Jim Callaghan's speach at the labour party conference in 1976 explaining "We used to think that you could spend your way out of resession and increase employment by cutting taxes and boosting government spending. Let me tell you, in all candor, that that option no longer exists; and that insofar as it ever did exist, it only ever worked by injecting ever bigger doses of inflation into the economy followed by higher levels of unemployment as the next step. That is the history of the past twenty years". Haven't we learned anything? show less

I bought this book back in the "good old days" when you could purchase a hardcover book for less than ten dollars. Due to the inflationary policies that Milton Friedman warns about, and that he provides a cure for, a comparable book today carries a price tag more than double the price of the book I purchased. It was a good investment.
In the book, Milton Friedman and his wife discuss the principles of the Free Market. It is this discussion, based on the foundation laid earlier in Capitalism show more and Freedom, that underscores the tyranny of unlimited government. They discuss lessons that we have not learned and taken to heart, for if we had done so we would not be facing the debt crisis of the Twenty-first century. I would only question the author's optimism. He titled the last chapter "The Tide is Turning" and it may have done so, if only slightly, in some Western European countries. But the level of economic control and bureaucratic bullying has only grown worse in the United States over the last thirty years. Fortunately, the principles discussed in Free to Choose are timeless and we can turn or return to them at any time. We only have to choose freedom. show less