by Maximilian Kasy · 15 Jan 2025 · 209pp · 63,332 words
that sidestep any reference to preferences, and that do allow us to make comparisons across people. One of these alternatives is the framework proposed by John Rawls in his famous A Theory of Justice. In addition to fundamental rights, Rawls discusses what he calls primary goods. These primary goods are basic resources
…
principle, measurable and, as such, allow for comparisons across people. There is no reference to subjective preferences in the definition of primary goods. Building on John Rawls’s approach, Amartya Sen proposed to focus on capabilities. Capabilities are the effective options available to us. They are like the set of constraints that
by Michael Huemer · 29 Oct 2012 · 577pp · 149,554 words
to force parties to do so. 3.4 Hypothetical consent and ethical constraints 3.4.1 Rawls’s contract theory as an account of authority John Rawls, the most influential political philosopher, advances a hypothetical social contract theory. 3.4.2 Could agreement be reached? There is no reason to think agreement
…
that we might alter our motivations in such a way that the conditions for legitimacy would become satisfiable in the future. In his later work, John Rawls takes a view similar to Nagel’s view of the conditions for political legitimacy, though he seems more sanguine about the prospects for agreement. Rawls
…
be unreasonable to reject the arrangement. 3.4 Hypothetical consent and ethical constraints 3.4.1 Rawls’s contract theory as an account of authority John Rawls is, by far and without question, the most influential political philosopher of the last hundred years. As a rough indicator, a search for the keyword
…
. The most respected contemporary political philosophers usually employ language reminiscent of legalese. Consider a representative passage from the most celebrated political thinker of recent times, John Rawls: I should now like to comment upon the second part of the second principle, henceforth to be understood as the liberal principle of fair equality
…
ethical questions frequently have no easy answers. 7.5.2 Process versus substance In an early article defending the Fair Play Account of political obligation, John Rawls takes as his central question, ‘How is it possible that a person, in accordance with his own conception of justice, should find himself bound by
…
Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility’, Journal of Political Economy 63: 309–21. ——. 1975. ‘Can the Maximin Principle Serve as a Basis for Morality? A Critique of John Rawls’s Theory’, American Political Science Review 69: 594–606. Hart, H. L. A. 1955. ‘Are There Any Natural Rights?’ Philosophical Review 64: 175–91. ——. 1958
by Burkhard Wehner · 10 Jan 2019
plausible answer. That existing democratic procedures would not be adequate to basic income projects can be inferred from experience, but equally convincing from philosophical arguments. John Rawls, in A Theory of Justice (Rawls 1971), argued that decision makers on distributional justice should be disinterested persons for whom nothing personal is at stake
by John J. Mearsheimer · 24 Sep 2018 · 443pp · 125,510 words
, since it aims to deal with political problems in the legal system, not the political arena. John Gray captures this point in his assessment of John Rawls’s thinking: “The central institution of Rawls’s ‘political liberalism’ is not a deliberative assembly such as a parliament. It is a court of law
…
powers for the benefit of mankind.”27 The most prominent progressive liberals over the past fifty years include Ronald Dworkin, Francis Fukuyama, Steven Pinker, and John Rawls. Fukuyama’s famous 1989 article “The End of History?,” which argued that with the fall of communism the question of the ideal form of government
…
liberalism, and by the early twentieth century it was the dominant form of political liberalism in American and British politics. Its king of thought is John Rawls. The key indicator of liberal progressivism’s triumph is that the interventionist state, committed in its liberal form to fostering economic opportunity as well as
…
has long been widespread in the United States, as Louis Hartz makes clear in The Liberal Tradition in America. It is also on display in John Rawls’s The Law of Peoples, where he makes it clear that the best world is one populated solely with liberal democracies.96 John Locke also
…
most and how to weigh them when they come into conflict. The problem is especially complicated when promoting equality is thrown into the mix.102 John Rawls maintains that “applying liberal principles has a certain simplicity,” but this is only sometimes true.103 Think about hate speech. Liberals who are absolutists regarding
…
the window “when we are face-to-face not merely with defeat but with a defeat likely to bring disaster to a political community.”107 John Rawls too maintains that “political liberalism allows the supreme emergency exemption.”108 Countries or regions that have experienced great upheaval usually show a yearning for political
…
that rights apply equally to people everywhere. They talk about human rights, not national rights, and the former trump the latter. This effectively neutralizes hypernationalism. John Rawls, for example, focuses explicitly on “peoples” in his major treatise on international relations, showing that he understands the world is divided into different nations. (Peoples
…
.” As Christopher Layne notes, “These are not isolated comments. . . . American statesmen have frequently expressed this view.”3 This missionary zeal is hardly limited to policymakers. John Rawls, for example, writes, “It is characteristic of liberal and decent peoples that they seek a world in which all peoples have a well-ordered regime
…
to violence. There is no assurance that conflicts will be resolved peacefully. This is why virtually every liberal recognizes the need for a state—including John Rawls, who is especially optimistic about the hexing power of tolerance. Democracy faces the same problem. It too is predicated on the assumption that citizens will
…
Government, ed. Thomas P. Peardon (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1952), p. 4. Also see Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, pp. 138–39; John Rawls, The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited” (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 12–13, 17, 19. As Alan Ryan
…
theorists do not fit perfectly into one category or the other, although some do. John Locke, for example, is clearly a modus vivendi liberal, while John Rawls fits squarely in the progressive liberal category. Regardless, my main concern is not to categorize particular liberal scholars according to one school of thought or
…
” (BCSIA Discussion Paper 2000-07, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, April 2000), p. 18. Fischer also talks about the “emptiness of liberalism” (p. 59). John Rawls is well aware of the charge that liberalism is “distraught by spiritual emptiness.” While he notes that “spiritual questions” are certainly important, he believes that
…
dealing with them is not the government’s business; instead “it leaves them for each citizen to decide for himself or herself.” John Rawls, The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited” (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), p. 127. 18. Stephen Holmes, Passions and Constraint
…
. Waltz, “Kant, Liberalism, and War,” p. 331. 39. Rawls, The Law of Peoples, pp. 34, 85. 40. This quote and the subsequent one are from John Rawls, Political Liberalism, expanded ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005), p. xxxvii. 41. Rawls, The Law of Peoples, pp. 25, 125. For an elaboration of
…
each individual assesses a politician’s position on the issues he cares about most. 92. Most liberal theorists acknowledge that individuals have important social ties. John Rawls, for example, writes: “Each person finds himself placed at birth in some particular position in some particular society, and the nature of his position materially
…
affects his life prospects.” John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), p. 13. Moreover, in The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited
…
. 102. H. L. A. Hart, “Rawls on Liberty and Its Priority,” in Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983), pp. 223–47. 103. John Rawls, Political Liberalism, expanded ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005), p. 162. 104. Contrast the views of Jeremy Waldron, The Harm in Hate Speech (Cambridge
…
.” John M. Owen, “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace,” International Security 19, no. 2 (Fall 1994): 89. 8. Ikenberry, “Liberal Internationalism 3.0,” p. 72. 9. John Rawls, The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited” (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), p. 35. 10. Rawls, The Law of Peoples
…
in this paragraph are from Christopher Layne, “Kant or Cant: The Myth of the Democratic Peace,” International Security 19, no. 2 (Fall 1994): 46. 4. John Rawls, The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited” (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 93, 113. 5. Rawls, The Law of
…
point. Doyle, “Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs,” part 2, p. 344. The overlap between just war theory and democratic peace theory is reflected in John Rawls, The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited” (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991). Rawls’s discussion of just war theory, for
…
are from ibid. Also see Axelrod and Keohane, “Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy,” pp. 232–33. Chapter 8. The Case for Restraint 1. Scholars such as John Rawls and Michael Walzer are aware of the crusading impulse built into liberal theory, and go to considerable lengths to argue against using force to make
…
the world a better place. See Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations (New York: Basic Books, 2007); John Rawls, The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited” (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999). This discussion of Walzer’s views points up
by Robert Nozick · 15 Mar 1974 · 524pp · 146,798 words
of the State.© 1968, pp 21-22, reprinted by permission of Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Excerpts from A Theory of Justice by John Rawls are reprinted by permission of the publishers, Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press and Oxford: The Clarendon Press, and are copyright © 1971
…
theory to dissect and criticize other theories of distributive justice which do envisage a more extensive state, focusing especially on the recent powerful theory of John Rawls. Other reasons that some might think justify a more extensive state are criticized, including equality, envy, workers’ control, and Marxian theories of exploitation. (Readers who
…
very helpful written comments on the whole manuscript written at the Center from W. V. Quine, Derek Parfit, and Gilbert Harman, on Chapter 7 from John Rawls and Frank Michelman, and on an earlier draft of Part I from Alan Dershowitz. I also have benefited from a discussion with Ronald Dworkin on
…
; so it will be in his interests not to bind himself to participate. “THE PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS” A principle suggested by Herbert Hart, which (following John Rawls) we shall call the principle of fairness, would be of service here if it were adequate. This principle holds that when a number of persons
…
introduced by the Lockean proviso. SECTION II RAWLS’ THEORY We can bring our discussion of distributive justice into sharper focus by considering in some detail John Rawls’ recent contribution to the subject. A Theory of Justice 15 is a powerful, deep, subtle, wide-ranging, systematic work in political and moral philosophy which
…
these issues in footnote 4 of “On the Randian Argument,” The Personalist, Spring 1971. 2 For a clear statement that this view is mistaken, see John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971), pp. 30, 565-566. 3 Which does which? Often a useful question to ask, as
…
other riddles talks.” 4 Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. Translated by H. J. Paton, The Moral Law (London: Hutchinson, 1956), p. 96. 5 See John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, sects. 5, 6, 30. 6 See Gilbert Harman, “The Inference to the Best Explanation,” Philosophical Review, 1965, pp, 88-95, and
…
objection to viewing the condition as sufficient to Ronald Hamowy. CHAPTER 5 / The State 1 Herbert Hart, “Are There Any Natural Rights?” Philosophical Review, 1955; John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971), sect. 18. My statement of the principle stays close to Rawls’. The argument Rawls offers
…
itself in question here, the analysis is necessarily delicate.” Kenneth Arrow, “Economic Equilibrium,” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 4, p. 381. 3 See John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971), chap. 9, sect. 79, “The Idea of a Social Union,” and Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
…
Lipsey and Kelvin Lancaster, “The General Theory of Second Best,” Review of Economic Studies, 24 (December 1956), which has stimulated an extensive literature. 5 Compare John Rawls, Theory of Justice, sect. 63, n. II. It is not clear how extensively Rawls’ later text would have to be revised to take this point
by Don Watkins and Yaron Brook · 28 Mar 2016 · 345pp · 92,849 words
is seldom defined, and comes in a variety of flavors, but the most influential conception of equality of opportunity comes from the late egalitarian philosopher John Rawls. For Rawls, equality of opportunity does not refer simply to the absence of legal barriers to success (e.g., Jim Crow laws), but to equality
…
they are in the interest of all and in particular of the most disadvantaged social groups. . . . The ‘difference principle’ introduced by the U.S. philosopher John Rawls in his Theory of Justice is similar in intent.”18 This means, for instance, that if you earn a million dollars when most people make
…
a resounding “no.” Why not? For that, we need to turn to the philosopher Piketty cites in support of his theory: the late Harvard philosopher John Rawls. Most inequality critics today are economists, journalists, politicians, policy wonks, or political commentators. But most of their ideas are derived from egalitarian philosophers: Rousseau, Marx
…
(accessed May 28, 2015). 20. Ayn Rand, “What Is Capitalism?” reprinted in Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (New York: Signet, 1967), p. 9. 21. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), p. 62. 22. Ibid., p. 62. 23. G. A. Cohen, “Incentives, Inequality, and Community,” The
by Philippe van Parijs and Yannick Vanderborght · 20 Mar 2017
socially useful yet unpaid activities, to protecting our lives against forced mobility and destructive globalization, and to emancipating us from the despotism of the market. John Rawls Versus the Malibu Surfers The conception of distributive justice appealed to in the previous section is one that belongs to a �family of conceptions
…
worst prospects, not about equalizing prospects even at everyÂ�one’s expense. The most influential theory that fits this characterization is the one proposed by John Rawls, founding Â�father of the liberal-Â�egalitarian tradition and of conÂ�temporary poÂ�litiÂ�cal philosophy, in his 1971 A Theory of Justice. Does
…
demogrant—Â�that is, an unconditional basic income.33 Consequently, the Rawlsian case for basic income seems overwhelming. It just needs spelling out.34 Yet, John Rawls himself did not agree. He wrote that “Â�those who surf all day off Malibu must find a way to support themselves and would not
…
the end, Rawls himself remained more attracted to guaranteed employment and wage subsidies than to an unconditional basic income.42 Ronald Dworkin Versus the Beachcombers John Rawls’s theory of justice is the most influential but not the only member of the liberal-Â�egalitarian Â�family. The more philosophically inclined among
…
are committed, as we are, to a liberal-�egalitarian conception of social justice have been discussing this issue intensively since the 1990s. Some, including John Rawls, consider that the demands of egalitarian justice apply only within Vi able i n the G lo bal Era? M ulti -L evel Basi c
…
-Â�border transfers (see chapter 8). 2. Basic Income and Its Cousins 1. We do not discuss Â�here more comprehensive “realist utopias” such as John Rawls’s (1971: section 42, 2001: section 41) “property-Â�owning democracy,” an institutional framework that we believe is consistent with an unconditional basic income (see
…
2009, 2015. Reciprocity, in the sense entailed by the indictment of Â�free riding, is crucially distinct from the much broader “criterion of reciprocity” which John Rawls (1999: 14) says must be satisfied by any acceptable set of princiÂ�ples of justice. This criterion requires that the terms of cooperation should be
…
the poor’s tax be not levied by distinct parishes, but by one equal tax throughout the Â�whole corporation.” 25. Including, for example, in John Rawls’s (1999: 74) theory of international justice. 26. See Steiner 2003 for a critique of this “solidaristic patriotism” and, for a response, Van Parijs 2003b
…
Theory.” Politics and Society 15: 453–482. —Â�—Â�—. 1988. “Rawls face aux libertariens.” In Catherine Audard et al., Individu et justice sociale. Autour de John Rawls, 193–218. Paris: Le Seuil. —Â�—Â�—. 1990. “The Second Marriage of Justice and Efficiency.” Journal of Social Policy 19: 1–25. —Â�—Â�—. 1991
…
Â�Family. Reply to Seven Critics.” Analyse & Kritik 23: 106–131. —Â�—Â�—. 2002. “Difference PrinciÂ�ples.” In Samuel Freeman, ed., The Cambridge Companion to John Rawls, 200–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —Â�—Â�—Â�, ed. 2003a. Cultural Diversity versus Economic Solidarity. Brussels: De Boeck Université. http://Â�w ww╉.Â
by Branko Milanovic · 15 Dec 2010 · 251pp · 69,245 words
Chen, whose assistance on Chinese household surveys was invaluable; Leif Wenar, to whose advice regarding issues of political philosophy and in particular the interpretation of John Rawls’s works I have frequently turned and who has given me excellent comments on several parts of the manuscript; and Slaheddine Khenissi, for his vast
…
ruins of this dream was built the most famous recent attempt to provide some guidance on how to reconcile economic inequality and justice: that of John Rawls, an American political philosopher. Rawls, in enunciating his celebrated “difference principle” in A Theory of Justice published in 1971, argued that the justification for any
…
not rule out humanitarian duty of assistance to foreigners, but it also does not impose on rich people and rich countries anything beyond that. Philosopher John Rawls offered a different view of why global inequality is immaterial. Rawls saw the most desirable global arrangement as the one where conditions from his Theory
…
did not change even if the nationality of the rulers did. Vignette 3.8 Why Was Rawls Indifferent to Global Inequality? To those who know John Rawls through his A Theory of Justice, the question in this vignette’s title may come as a surprise. After all, Rawls is rightly associated with
…
goes back to John Harsanyi, “Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and the Inter-personal Comparisons of Utility,” Journal of Political Economy 63 (1955): 309-321. 17 John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, rev. ed. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), 13. 18 Ibid., 54. 19 Rawls indirectly excluded the situation where the absolute improvements
…
include the estimated incomes of the colonizers. 4 In approximately today’s PPP dollars. 5 British income distribution data for 2004. Vignette 3.8 1 John Rawls, The Law of Peoples (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999), 39. 2 “Peoples have a duty to assist other peoples living under unfavorable conditions that prevent
by Michael J. Sandel · 9 Sep 2020 · 493pp · 98,982 words
based on what people merit or deserve. Welfare State Liberalism Welfare state liberalism (or “egalitarian liberalism”) finds its fullest philosophical expression in the work of John Rawls, the noted twentieth-century American political philosopher. In his classic work A Theory of Justice (1971), Rawls argues that even a system of fair equality
…
New York Times , March 29, 2019, nytimes.com/2019/03/29/dining/chicken-paillard-recipe.html?searchResultPosition=1 . 20. See the discussion of Friedrich Hayek, John Rawls, and the luck egalitarians in chapter 3. 21. Reagan used “you deserve” 31 times, compared with a total of 27 uses by Presidents Kennedy, Johnson
…
of Liberty (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960), pp. 92–93. 20. Ibid., pp. 85–102. 21. Ibid., p. 93. 22. Ibid., p. 94. 23. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971). 24. Ibid., pp. 73–74. 25. Ibid., p. 75. 26. Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., “Harrison Bergeron
by Branko Milanovic · 10 Apr 2016 · 312pp · 91,835 words
national borders? The ne plus ultra of the nation-state? This is a question that political philosophers have thought about more than economists. Some, following John Rawls and his Law of Peoples (1999), believe that global equality of opportunity is not a significant issue and that every argument for it conflicts with
…
legal equality between the different groups that humans are divided into, but also substantively greater income and wealth equality. Existential equality is equivalent to what John Rawls calls meritocratic equality—what he views as the lowest level of equality, where all participants are legally free to pursue whatever career they choose but
by Rodrigo Aguilera · 10 Mar 2020 · 356pp · 106,161 words
by Keith Payne · 8 May 2017
by Paul Tucker · 21 Apr 2018 · 920pp · 233,102 words
by Mark Walker · 29 Nov 2015
by Jamie Bronstein · 29 Oct 2016 · 332pp · 89,668 words
by Max More and Natasha Vita-More · 4 Mar 2013 · 798pp · 240,182 words
by Peter Thiel and Blake Masters · 15 Sep 2014 · 185pp · 43,609 words
by Branko Milanovic · 9 Oct 2023
by Rob Reich · 20 Nov 2018 · 257pp · 75,685 words
by Jonathan Aldred · 1 Jan 2009 · 339pp · 105,938 words
by Brian Christian and Tom Griffiths · 4 Apr 2016 · 523pp · 143,139 words
by Duncan J. Watts · 28 Mar 2011 · 327pp · 103,336 words
by Robert Skidelsky and Edward Skidelsky · 18 Jun 2012 · 279pp · 87,910 words
by Michael Marmot · 9 Sep 2015 · 414pp · 119,116 words
by Sam Harris · 5 Oct 2010 · 412pp · 115,266 words
by Jan Narveson · 15 Dec 1988 · 371pp · 36,271 words
by Fredrik Deboer · 3 Aug 2020 · 236pp · 77,546 words
by Kathryn Paige Harden · 20 Sep 2021 · 375pp · 102,166 words
by Timothy Noah · 23 Apr 2012 · 309pp · 91,581 words
by Adom Getachew · 5 Feb 2019
by Branko Milanovic · 23 Sep 2019
by Francis Fukuyama · 1 Jan 2002 · 350pp · 96,803 words
by Paul Collier · 6 Aug 2024 · 299pp · 92,766 words
by Adrian Wooldridge · 2 Jun 2021 · 693pp · 169,849 words
by Thomas Piketty and Arthur Goldhammer · 7 Jan 2015 · 165pp · 45,129 words
by Timothy Garton Ash · 23 May 2016 · 743pp · 201,651 words
by George R. Tyler · 15 Jul 2013 · 772pp · 203,182 words
by Jamie Susskind · 3 Sep 2018 · 533pp
by Richard V. Reeves · 22 May 2017 · 198pp · 52,089 words
by Will Hutton · 30 Sep 2010 · 543pp · 147,357 words
by Thomas Sowell · 31 Aug 2015 · 877pp · 182,093 words
by Gene Sperling · 14 Sep 2020 · 667pp · 149,811 words
by Ingrid Robeyns · 16 Jan 2024 · 327pp · 110,234 words
by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri · 9 Mar 2000 · 1,015pp · 170,908 words
by Paul Collier · 4 Dec 2018 · 310pp · 85,995 words
by John Kay · 24 May 2004 · 436pp · 76 words
by Roger Scruton · 30 Apr 2014 · 426pp · 118,913 words
by Jonathan Haidt · 13 Mar 2012 · 539pp · 139,378 words
by Yascha Mounk · 26 Sep 2023
by Walter Isaacson · 9 Mar 2021 · 700pp · 160,604 words
by Richard Susskind and Daniel Susskind · 24 Aug 2015 · 742pp · 137,937 words
by John N. Reynolds and Edmund Newell · 8 Nov 2011 · 193pp · 11,060 words
by Commander R 'Mike' Crosley Dsc Rn · 5 Aug 2014 · 473pp · 156,146 words
by Nick Bostrom · 3 Jun 2014 · 574pp · 164,509 words
by Peter Temin · 17 Mar 2017 · 273pp · 87,159 words
by Sasha Abramsky · 15 Mar 2013 · 406pp · 113,841 words
by Daniel Susskind · 14 Jan 2020 · 419pp · 109,241 words
by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt · 14 Jun 2018 · 531pp · 125,069 words
by Daniel C. Dennett · 15 Jan 1995 · 846pp · 232,630 words
by Yochai Benkler · 14 May 2006 · 678pp · 216,204 words
by Jennifer Burns · 18 Oct 2009 · 495pp · 144,101 words
by Yoram Hazony · 3 Sep 2018 · 333pp · 86,628 words
by Linsey McGoey · 14 Sep 2019
by Cass R. Sunstein · 23 Aug 2006
by Deirdre N. McCloskey · 15 Nov 2011 · 1,205pp · 308,891 words
by Jesse Norman · 30 Jun 2018
by Michael P. Lynch · 21 Mar 2016 · 230pp · 61,702 words
by Noam Chomsky · 24 Feb 2012
by Helen Pluckrose and James A. Lindsay · 14 Jul 2020 · 378pp · 107,957 words
by Richard Beck · 2 Sep 2024 · 715pp · 212,449 words
by Michael J. Mauboussin · 14 Jul 2012 · 299pp · 92,782 words
by Parag Khanna · 18 Apr 2016 · 497pp · 144,283 words
by Thomas Piketty · 10 Mar 2014 · 935pp · 267,358 words
by Michel Aglietta · 23 Oct 2018 · 665pp · 146,542 words
by Guy Spier · 8 Sep 2014 · 240pp · 73,209 words
by Malcolm Harris · 14 Feb 2023 · 864pp · 272,918 words
by Sophie Pedder · 20 Jun 2018 · 337pp · 101,440 words
by Nigel Dodd · 14 May 2014 · 700pp · 201,953 words
by Andrew Keen · 1 Mar 2018 · 308pp · 85,880 words
by David Goodhart · 7 Sep 2020 · 463pp · 115,103 words
by Steven Pinker · 1 Jan 2002 · 901pp · 234,905 words
by Noam Chomsky · 7 Dec 2015
by Steven E. Landsburg · 1 May 2012
by Robert Skidelsky · 3 Mar 2020 · 290pp · 76,216 words
by Steven Pinker · 13 Feb 2018 · 1,034pp · 241,773 words
by Guy Standing · 3 May 2017 · 307pp · 82,680 words
by Peter Barnes · 29 Sep 2006 · 207pp · 52,716 words
by Robert H. Frank · 3 Sep 2011
by Julie Battilana and Tiziana Casciaro · 30 Aug 2021 · 345pp · 92,063 words
by John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge · 31 Mar 2009 · 518pp · 143,914 words
by Emrys Westacott · 14 Apr 2016 · 287pp · 80,050 words
by Stephen D. King · 14 Jun 2010 · 561pp · 87,892 words
by Joseph E. Stiglitz · 16 Sep 2006
by Tom Clark and Anthony Heath · 23 Jun 2014 · 401pp · 112,784 words
by Jacob Turner · 29 Oct 2018 · 688pp · 147,571 words
by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman · 14 Oct 2019 · 232pp · 70,361 words
by Kenneth Payne · 16 Jun 2021 · 339pp · 92,785 words
by Diane Coyle · 21 Feb 2011 · 523pp · 111,615 words
by Gabriel Weinberg and Lauren McCann · 17 Jun 2019
by Yascha Mounk · 19 Apr 2022 · 442pp · 112,155 words
by Peter Marshall · 2 Jan 1992 · 1,327pp · 360,897 words
by Cass R. Sunstein · 7 Mar 2017 · 437pp · 105,934 words
by Peter Boghossian · 1 Nov 2013 · 257pp · 77,030 words
by Shane Parrish · 22 Nov 2019 · 147pp · 39,910 words
by Andrew Sayer · 6 Nov 2014 · 504pp · 143,303 words
by Binyamin Appelbaum · 4 Sep 2019 · 614pp · 174,226 words
by Alice Schroeder · 1 Sep 2008 · 1,336pp · 415,037 words
by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein · 7 Apr 2008 · 304pp · 22,886 words
by Jim Holt · 14 May 2018 · 436pp · 127,642 words
by Thomas W. Malone · 14 May 2018 · 344pp · 104,077 words
by Raghuram Rajan · 26 Feb 2019 · 596pp · 163,682 words
by Nate Silver · 12 Aug 2024 · 848pp · 227,015 words
by Diane Coyle · 11 Oct 2021 · 305pp · 75,697 words
by Rob Reich, Mehran Sahami and Jeremy M. Weinstein · 6 Sep 2021
by Timothy Ferriss · 14 Jun 2017 · 579pp · 183,063 words
by Vito Tanzi · 28 Dec 2017
by Erwann Michel-Kerjan and Paul Slovic · 5 Jan 2010 · 411pp · 108,119 words
by Sheldon S. Wolin · 7 Apr 2008 · 637pp · 128,673 words
by Jeremy Rifkin · 31 Dec 2009 · 879pp · 233,093 words
by Jeff Walker · 30 Dec 1998 · 525pp · 146,126 words
by James Miller · 17 Sep 2018 · 370pp · 99,312 words
by Daniel Markovits · 14 Sep 2019 · 976pp · 235,576 words
by Bruce Schneier · 14 Feb 2012 · 503pp · 131,064 words
by Alex Zevin · 12 Nov 2019 · 767pp · 208,933 words
by Amitav Ghosh · 16 Jan 2018
by Charles Leadbeater · 9 Dec 2010 · 313pp · 84,312 words
by Wendy Brown · 6 Feb 2015
by Yuval Noah Harari · 29 Aug 2018 · 389pp · 119,487 words
by Peter Singer · 3 Mar 2009 · 190pp · 61,970 words
by Nicholas Shaxson · 11 Apr 2011 · 429pp · 120,332 words
by Simon McCarthy-Jones · 12 Apr 2021
by Eduardo Porter · 4 Jan 2011 · 353pp · 98,267 words
by Johan Norberg · 31 Aug 2016 · 262pp · 66,800 words
by John Kay · 30 Apr 2010 · 237pp · 50,758 words
by Richard Dawkins · 12 Sep 2006 · 478pp · 142,608 words
by Vivek Ramaswamy · 16 Aug 2021 · 344pp · 104,522 words
by Philip Mirowski · 24 Jun 2013 · 662pp · 180,546 words
by Jan Lucassen · 26 Jul 2021 · 869pp · 239,167 words
by Toby Ord · 24 Mar 2020 · 513pp · 152,381 words
by Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Thomas Ramge · 27 Feb 2018 · 267pp · 72,552 words
by Darrin M. McMahon · 14 Nov 2023 · 534pp · 166,876 words
by Linda McQuaig · 1 May 2013 · 261pp · 81,802 words
by Frank Partnoy · 15 Jan 2012 · 342pp · 94,762 words
by Paul Krugman · 28 Jan 2020 · 446pp · 117,660 words
by Steven Pinker · 14 Oct 2021 · 533pp · 125,495 words
by Roger Bootle · 4 Sep 2019 · 374pp · 111,284 words
by Francis Fukuyama · 28 Feb 2006 · 446pp · 578 words
by Tim O'Reilly · 9 Oct 2017 · 561pp · 157,589 words
by Robert Verkaik · 14 Apr 2018 · 419pp · 119,476 words
by Peter Gutmann
by Ivan Krastev · 7 May 2017 · 100pp · 31,338 words
by Pete Dyson and Rory Sutherland · 15 Jan 2021 · 342pp · 72,927 words
by David Bodanis · 25 May 2009 · 349pp · 27,507 words
by Orly Lobel · 17 Oct 2022 · 370pp · 112,809 words
by James O'Brien · 2 Nov 2018 · 173pp · 52,725 words
by Richard Pereira · 5 Jul 2017 · 177pp · 38,221 words
by David Graeber · 13 Aug 2012 · 284pp · 92,387 words
by John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge · 1 Sep 2020 · 134pp · 41,085 words
by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett · 1 Jan 2009 · 309pp · 86,909 words
by Kurt Andersen · 14 Sep 2020 · 486pp · 150,849 words
by Kentaro Toyama · 25 May 2015 · 494pp · 116,739 words
by Adam Becker · 14 Jun 2025 · 381pp · 119,533 words
by Ian Dunt · 15 Oct 2020
by Robert D. Putnam · 10 Mar 2015 · 459pp · 123,220 words
by Max Brooks, John Amble, M. L. Cavanaugh and Jaym Gates · 14 May 2018 · 278pp · 84,002 words
by Benjamin R. Barber · 5 Nov 2013 · 501pp · 145,943 words
by Broughton Coburn · 29 Apr 2013 · 313pp · 95,361 words
by Lawrence Lessig · 4 Oct 2011 · 538pp · 121,670 words