The New Industrial State (The James Madison Library in American Politics, 2)

Whether you agree with his political views or not, John K. Galbraith is always a pleasure to read. If you are interested in "economic philosophy", you cannot go wrong with any of his books.

The book arrived in excellent condition. Thank you!

The order was placed at the same time as another book which arrived 2 weeks quicker despite being shipped at the same time. More effort might have been made to keep me informed. Other than that the book arrived it was in good condition and was what I wanted.

If only the present Federal Reserve Chairman as well as the past and Furture Chairpersons could read and understand this book, the economic turmoils could be muted. This is the primer for all who engage in managing the ship of state. Withouth this knowledge only the cycles of collapse will endure.

I like his ideas about the excesses of capitalism and the war industry. If he were around today I bet he would be writing about ways to create socially responsible corporations.

This is a superb book. It is a book, however, that has become dated. Its datedness should not dissuade potential readers. The datedness of "The New Industrial State" has only changed the books relevance and importance. When the book was first published in 1967, it accurately described how the then modern corporation functioned, its power structure, and the motivations of individuals who guided the decision making and development of the corporation. This book should be understood to be part of a publication trilogy, starting with Galbraith's "Affluent Society," "The Industrial State," and "Economics and the Public Purpose." In my opinion "The Industrial State" is the apex of the series. It is however, the most technical of the three books. The "Affluent Society" being the most accessible. For economic academia the book was revolutionary, because it radically challenged microeconomic and macroeconomic textbook accounts of markets and market adjustments. Microeconomics was challenged on several fronts. The most important being the motivation of the `power brokers' of the (then) modern corporation, what Galbraith called the "technostructure." The technostructure is a complex and imperfectly defined "collective" of (especially) "technical" and "specialized" staff members at the midrange management level. It was the decision making of the technical and specialized staff members who really determined the development direction of the (then) modern corporation. This is revolutionary because the motivation of these staffers, or technostructure, was not one of profit, but instead "identity" with the group/staff and corporation and (marginal) "adaptation" of the company's goal toward their own. At a macroeconomic level Galbraith argues that it was not his beloved Keynesian interventionism which stabilized the post-WWII economy, but the massive capital contracts the U.S. government had with industrial capital (e.g. steel, rubber, chemical, etc.), mainly though the Pentagon and NASA. These contracts allowed for industrial companies to build inventories without worrying about sales or the business cycle. Galbraith argued, the (then) modern corporation is mainly concerned with its own stability and longevity. Stability and longevity required the corporation to become as enormous as possible. The enormity of the corporation's size required "planning" become its primary development activity. The planning goes on (1) between technical and specialized staffers and midrange and upper-management, e.g. human resource planning for internal consistency; (2) for research and development and technological growth; (3) for price stability, marketing, and reliability in demand, establishing external stability and consumer relevance; (4) for balance within the corporation, via collective bargaining with worker unions and predictability of payroll costs; and (5) for contracts with the State. Small business and entrepreneurial corporations far outnumbered the several 100 enormous corporations. The actual economic and business activity was dominated by the minority big/enormous corporations. This meant the American system was dual in institutional structure. One sector where big business predominated and the dynamics of "planning" ran supreme. The other where small business and the dynamics of the profit motivate ran supreme. This was a situation that businessmen well understand, but that policy economists and politicians failed to appreciate the full relevance and policy implications. In its fortieth anniversary publication, the institutional structure of the American economy has radically transformed. The technostructure is still necessary, but its power has been greatly, perhaps absolutely, diminished. Technological shifts and socioeconomic policy shifts have moved history and the world beyond Galbraith's "The New Industrial State." However, the book's importance has not been diminished, but merely shifted. The book's importance is no longer in describing the institutional structure of American capitalism, but understanding from were the now current system evolved. To draw a Darwinian metaphor, "The New Industrial State" is the missing link between the "just-in-time" production corporation and the entrepreneurial capitalists of Adam Smith (1776) thru Karl Marx (1867). "Just-in-time" production corporations contract significant portions (if not all) of their production from subcontractors. The prevailing role of the "planning" of The New Industrial State has been demoted. The corporation does not have to plan because a subcontractor can almost always be found, the subcontractors planning is only as long as the contract with a Wal-mart, or some other mega-corporation. This institutional shift toward "just-in-time" production does not make the technostructure obsolete, but it does diminish their power role within the corporation. It will be Galbraith's "The New Industrial State" which will allow us to fully understand the "Post-Industrial State." The "New Industrial State" should receive a wide and new generation of readers. It is an important book to understand a previous era, and a specific relationship between citizens, workers, business, and the public sector, a type of symbiotic embeddedness between each group. It is also an important book to understand how that specific relationship has be reconfigured, generating a type of disembeddedness between citizens/workers and business/public sector. "The New Industrial State" helps us understand why big moneyed lobbyists have come to dominate Washington, and how it could be, and was, different.

Not an excellent economist. Galbraith's style and ease of readability is almost second to none but there is little substance in this book. I would recommend Mises, Rothbard, or Hayek to any interested in economics. I will say this however, you can't know what you disagree with, nor why you do, if you don't read their work.With that said though the rating I gave was low I do think it is a necessary purchase and read so that one can make themselves familiar with many of the flawed arguments they will come into contact with.A biased or selective reader is a limited in knowledge.

John Kenneth Galbraith's "The New Industrial State" is a hallmark in economic thought. His work is both an extension and reformulation of his previous work "The Affluent Society". Galbraith spots fundamental contradictions throughout the modern field of economics. As always Galbraith is willing to attack all economists, liberals and conservatives alike, in search of the truthIn "The New Industrial State" Galbraith begins by looking at the modern composition of production. With small exception the mature corporation has become the central producer in the industrialized world. The mature corporation no longer seeks to maximize profits. It seeks, first, survival and, second, absolute growth. This means that corporations are held to maintain a minimum set of profits in order to prevent external influence on future decisions. Maximizing profits, and therefore increasing risk, is discouraged because with greater risk comes a greater chance of failing to maintain a minimum level of profit. After a minimum level of profit has been achieved it is the goal of the mature corporation to grow. By growing it gains greater influence over the economy and society at large.The reason for the rise of the mature corporation is because of technology. As production processes become more complex a greater need for planning becomes necessary. Without control of supply and demand it is extremely difficult to plan for a long production schedule (ex: 5 years). If, say, disposable income or consumer desires were to change then the mature corporation would fall into risk of bankruptcy or, at the very least, external finance (which threatens autonomy).In order to minimize risk the mature corporation must try to control supply and demand. The control of supply is done through a large degree of bargaining power with suppliers of material and through the use of unions. (Ironically, unions have become docile to the demands of the mature corporation and further its will.) In order to control demand the mature corporation relies on the government to stabilize aggregate demand. On the micro level the mature corporation manufactures artificial wants through marketing and public perception. While the mature corporation does not exhibit complete and total control over supply or demand they control both to a large extent.The reason why the mature corporation can exhibit such behavior is because of the division between management and ownership. The stockholders in a mature corporation have no input on management's decisions. The board of directors, indirectly chosen by management, choose the mature corporation's management. The traditional hierarchy of management is blatantly false due to the needs of teamwork and division of labor. Instead what is created is a "technostructure". It is the (headless) technostructure that inadvertently controls the economy. Very little of the United State's economy can be considered market based. The vast majority of the United States is a planned economy.According to Galbraith, "Increasing it will be recognized that the mature corporation, as it develops, becomes part of the larger administrative complex associated with the state. In time the line between the two will disappear... Though this recognition will not be universally welcomed, it will be healthy.. the autonomy of the technostructure is, to repeat yet again, a functional necessity of the industrial system." (CHXXXV p.393)

The book helps an understanding the diverse economic currents in a ever changing world.