Book Review: David Christian – Origin Story: A Big History of Everything

David Christian – Origin Story: A Big History of Everything (New York: Little, Brown Spark, 2018).

A breezy, big-picture history of the universe in the tradition of Bill Bryson. On the plus side, Christian’s approach is less sensationalistic than Bryson’s. On the downside, that means it is a little less entertaining as well. But that’s only in relative terms. In absolute terms, this book is highly enjoyable, and I liked it better than Bryson’s. The early chapters, from the Big Bang on up to the early solar system, are strong on cosmology. From there, the emphasis changes to geology, cellular biology, anthropology, and then a little bit of economics and sociology and a guess at where technology is headed. Maybe not a book for specialists, but they would gain perspective from engaging outside their specialty—which is good all-around life advice as well.

Walter Williams, 1936-2020

Walter Williams passed away this week at age 84. He was the rare economist to succeed as both an academic and a popular communicator. His success came both despite and because of his growing up poor in Philadelphia. He and his sister were raised by a single mother. They lived in a housing project for much of his childhood, and they were on and off welfare for much of that time. But she set high standards for her children, and saw that they met them. In the introduction to Williams’s 1987 book All it Takes Is Guts: A Minority View, he thanked his mother, “who taught me to be independent, suspicious of the status quo, and ambitious.”

After a single semester of college in Los Angeles, he worked as a cab driver for a bit back in Philadelphia, then served in the Army. He was stationed in the Jim Crow south, and the experience was eye-opening. He committed several inspired acts of disobedience aimed at fighting the pervasive racism around him, which led to a failed attempt by one of his commanding officers to court-martial him, and a transfer to Korea. He also wrote a letter to President John F. Kennedy about racism in the military, and received a response from a higher-up in the Defense Department. This would not be the last of his writings to draw a response.

After the army, he worked as a probation officer, finished college, and earned his Ph.D. from UCLA at a time when its department was one of the country’s best. Williams spent his days in the company of world-class price theorists such as Armen Alchian, with whom he would remain friends until Alchian’s death in 2013. He also befriended James Buchanan, who would go on to win the economics Nobel for his role in founding public choice theory, and was briefly a UCLA faculty member during this period. He also met Thomas Sowell, who shares Williams’s gifts for clear reasoning and clear writing.

After bouncing around a few different academic positions, including Temple University and a year at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, he found his home in 1980 at George Mason University, where he would teach for the rest of his life.

Mason had been granted its independence from the University of Virginia less than a decade before, and had no reputation to speak of. The whole school, not just the economics department, was essentially still under construction. Williams played a major role in building up their economics department, which has produced two Nobel Prize winners—Buchanan in 1986 and Vernon Smith in 2002, who also won CEI’s Julian Simon Award in 2015. Many of today’s top economists either attended or teach at Mason.

Williams would not only become the department’s longtime chairman, he would continue to teach the first-year microeconomics course required of all Ph.D students. Most professors who achieve Williams’s level of fame drop their teaching responsibilities like a hot potato. Williams embraced it. His course became something of a rite of passage, and he had a way of pairing a no-nonsense demeanor with a sense of encouragement. He wanted his students to do well, but they had to earn it.

But there is that whole fame part. Like many academics, he had top-notch mentors and colleagues, such as Alchian, Buchanan, and Sowell. But his emphasis on classroom work also sharpened his ability to explain ideas in ways that people can understand them. This is what would give him a national reputation—along with the fact that he was unapologetic about where his reasoning led him, even when it was unpopular. And on issues from minimum wages to labor regulations to fighting racial discrimination, he often was unpopular.

Williams published roughly 150 scholarly articles in his career, which is more than most academics achieve. But this was only a fraction of his output. Of his 13 books, four are collections of his newspaper columns, which he continued to write until the end of his life. Few economists have had more readers than Walter Williams. He had a gift for communication, and he was not shy about using it.

Williams’s first famous book was 1982’s The State Against Blacks, which argued that many well-intended government policies actually made racial discrimination worse. Minimum wages, for example, not only lop off the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, as I’ve also argued, they actually make it easier for racist employers to discriminate. When the price of labor goes up, more people vie for fewer job openings. Employers have an easier time using non-price reasons for choosing whom to hire, such as hiring only people of their own race, or intentionally excluding Blacks or women.

Rent controls reduce the incentive to build new housing or to maintain existing housing. Minorities are worst affected by this, for similar reasons. With fewer housing spots available compared to demand, racist landlords can indulge their bigotry far more easily than they can in a free market.

Ball State University economist Steve Horwitz, who earned his Ph.D at George Mason and was CEI’s 2020 Julian Simon Award winner, said in a Facebook post, “*The State Against Blacks* was formative in my thinking about how markets and race interacted, and what a progressive libertarianism might look like. *South Africa’s War Against Capitalism* helped too.”

That book argued that Apartheid was the opposite of free-market policy. Markets punish discrimination, or at least make it more expensive. Apartheid was government regulation that forced even non-racists to discriminate, on pain of fines or worse. Markets bring people together so they can exchange for mutual benefit. It takes government policies such as Jim Crow and Apartheid to keep people apart—hence the very term “Apartheid.”

Horwitz’s point is an important one for the future of the free-market movement. Williams is an excellent role model here. Most free-market advocates have too narrow a view of things. Economic freedom is only one kind of freedom that markets can help preserve. Markets are also moral playgrounds, as George Mason economists Virgil Storr and Ginni Choi argue. In markets, people learn to trust and to be trustworthy. They learn that openness to strangers is an opportunity, not a threat. Everyone has something to offer, if you let them. Markets teach people that not only is discrimination is bad for business, it is also immoral.

Sound economic reasoning, such as Williams spent a career practicing, shows why the conventional policies people turn to in fighting discrimination are largely counterproductive. It also shows why markets are far more effective for achieving progressivism’s nobler goals than their usual policies. That dialogue needs to be more open; nothing was ever accomplished with silence.

If more classical liberals take the time to show how free markets, and not top-down policy making, can empower women, minorities, and the developing world, they can help reduce poverty, create opportunities for innovation, and reduce racism. Above all, markets create opportunities. For people who lack them, this is incredibly meaningful.

These are not always popular things to say, inside the liberty movement or out of it. But Williams didn’t mind. His reasoning is correct, as was his moral sense. So, he spoke up in print, on radio, and on television. While the fit does not seem natural, he was a frequent guest host for Rush Limbaugh’s talk radio program. Williams’s appearance in Milton Friedman’s 1980 Free to Choosetelevision series on PBS led to his own three-part PBS series in 1982, Good Intentions, based on The State Against Blacks. In his autumn years, Williams was the subject of the documentary “Suffer No Fools,” and wrote his autobiography, “Up from the Projects.” And he continued writing until almost the day he died.

Walter Williams set quite the example in his life and in his work. Now it is up to us to live up to it.

Book Review: Frans de Waal – Are We Smart Enough to Know How Smart Animals Are?

Frans de Waal – Are We Smart Enough to Know How Smart Animals Are? (New York: W.W. Norton, 2017).

The short answer to the title’s question is kind of, but not really. We can never truly get into even another human being’s head. It is impossible to tell is someone else sees the color red the same way you do, or feels hot and cold the same way. It is also clearly impossible to do this across species, which have different sensory thresholds–and in some cases, different senses–than we do.

But de Waal’s core argument is more about empathy and decency. You can tell a lot about a person by how they treat animals. By building up a persuasive case that animals have complex intellectual and emotional lives, de Waal gives good reasons for treating other species with respect. We are them, and they are us. Or, at least, we’re a lot closer than most people think.

Humans have three types of cone cells in our eyes to perceive colors, hence our three primary colors; birds have four. Mantis shrimp have 17. We will never see the world as they do. Cats and other nocturnal animals have more types of rod cells than humans do. These detect black-and-white and relative brightness, and are useful for low-light conditions. Insects have compound eyes, which are very different from our camera-style eyes. Butterflies can see ultraviolet light, which they use to assess potential mates. The UV-reflective scales on their wings wear away with age, so abundant UV reflections on their wings are indicators of youth and health for them, though humans will never know this.

But these differences are no reason to believe such animals lack intelligence. We do the same things ourselves, just in a different way. All animals live by the same four Fs: fighting, fleeing, feeding, and mating. We have evolved different ways of going about it, but the fundamentals are the same.

De Waal is also concerned with emotions. And yes, animals do feel many of the same emotions humans do. And again, our differences are more of degree than of kind. Animals feel pain, love, loss, hunger, and happiness. Maybe not in exactly the same way we do, but they do feel them.

Elephants and other animals mourn their dead, and even hold funeral services. Blood chemistry tests show that yes, your cat really does love you. Interactions with their owners release the exact same oxytocin “love hormone” that shows up in human blood when we interact with our loved ones.

Chimpanzees and bonobos—de Waal’s research specialty—have complicated social dynamics that require sophisticated emotional intelligence. They have similar notions of family and friendship, and they form complicated three-way alliances and rivalries that are very similar to the ones human nation-states build to maintain a balance of powers within the group–or in our case, global geopolitics. Our cousins, with whom we share a common ancestor as recently as six or seven million years ago, are different than each other, and from us. But the fundamentals are the same, and deserve more respect from humans.

Book Review: Jennifer Ackerman – The Genius of Birds

Jennifer Ackerman – The Genius of Birds (New York: Penguin, 2017).

Her occasional lapses into prophecies of ecological doom take away from the seriousness of her case, but Ackerman has written a fascinating look at avian intelligence. Despite their tiny brain size, many birds are highly intelligent in a wide variety of areas. “Bird brain” should be a compliment, not an insult.

Parrots and songbirds are keen linguists and mimics. Corvids—crows and jays—have a strong social intelligence, long memories, an ability to learn on par with human 5-year-olds in some areas, and show tool use. Some birds are also able to differentiate the works of different artists–even ones within the same style, such as impressionism.

Migratory birds have mastered a variety of methods and senses to find their way. They use a combination of landmarks, the sun and stars, barometric pressure, a built in genetic clock (fly south for a certain amount of days, then stop), listening for the differences in sound reflections between ocean and land, as well as changing odors.

Even hummingbirds, for all their hyperactivity and tiny size, show a keen memory for food sources and plan their routes to save precious energy. Scientists have even observed hummingbirds return to the same feeders each year within a day or two every spring when they return north.

There is also good reason for birds packing as much intelligence into as little brain size as possible–it saves weight. To fly, birds have to be as light as possible. Their bones are hollow. Their lungs can absorb oxygen on both the inhale and exhale, making them nearly twice as efficient as ours, and much lighter. They have light keratin beaks instead of heavy bone jaws. So of course evolution figured out ways to make the best possible use of small and lightweight brains.

Ackerman’s case for bird intelligence would have been further strengthened if she had discussed Gordon Tullock’s famous article “The Coal Tit as a Careful Shopper,” in which Tullock finds that birds have an intuition of the laws of economics.

The coal tit, a small bird in Britain, likes to eat a kind of grub that lives inside pine cones. When food is abundant, the bird will get the easiest grubs, and leave the more difficult-to-reach ones alone. That way it spends less time getting the calories it needs, and can use the freed time for other uses, such as attracting mates and avoiding predators.

When food is scarce, those calories become more valuable in comparison at the margin, and the coal tit changes its behavior to match. It will spend more time on each pine cone, getting even the most difficult-to-reach grubs, because doing so is better than alternative uses of its time and energy. This small creature is able to use economic principles such as the law of demand, marginal thinking, and opportunity costs to improve its odds of survival.

Book Review: Ben Wilson – Metropolis: A History of the City, Humankind’s Greatest Invention

Ben Wilson – Metropolis: A History of the City, Humankind’s Greatest Invention (New York: Doubleday, 2020).

A wide-ranging world history told through the lens of cities. Wilson bounces around between Asia, Europe, and America, and concludes in Lagos, Nigeria, which is well on its way to becoming one of the world’s major urban centers. Wilson feels at home discussing subjects as diverse as the Epic of Gilgamesh and its relationship to Uruk, the first big city; coffeehouse culture in 18th century London, with its undercurrents of political dissent and rebellion against social norms; the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and their fast but difficult recovery; and the birth of skyscrapers in jazz age New York and the dashed grand plans for remaking social orders in glass and steel. For a Brit, he is also surprisingly well-versed in the early history of hip-hop.

Wilson is a cheerful tour guide and has a conversational prose style that reads quickly. Metropolis would go well with any number of books, ranging from James C. Scott’s Against the Grain about the close relationship between early agriculture, the first cities, and the first governments; Monica Smith’s very similar Cities: The First 6,000 Years; and The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs, the influential urban economist who took on Robert Moses’ machine politics in New York City in the mid-twentieth century.

This Week in Ridiculous Regulations

Thanksgiving was rather different than most years, and not in a good way. Hopefully, with viable vaccines on the way, it will be back to normal in 2021. The number of new final regulations this year passed the 3,000 mark, and has already surpassed last year’s total with more than a month to go. The 2020 Federal Register surpassed 76,000 pages, and is already the Trump administration’s longest by more than 5,000 pages.Regulatory agencies issued new regulations ranging from milk flexibilities to electronic groundfish monitoring.

On to the data:

  • Last week, 73 new final regulations were published in the Federal Register, after 69 the previous week.
  • That’s the equivalent of a new regulation every two hours and 18 minutes.
  • Federal agencies have issued 3,025 final regulations in 2020. At that pace, there will be 3,302 new final regulations. Last year’s total was 2,964 regulations.
  • There were 35 proposed regulations in the Federal Register last week, for a total of 1,984 on the year. At that pace, there will be 2,166 new proposed regulations in 2020. Last year’s total was 2,170 proposed regulations.
  • Last week, agencies published 406 notices, for a total of 20,392 in 2020. At that pace, there will be 22,262 new notices this year. Last year’s total was 21,804.
  • Last week, 1,821 new pages were added to the Federal Register, after 1,692 pages the previous week.
  • The 2020 Federal Register totals 76,417 pages. It is on pace for 83,424 pages. The 2019 total was 70,938 pages. The all-time record adjusted page count (which subtracts skips, jumps, and blank pages) is 96,994, set in 2016.
  • Rules are called “economically significant” if they have costs of $100 million or more in a given year. Five such rules have been published this year. Four such rules were published in 2019.
  • The running cost tally for 2020’s economically significant regulations ranges from net savings of between $2.04 billion and $5.69 billion. 2019’s total ranges from net savings of $350 million to $650 million, mostly from estimated savings on federal spending. The exact number depends on discount rates and other assumptions.
  • Agencies have published 70 final rules meeting the broader definition of “significant” so far this year. 2019’s total was 66 significant final rules.
  • So far in 2020, 597 new rules affect small businesses; 24 of them are classified as significant. 2019’s totals were 501 rules affecting small businesses, with 22 of them significant.

Highlights from last week’s new regulations:

For more data, see Ten Thousand Commandments and follow @10KC and @RegoftheDay on Twitter.

Book Review: David Eagleman – Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain

David Eagleman – Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain (New York: Vintage, 2011)

Interesting and engaging, but second-rate compared to the leading works of the genre. Eagleman describes how the brain’s conscious and unconscious systems interact. The human brain turns out to be a wonderful economist. It is constantly taking in more information than it can process, and has evolved sophisticated, almost automatic algorithms to prioritize its resources to focus on what is important, and ignore what isn’t, to save energy. If it didn’t do this, our energy-hungry brain, which already accounts about a fifth of an average person’s calories burned despite being about 2 percent of body weight, would outpace what the body can provide it.

Along the way he gives the reader a tour of both famous and overlooked research, teaches brain anatomy, and at times turns philosophical. It also briefly name-checks Ryan Braun, one of my favorite baseball players, who won the National League MVP award around the time this book was written. As it turns out, the paths outfielders such as Braun take to catch flyballs are determined mostly unconsciously. Rather than direct routes to where the ball will likely land, even the best players take curving, circuitous routes that nobody would consciously follow. Same goes for hitters. The human eye cannot track a 90-mph fastball. Every swing is a guess, based on an unconscious algorithm. Deliberate thought simply isn’t fast enough.

Eagleman’s main public policy proposal is statistically-based sentencing for criminals, based on the likelihood of a person’s recidivism. This is not that far removed from the movie Minority Report, based on a dystopian Philip K. Dick story featuring a department of pre-crime, which punished people who have not committed crimes, but are about to.

Statistically-based sentencing proposal has two fatal flaws. One is a knowledge problem. Well-meaning experts cannot reliably predict who will re-offend, and who will not. Today’s most advanced experts might as well flip a coin, Eagleman points out. The second is a public choice problem—those experts are not always well-meaning.

Experts are subject to the same cognitive biases, mood swings, personal grudges and corruptibility as everyone else—which Eagleman describes elsewhere throughout the book. And the real-world government that would enact such a proposal would be influenced by electoral politics, by ideological and rent-seeking special interests, and would be bogged down by bureaucratic infighting and turf battles among prestige-seeking experts. Anyone interested in criminal justice reform should take a hard pass on Eagleman’s idea.

But Eagleman does offer up a good read on how the brain’s conscious and unconscious systems interact, and describes a lot of the research in an entertaining way. He does not operate at the same analytical heights as Kahneman and Tversky, Robin Hanson, Steven Pinker, or Michael Shermer. Eagleman’s certainty about philosophical determinism is also questionable, given that he, too, has the human brain’s cognitive shortcomings and shortcuts that he convincingly describes. But even if this book is a B or a B- compared to the top tier, most readers will still get quite a lot out of Incognito.

Book Review: Casey Mulligan – You’re Hired!: Untold Successes and Failures of a Populist President

Casey Mulligan – You’re Hired!: Untold Successes and Failures of a Populist President (Alexandria, VA: Republic Book Publishers, 2020).

Mulligan was the Chief Economist of President Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers. He is much kinder to Trump than most economists are. While Mulligan pulls a lot of his punches and has some of the unconvincing persecution complex that many Republicans have, he offers credible insights into how Trump and his White House worked. Despite its restraint, You’re Hired has lessons for policy advisers of any political persuasion. Personality matters in politics. Advisers who do not account for that will not get sound policies enacted.

While President Trump is not knowledgeable about policy, he is also not as dumb as many of his critics allege. For example, when he would tweet out good economic news, he would often exaggerate it on purpose, knowing that media reports would instantly go about correcting him—and unintentionally spreading good news they might otherwise have ignored.

Mulligan also praises Trump’s tendency during meetings to intuit many mostly correct economic conclusions even when it is clear he is approaching a given issue for the first time. Mulligan is likely either selective or exaggerating, though, considering Trump’s long pre-presidency track record on issues such as trade, immigration, and industrial policy.

On the negative side, Mulligan’s treatment of opiate policy is at best incomplete. This was one of his primary issues during his CEA tenure; for the most part, Mulligan’s book focuses on issues he personally worked on. On one hand, Mulligan is correct that subsidizing opiates has had negative unintended consequences, and he offers sound policy fixes. On the other hand, Mulligan dismisses ending the criminalization of recreational users or prescribing doctors.

Mulligan is also ok with Washington interfering in doctor-patient relationships involving chronic pain patients—one of whom was my late grandfather, who suffered a great deal of unnecessary pain because of federal policies such as Mulligan endorses.

He also does not address the larger criminal justice problems created by federal drug policy. Mulligan is so narrowly focused on price controls, that while his analysis is correct as far as it goes, he dismisses larger—and politically possible—fixes that lie outside of formal price theory.

While Mulligan writes well, his consistent capitalization is “Federal” is an off-putting stylistic decision. Government documents use the same device. Mulligan’s use of the same honorific does not help his desire to appear independent, even though this is an example of style, not substance.

His lengthy tangent on the lack of collusion in President Trump’s Russia scandal feels out of place, both in they way it copies Trump’s terminology, and because Mulligan had nothing to do with the scandal; “collusion” was not a legal term at issue in the case.

You’re Hired is a useful counter to Trump Derangement Syndrome, which can be almost as harmful as Trumpism. But Mulligan is too sanguine about the administration’s illiberalism. The administration’s policy successes on regulation, education, environmental policy, and assorted other issues do not excuse its deficit spending, its expansive view of executive power, its immigration policies, its poor COVID response, its embarrassing personality cult, embrace of fringe figures and conspiracy theories, its ill-timed stress-testing of liberal political institutions, and its divisive impact on American culture. The administration was neither wholly good nor wholly bad. It had elements of both. Neither should be overlooked.

Mulligan offers pointed criticisms and telling stories of trade adviser Peter Navarro, with whom he crossed paths several times. Since Mulligan also writes at length about immigration policy in the book, he should have done the same to immigration adviser Stephen Miller, who pushed the Trump administration’s family separation policies, casually uses slang terms drawn from white nationalism, frequently cites its literature, and has several personal and online connections to that world. History will not look kindly on Miller; neither should Mulligan.

Mulligan is credible, unlike trashy reality-tv personalities who have surrounded Trump, such as Omarosa Manigault and Michael Cohen. He is also not sycophantic like Sen. Lindsey Graham, Rep. Matt Gaetz, or large swathes of conservative media are. He is also a skilled economist and an unusually clear writer for an academic economist. But Mulligan’s omissions and kid-glove treatments give the impression that he’s holding a lot back.

As fear of a Trump tweet-storm recedes, hopefully Mulligan will be more forthcoming in the future. Future administrations’ policy teams would benefit from this, especially if Trump’s personality and populism remain part of the GOP going forward.

See also a CEI book forum featuring Mulligan. Reading this review over, it is a bit harsh for a book I have a positive opinion of. The book forum balances that out a bit while still asking some pointed questions.

Book Review: Muhammad Yunus – Banker To The Poor: Micro-Lending and the Battle Against World Poverty

Muhammad Yunus – Banker To The Poor: Micro-Lending and the Battle Against World Poverty (New York: PublicAffairs, 2007)

Yunus is a Bangladeshi economist who did much to popularize microlending—small loans to budding entrepreneurs in the developing world. He won the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize. This is his autobiography.

While his bottom-up approach to development is a massive improvement from the top-down model favored by economists such as Jeffrey Sachs and organizations like the World Bank, Yunus is not without his critics, and was touched by scandal in recent years. Now 80 years old, he is mostly retired.

Though not entirely objective, this is a good introduction to how a creative, entrepreneurial approach can have a large positive impact on philanthropy and economic development. There are lots of ways to cook an egg. Yunus’ recipe is one of many that are not perfect, but are still part of a healthy diet.

Further reforms must operate not just in finance or in this or that policy area, but also at the institutional level, such as property rights protections, and in culture, such as a general sense that openness, innovation, and commerce are good things, and corruption should be resisted, rather than tolerated.

Book Review: Eamonn Butler – Friedrich Hayek: The Ideas and Influence of the Libertarian Economist

Eamonn Butler –  Friedrich Hayek: The Ideas and Influence of the Libertarian Economist (Hampshire, UK: Harriman House, 2012)

Butler has written accessible intellectual biographies of several major classical liberal thinkers. His entry on Hayek does exactly what it intends to. While it does not offer the same depth as Bruce Caldwell’s lengthy Hayek’s Challenge, that isn’t Butler’s goal. Instead, in about 150 pages, students and lay readers can get high-level yet accessible explanations of spontaneous order, the importance of using bottom-up processes rather than top-down planning, and other key Hayekian concepts, plus a tour of Hayek’s major works.

His native Vienna was at its cultural and intellectual peak during his childhood, and most of his family were natural scientists, as were both of his children. This sparked his interest in evolutionary processes, in which intricate designs require no designer. He fought in World War I, earned two doctorates, was a members of Ludwig von Mises’ famous seminars, then joined the London School of Economics faculty and became a friend and rival to Keynes.

He moved permanently when the Nazis made their intentions clear, and wrote his most famous book, 1944’s The Road to Serfdom, from a barn well outside London, which was still under the Blitz. This period marked the end of Hayek’s technical economics work on business cycles and monetary theory. Hayek instead turned to a multidisciplinary approach that contributed to political philosophy, law, history, and science, as well as economics. Serfdom, one of Hayek’s first works from this new approach, is commonly misunderstood as a slippery-slope argument, in which any move away from liberalism will send a country on a one-way street to totalitarianism.

Hayek instead makes a package-deal argument. A planned economy requires getting rid of liberal institutions such as private property, equality before the law, and all the other common rights. Similarly, a society that respects human rights must also have a free economy. For Hayek, economic freedom and personal freedom are a package deal. These two liberalisms cannot be chosen a la carte; it’s both or neither.

Butler goes over the highlights of Hayek’s major early papers, collected in Individualism and Economic Order, though he gives too little attention to Hayek’s larger “Abuse of Reason” project, which was never completed, but include The Counter-Revolution of Science, and influenced much of his later work. Also under-served here is Hayek’s major psychological work, The Sensory Order. One of Hayek’s main arguments in this book is that a mind cannot fully understand something more complicated than itself. A policy implication is that a central planner can never fully understand how millions of individual minds think, interact, and make their own evolving plans.

Butler also tours the Constitution of Liberty, which is Hayek’s positive vision of what a free society’s institutional and legal structures would look like.

Hayek’s later Law, Legislation, and Liberty trilogy also gets a close inspection, with a chapter on Hayek’s views on social justice—which in this reviewer’s opinion, don’t entirely hold up. More important is Hayek’s distinction between higher principles of natural law, and the flawed man-made legislation that attempts to capture its essence—or, just as often, attempts to overrule it. Butler also goes into the usually-overlooked third volume, in which Hayek take a cue from Plato’s Republic and builds his own utopian institutional system. It’s a bit out there, and one of Hayek’s least essential works.

Hayek’s final book was The Fatal Conceit, which haunts every aspiring planner who thinks he can overcome the knowledge problems that have attempted to impose their own top-down philosophy on a bottom-up world.

Butler concludes with a look at Hayek’s legacy and what the future of liberalism might hold.