What do you think?
Rate this book
The Age of Uncertainty
Foreword
The Prophets & Promise of Classical Capitalism
The Manners & Morals of High Capitalism
The Dissent of Karl Marx
The Colonial Idea
Lenin & the Great Ungluing
The Rise & Fall of Money
The Mandarin Revolution
The Fatal Competition
The Big Corporation
Land & People
The Metropolis
Democracy, Leadership, Commitment
A Major Word of Thanks
Notes
List of Illustrations
Index
The Prophets & Promise of Classical Capitalism
The Manners & Morals of High Capitalism
The Dissent of Karl Marx
The Colonial Idea
Lenin & the Great Ungluing
The Rise & Fall of Money
The Mandarin Revolution
The Fatal Competition
The Big Corporation
Land & People
The Metropolis
Democracy, Leadership, Commitment
A Major Word of Thanks
Notes
List of Illustrations
Index
365 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1977
11 people are currently reading
806 people want to read
About the author
John Kenneth Galbraith
205 books508 followersJohn Kenneth Galbraith was a Canadian-American economist. He was a Keynesian and an institutionalist, a leading proponent of 20th-century American liberalism and democratic socialism. His books on economic topics were bestsellers in the 1950s and 1960s. A prolific author, he produced four dozen books & over a 1000 articles on many subjects. Among his most famous works was his economics trilogy: American Capitalism (1952), The Affluent Society (1958) & The New Industrial State (1967). He taught at Harvard University for many years. He was active in politics, serving in the administrations of Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, and Lyndon Johnson. He served as US Ambassador to India under John F. Kennedy.
He received the Presidential Medal of Freedom twice: one in 1946 from President Truman, and another in 2000 from President Clinton. He was also awarded the Order of Canada in 1997, and in 2001, the Padma Vibhushan, India's second highest civilian award, for strengthening ties between India and the USA.
He received the Presidential Medal of Freedom twice: one in 1946 from President Truman, and another in 2000 from President Clinton. He was also awarded the Order of Canada in 1997, and in 2001, the Padma Vibhushan, India's second highest civilian award, for strengthening ties between India and the USA.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
December 4, 2014
I watched this BBC series, the companion of one done with Milton Friedman, while working weekends as a security guard at Union Theological Seminary in New York during the summer of '78. The job itself, part of the federal Work-Study program, was a peach that I held during all four years there. Usually it was night work, patrolling the campus in Morningside Heights and Harlem, studying between rounds, but often I would take extra shifts such as the one that had me at the mailroom and reception area to McGiffert Hall on weekend afternoons. There was a television there and the NYC-PBS station was doing the Galbraith series at just the right time to catch all of it. Going to work became a delight, sitting with a pot of black coffee, learning about political economy from a delightfully droll lecturer. It was one of my first real exposures to Galbraith and I promptly went out to get the book of the television series, The Age of Uncertainty, and to start collecting other volumes of his writing as they appeared at used bookstores.
July 1, 2011
Quite similar to Dawkins' The God Delusion at first thought I'd give it 5 stars and highly recommend it. While insisting on the latter, I must admit to be ideologically biased, so I was reading what I really like to read (or hear) while some other people may disagree with some parts of the book including the author's slight arrogance.
However this book, an intelligently opinionated short history of political economy, no less than 35 years after it was written and in the midst of a new crisis and abysmal uncertainty, still makes valuable reading for any open minded person and a must for all leftist democrats. Maybe even more today than when it was written.
P.S.: The BBC TV documentary series with the same title is available here: http://www.cosmolearning.com/document...
However this book, an intelligently opinionated short history of political economy, no less than 35 years after it was written and in the midst of a new crisis and abysmal uncertainty, still makes valuable reading for any open minded person and a must for all leftist democrats. Maybe even more today than when it was written.
P.S.: The BBC TV documentary series with the same title is available here: http://www.cosmolearning.com/document...
August 9, 2017
Highly recommended as an overview of human history, through the filter of economics.
While the economy is often foremost in the modern mind, economics is the hidden undercurrent which often gets overlooked when examining the past. Gailbraith paints pictures of the recurring patterns and cycles which drive human affairs. It as much about the psychology of economics as specific events.
And that's why it's a timeless peek behind the curtain.
I encountered this as the TV series first then found it as part of a bundle, with the book and a teaching guide, some years later. The TV series is a bit plodding by today's standards but I still recommend it to the young adults I work with. It helps provide cohesion, an armature on which to place the fractured version of history they learn in school.
While the economy is often foremost in the modern mind, economics is the hidden undercurrent which often gets overlooked when examining the past. Gailbraith paints pictures of the recurring patterns and cycles which drive human affairs. It as much about the psychology of economics as specific events.
And that's why it's a timeless peek behind the curtain.
I encountered this as the TV series first then found it as part of a bundle, with the book and a teaching guide, some years later. The TV series is a bit plodding by today's standards but I still recommend it to the young adults I work with. It helps provide cohesion, an armature on which to place the fractured version of history they learn in school.
November 5, 2022
I'll be honest, I found this book heavy-going. There were a couple of topics I did find interesting, which related to our planet's population explosion, poverty and nuclear warfare.
"The relentless population increase in the poor countries cannot be checked except by the control of births. The Chinese, and increasingly the Indians, are concluding this cannot be purely permissive. Few elsewhere wish to commit themselves to this hard truth."
This book was published in 1977, it's content still very relevant almost 50 years on. Earth's human population has grown and continues to grow at an exponential rate, we are living longer, land-clearing and deforestation making way for more and more housing development, pastures for livestock, crops etc.
"A nuclear holocaust threatens all life and its elimination."
It is indeed an age of uncertainty.
"The relentless population increase in the poor countries cannot be checked except by the control of births. The Chinese, and increasingly the Indians, are concluding this cannot be purely permissive. Few elsewhere wish to commit themselves to this hard truth."
This book was published in 1977, it's content still very relevant almost 50 years on. Earth's human population has grown and continues to grow at an exponential rate, we are living longer, land-clearing and deforestation making way for more and more housing development, pastures for livestock, crops etc.
"A nuclear holocaust threatens all life and its elimination."
It is indeed an age of uncertainty.
October 2, 2013
Great book
Galbraith one of the greatest economist when it comes to explain different issues about economics and history. The book is easy to read and has a great sense of homour.
Galbraith one of the greatest economist when it comes to explain different issues about economics and history. The book is easy to read and has a great sense of homour.
December 1, 2022
Very in-depth and heavy reading, so I previewed each chapter with the BBC tv series. Its a worthwhile read.
January 27, 2022
A great history of the world economy. Explains how the Great Depression happened....
October 30, 2023
A BOOK VERSION OF THE TELEVISION SERIES
Economist John Kenneth Galbraith wrote in the Foreword to this 1977 book (which is based in his TV series for BBC), “in 1973… I received a call from … the BBC … [they] wanted to know if I would do a television series on some unspecified aspect of the history of economic or social ideas… We settled on the title ‘The Age of Uncertainty’ for the series. It sounded well; it did not confine thought; and it suggested the basic theme: we would contrast the great certainties in economic thought in the last century with the great uncertainty with which problems are faced in our time. In the last century capitalists were certain of the success of capitalism, socialists of socialism… and the ruling classes knew they were meant to rule. Little of this certainty now survives. Given the dismaying complexity of the problems mankind now faces, it would surely be odd if it did…”
“[A] further theme emerged. It began with the thought that ideas are important not only for themselves but also for explaining or interpreting social behavior. The ruling ideas of the time are those by which people and governments are guided. Thus they help to shape history itself… So our treatment of ideas would fall very roughly into two parts: First, the men and the ideas, then their consequences. First, Adam Smith, Richardo and Malthus, then the impact of their systems in Britain, Ireland, and the New Worl. First, the history of economic ideas, then the economic history.… The last of the great figures in economics with which I deal is Keynes… those who followed were born too late.”
In the first chapter, he states, “Voltaire was a man---perhaps THE man---of reason. The word is one that scholars often hesitate to define for fear of seeming simple. Where things ARE simple, one should avoid making them complicated… For both [Adam] Smith and Voltaire reason required that one reach conclusions not by recourse to religion, rule, prejudice, or passion… Thus one made decisions. By this standard Adam Smith was also supremely a man of reason… He gathered it, digested it and allowed it to guide his thoughts. These led him into new paths, made him a pioneer.? (Pg. 16)
He recounts, “In 1774, Turgot become Comptroller-General of France, and his task was to curb the extravagance of the French court… He failed. A firm rule operated against him. People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage. Intellectual myopia, often called stupidity, is no doubt a reason. But the privileged feel also that their privileges, however egregious they may seem to others, are a solemn, basic, God-given right. The sensitivity of the poor to injustice is a trivial thing compared with that of the rich…. When reform from the top became impossible, revolution from the bottom became inevitable.” (Pg. 22)
He recalls, “the name, New Lanark, is associated … with enlightened humanitarian experiment… New Lanark became the largest cotton mill in Scotland… The atmosphere was of the highest moral tone. Each of the orphans was given an hour and a half of rigorous schooling each day. However… the mills must also return a profit… the work ethic had to be protected and encouraged. So the schooling was in the evening after a good, honest, thirteen-hour day in the mills. No one should be shocked. But the standards of the time New Lanark WAS a place of compassion and culture.” (Pg. 20-30)
He observes, “the men employed in the steel mills and refineries mostly remained in that wholesome poverty that meant a hard life in this world but assured an easy one in the next…. The rich, by contrast, set more store by the pleasures of the world. There can be no doubt, I think, that the possession of money causes people to take a more favorable view of this world in comparison with the next.” (Pg. 43)
He states, “Louis XIV died in 1715. His legacy to France was great and varied, and it included two major misfortunes. One was the French Treasury, which was bankrupt; the other was the Regent, the Due d’Orleans, who was intellectually and morally bankrupt. The result was the seemingly hopeless situation that gives opportunity to a rascal… He was John Law…” (Pg. 170)
He explains, “paper money, the invention of the colonies, paid for the American Revolution. Some was issued by the states. The rest… were authorized by the Continental Congress…. The predictable results … was inflation… But there was no alternative… No one thought the new republic even a passable credit risk. Paper money saved the day. This … has never been recognized. When the war was won, the sound-money men wrote the history. They could not have said that the United States was conceived in financial sin. So they held that the financing of the Revolution was a terrible mistake, without ever explaining what would have been both practical and right.” (Pg. 182)
During World War II in the U.S., “The only hope was to go in for price-fixing on a vast scale. This, in the spring of 1942, we did, and rationing followed. That policy did work; prices were kept nearly stable throughout the war. Previously I had argued against a general ceiling on prices with great conviction: now I argued for it with equal passion. Almost no one notices this change of mind. No one at all criticized it. In economics it is a far, far wiser thing to be right than to be consistent.” (Pg. 222)
He noted, “A year and a half after the Bay of Pigs came the Cuban missile crisis. Cuba again. The effect of this was on the concept of the irrepressible conflict itself. Until then discussion of the conflict had been hypothetical, even academic in tone. Generals made speeches threatening the Communists with nuclear annihilation and calling for its calm acceptance by all patriotic Americans. The response was much as to sermons threatening or promising eternal punishment. The fear is in the sermon, not the prospect. Now for a few tense and terrible days the prospect was faced. People looked directly into the pit. There can be no doubt as to the result: thousands and perhaps millions began to wonder if there was not some slightly less heroic but substantially more pleasant alternative. Though it was little noticed at the time, after the missile crisis the generals ceased to make the speeches.” (Pg. 248)
He observes, “Many in the poor countries believe that the rich nations urge birth control because it is a painless way of being rid of them, and the remedy becomes even more attractive if the poor are dark, yellow or black. One consequence is a sensitive reluctance by many in the affluent countries to press the case for birth control. This is unfortunate; no one should be so constrained. The affluent practice contraception. They are not offering advice they do not accept themselves. And the consequences of uncontrolled population growth are visited not upon the rich but upon the poor.” (Pg. 285)
He states, “On two … matters the prospect is… grim. First there is the fact that capitalism performs excellently in providing those things---automobiles, disposable packaging, drugs, alcohol---that cause problems for the city. But it is inherently incompetent in providing the things that city dwellers most urgently need. Capitalism has never anywhere provided good homes at moderate cost. Housing, it seems unnecessary to stress, is an important adjunct of a successful urban life. Nor does capitalism provide good health services, and when people live close together with attendant health risks, these too are unimportant. They are made more urgent because, on coming to the city, people no longer accept as inevitable unintended sickness and then a quiet death as they would in some lonesome sharecropper’s cabin. Nor does capitalism provide efficient transportation for people---another essential of life in the Metropolis.” (Pg. 319)
He concludes, “Our minds can extend to a war in some distant jungle and set in motion the actions that reject it. But not yet to the nuclear holocaust. A commitment to this reality is now the supreme test of our politics. None should accept the easy invasion that the decision is not ours. The Russians are no less perceptive…. We must believe, for it is true, that they are as willing as we are to commit themselves to this reality, to the existence of this threat to all life and to its elimination. That, indeed, is the highest purpose of politics in both countries, one that transcends the differences in economic or political systems… In an age when so much is uncertain, there is one certainty: This truth we must confront.” (Pg. 342)
This book will appeal to those who enjoy Galbraith’s thoughts.
Economist John Kenneth Galbraith wrote in the Foreword to this 1977 book (which is based in his TV series for BBC), “in 1973… I received a call from … the BBC … [they] wanted to know if I would do a television series on some unspecified aspect of the history of economic or social ideas… We settled on the title ‘The Age of Uncertainty’ for the series. It sounded well; it did not confine thought; and it suggested the basic theme: we would contrast the great certainties in economic thought in the last century with the great uncertainty with which problems are faced in our time. In the last century capitalists were certain of the success of capitalism, socialists of socialism… and the ruling classes knew they were meant to rule. Little of this certainty now survives. Given the dismaying complexity of the problems mankind now faces, it would surely be odd if it did…”
“[A] further theme emerged. It began with the thought that ideas are important not only for themselves but also for explaining or interpreting social behavior. The ruling ideas of the time are those by which people and governments are guided. Thus they help to shape history itself… So our treatment of ideas would fall very roughly into two parts: First, the men and the ideas, then their consequences. First, Adam Smith, Richardo and Malthus, then the impact of their systems in Britain, Ireland, and the New Worl. First, the history of economic ideas, then the economic history.… The last of the great figures in economics with which I deal is Keynes… those who followed were born too late.”
In the first chapter, he states, “Voltaire was a man---perhaps THE man---of reason. The word is one that scholars often hesitate to define for fear of seeming simple. Where things ARE simple, one should avoid making them complicated… For both [Adam] Smith and Voltaire reason required that one reach conclusions not by recourse to religion, rule, prejudice, or passion… Thus one made decisions. By this standard Adam Smith was also supremely a man of reason… He gathered it, digested it and allowed it to guide his thoughts. These led him into new paths, made him a pioneer.? (Pg. 16)
He recounts, “In 1774, Turgot become Comptroller-General of France, and his task was to curb the extravagance of the French court… He failed. A firm rule operated against him. People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage. Intellectual myopia, often called stupidity, is no doubt a reason. But the privileged feel also that their privileges, however egregious they may seem to others, are a solemn, basic, God-given right. The sensitivity of the poor to injustice is a trivial thing compared with that of the rich…. When reform from the top became impossible, revolution from the bottom became inevitable.” (Pg. 22)
He recalls, “the name, New Lanark, is associated … with enlightened humanitarian experiment… New Lanark became the largest cotton mill in Scotland… The atmosphere was of the highest moral tone. Each of the orphans was given an hour and a half of rigorous schooling each day. However… the mills must also return a profit… the work ethic had to be protected and encouraged. So the schooling was in the evening after a good, honest, thirteen-hour day in the mills. No one should be shocked. But the standards of the time New Lanark WAS a place of compassion and culture.” (Pg. 20-30)
He observes, “the men employed in the steel mills and refineries mostly remained in that wholesome poverty that meant a hard life in this world but assured an easy one in the next…. The rich, by contrast, set more store by the pleasures of the world. There can be no doubt, I think, that the possession of money causes people to take a more favorable view of this world in comparison with the next.” (Pg. 43)
He states, “Louis XIV died in 1715. His legacy to France was great and varied, and it included two major misfortunes. One was the French Treasury, which was bankrupt; the other was the Regent, the Due d’Orleans, who was intellectually and morally bankrupt. The result was the seemingly hopeless situation that gives opportunity to a rascal… He was John Law…” (Pg. 170)
He explains, “paper money, the invention of the colonies, paid for the American Revolution. Some was issued by the states. The rest… were authorized by the Continental Congress…. The predictable results … was inflation… But there was no alternative… No one thought the new republic even a passable credit risk. Paper money saved the day. This … has never been recognized. When the war was won, the sound-money men wrote the history. They could not have said that the United States was conceived in financial sin. So they held that the financing of the Revolution was a terrible mistake, without ever explaining what would have been both practical and right.” (Pg. 182)
During World War II in the U.S., “The only hope was to go in for price-fixing on a vast scale. This, in the spring of 1942, we did, and rationing followed. That policy did work; prices were kept nearly stable throughout the war. Previously I had argued against a general ceiling on prices with great conviction: now I argued for it with equal passion. Almost no one notices this change of mind. No one at all criticized it. In economics it is a far, far wiser thing to be right than to be consistent.” (Pg. 222)
He noted, “A year and a half after the Bay of Pigs came the Cuban missile crisis. Cuba again. The effect of this was on the concept of the irrepressible conflict itself. Until then discussion of the conflict had been hypothetical, even academic in tone. Generals made speeches threatening the Communists with nuclear annihilation and calling for its calm acceptance by all patriotic Americans. The response was much as to sermons threatening or promising eternal punishment. The fear is in the sermon, not the prospect. Now for a few tense and terrible days the prospect was faced. People looked directly into the pit. There can be no doubt as to the result: thousands and perhaps millions began to wonder if there was not some slightly less heroic but substantially more pleasant alternative. Though it was little noticed at the time, after the missile crisis the generals ceased to make the speeches.” (Pg. 248)
He observes, “Many in the poor countries believe that the rich nations urge birth control because it is a painless way of being rid of them, and the remedy becomes even more attractive if the poor are dark, yellow or black. One consequence is a sensitive reluctance by many in the affluent countries to press the case for birth control. This is unfortunate; no one should be so constrained. The affluent practice contraception. They are not offering advice they do not accept themselves. And the consequences of uncontrolled population growth are visited not upon the rich but upon the poor.” (Pg. 285)
He states, “On two … matters the prospect is… grim. First there is the fact that capitalism performs excellently in providing those things---automobiles, disposable packaging, drugs, alcohol---that cause problems for the city. But it is inherently incompetent in providing the things that city dwellers most urgently need. Capitalism has never anywhere provided good homes at moderate cost. Housing, it seems unnecessary to stress, is an important adjunct of a successful urban life. Nor does capitalism provide good health services, and when people live close together with attendant health risks, these too are unimportant. They are made more urgent because, on coming to the city, people no longer accept as inevitable unintended sickness and then a quiet death as they would in some lonesome sharecropper’s cabin. Nor does capitalism provide efficient transportation for people---another essential of life in the Metropolis.” (Pg. 319)
He concludes, “Our minds can extend to a war in some distant jungle and set in motion the actions that reject it. But not yet to the nuclear holocaust. A commitment to this reality is now the supreme test of our politics. None should accept the easy invasion that the decision is not ours. The Russians are no less perceptive…. We must believe, for it is true, that they are as willing as we are to commit themselves to this reality, to the existence of this threat to all life and to its elimination. That, indeed, is the highest purpose of politics in both countries, one that transcends the differences in economic or political systems… In an age when so much is uncertain, there is one certainty: This truth we must confront.” (Pg. 342)
This book will appeal to those who enjoy Galbraith’s thoughts.
Want to read
November 17, 2020For understanding the social-economic changes, "the crisis of world capitalism", the social-economic reforms of our world, Galbraith's "The Age of Uncertainty" is a useful book! The world changed since 2. World War, but how, how did the world change? In the world economic relations, in the financial relations, in the political relations, how did the world change? Galbraith advice to question to the world because of "capitalist structures" of the world, because of "uncertain relations of world capitalism" which cause a lot of problems, practically, in the life of societies of the world. Galbraith thinks the "philosophy" of "world capitalism", Galbraith writes about Marx who wrote "Capital", Galbraith writes about Lenin who wrote "Imperialism", Galbraith questions the thinking tradition in social sciences about the world.
Want to read
November 17, 2020John Kenneth Galbraith'ın Türkçe'de çok okunmuş kitaplarından biri "Kuşku Çağı: Ekonomik Gelişmeler Tarihi", Altın Kitaplar Yayınevi'nin Türkçe bilim yazınına değerli bir katkısı! Galbraith'ın dünya kapitalizminin "bunalım"larını okumaya alışmış okurlarına tanıdık gelen izlenimleri var, 20. Yüzyıl'ın son çeyreğinde dünya kapitalizmi yeni "bunalım"lar yaşıyor, malî piyasalarda, sanayi üretiminde, şehirlerde büyüyen ("büyüme" lâfını çok duydunuz!) ekonominin "bunalım" üreten "yapı"sından "kuşku" duymayı öneriyor, Galbraith! Galbraith'ın önerdiği "kuşku"yu dünyanın bir çok ülkesinde "kapitalist bunalım"larla yaşayan milyar insan duyuyorlar, ama, Galbraith, bilim adamlarına, ekonomi uzmanlarına, "kapitalizm" ile anlaşmak için "fırsat" kollayan "bürokrasi"lere daha "metodolojik", daha "ciddî" bir "kuşku" öneriyor. Galbraith, 1990'ların "dünya bunalımı"nı çok önceden hissediyor, ama, 1970'lerin "dünya bunalımı"nı da hatırlayalım, bir yandan dünya çapında "grev"ler, "lokavt"lar, "para bunalımı", "işsizlik", "aşırı eşitsizlik", bir yandan da "nükleer ve konvansiyonel silâhlanma yarışı"nın dünyaya yayılması, "açlık", "yoksulluk", "enerji bunalımı", başka bir çok "bunalım"lar. Galbraith'ın "Kuşku Çağı" dediği, "Pompei'nin son günleri" gibi neredeyse, dünya kapitalizminin çöküp çökmediğinin tartışıldığı yıllar! Galbraith'ın "Kuşku Çağı: Ekonomik Gelişmeler Tarihi"ni okuduktan sonra, 1990'ları, 2000'li yılların dünyasını daha iyi anlayabiliriz, daha iyi tartışabiliriz!
November 1, 2021
A book deserving of 3.5 stars. Liked it but didn't love it because it isn't as whole Galbraith at his best. Though parts of it are, especially those chapters he based on his other written works and which show his usual polish. But run of the mill Galbraith is still well past the average, so not at all a disappointing effort. And certainly entertaining, given the accompanying photos which are usually absent from his books. I'll have to watch the series itself - unfortunately the original BBC films were destroyed in a fire, so only a few remain floating in the digital ether.
October 16, 2023
I wanted to read a book about economics to get a better understanding of interest rates, inflation, etc. This one was great - funny, interesting, and entertaining. Covers the history of economics into the 20th Century and kept my attention entirely. apparently there's a series. Hope I can find it.
March 28, 2024
A book concerned with economic history written in the mid-1970s would always have a problem appearing relevant 50 years later. As a point-in-time document it was interesting to see how much attitudes and approaches to economic solutions have changed, not to mention the casual colonialism and sexism that even a giant such as JKG was not immune from.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 25, 2024
Read as a companion to the public television series.
Two years later I took a course in principles of economics ( macroeconomics) and the other course, principles of economics ( microeconomics). This book was a good primer in understanding Keynesian theory.
Two years later I took a course in principles of economics ( macroeconomics) and the other course, principles of economics ( microeconomics). This book was a good primer in understanding Keynesian theory.
August 8, 2022
Excelent
November 16, 2007
The blurb is right, the author gives a "laconic" telling of some economic history. I often don't agree with his viewpoint, but still appreciated much of the book.
Want to read
February 14, 2011Eventhough published in 1977, it still looks like a good read.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews