The Silent Takeover - Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy. By Noreena Hertz.

London:
William Heinemann. 2001. 242 pages. Price: 25 USD.
Reviewed by Peter De Neef.
Introduction
Resisting the Silent Takeover
Corporations are powerful. No one nowadays can deny this simple fact; their rise has justifiably been
described as a twentieth century transformation rivaling in importance the rise of the nation state in the
Middle Ages. [i] The difficult questions are, however, whether the business world has grown too strong,
and whether business interests are overshadowing other societal goals. Noreena Hertz (the "Author")
answers these questions positively in her book, "The Silent Takeover - Global Capitalism and the Death
of Democracy" (the "Book"). [ii] The Author argues that multinational companies have taken over too
much power from the national governments, to such an extent that it constitutes a danger to democracy.
She sees this takeover in the broader context of globalization and the neo-liberal consensus on
capitalism. In addition, the Author fundamentally questions the desirability in social terms of a such
consensus: however, she finds that we will only be able to change it after democracy has been restored,
and that the catalyst for such restoration might - and should - be the combined action of the consumer,
shareholder and activists' protest movement.
In this review - which consists out of 7 sections - I will first describe the context of the Book (I), then
say a word on its methodology (II), and give a short summary of the content (III). After these more
descriptive sections, I will evaluate the three main themes (IV), as well as the quality of the background
information (V), and some often heard critiques (VI). I will conclude this review with two remarks, one
on the message of the Author, and another on the solutions she proposes (VII).
I. Context of the Book: the "Anti-Globalization Movement"
The Book is well-known amongst those interested in what is commonly referred to as the antiglobalization movement; the Author has even been proclaimed a "leader" of anti-globalization, together
with authors such as Naomi Klein (author of the best-seller "No Logo" [iii] ). The actual origin and goals
of this movement are a source of controversy. The public's knowledge is generally overshadowed by
media covered images of protesters on the streets of, for example, Seattle and Genoa; they are depicted
as (most often young) people who seem to have either the most extreme, non-unified and contrary goals,
or otherwise no other goal than smashing windows of fast food chains such as Mc Donalds and engaging
in fights with the authorities. As far as the latter anarchistic and violent behavior is concerned, the
standpoint of the majority of protesters is clear; they severely condemn what is considered as an abuse
by some malicious elements of an inherently peaceful protest movement. The question remains,
however, if the movement stands for certain common goals, and, if so, what these are.
In order to answer these questions, the meaning of the logically preceding concept, that of globalization
itself, needs to be explored. Its original meaning was that of a purely economical phenomenon:
"integrating economies across the globe". [iv] As such, it is by no means something new; indeed, since
the beginning of the eighteenth century, economists have analyzed the "economic interpenetration of
nations". [v] What is new, is the scale this interpenetration has taken; the reasons are said to be the

technological evolution in transport and telecommunication (and the accompanying decrease in costs
thereof), as well as the liberalization of capital and trade. The explosion in its magnitude has lead to the
adoption of a broader understanding of globalization, which is "the shrinkage of distance on a world
scale through the emergence and thickening of networks of connections - environmental and social as
well as economic" [vi] (or, "a 'stretching process', in which connections have been made between
different social contexts or regions and become networked across the earth as a whole"): [vii] this
description, although prima facie very similar to the first one, has the rather peculiar aspect to it that it
tends to incorporate what are essentially consequences of globalization (in the economic sense) - e.g.
social networking and environmental impacts - into the definition (as we will see next, this widening of
the meaning of the word "globalization" is is felt even more when it is mentioned in the description of
the anti-globalization movement). Throughout this review, globalization will be used in the first sense,
i.e. economic interpenetration of nations ("Globalization"), except when stipulated otherwise.
We can now analyze the meaning and the goals of the anti-globalization movement itself. In public
debates and academic literature, "anti-globalists" have often been criticized for being nave and
unrealistic. It is said that globalization cannot be reversed, and that anti-globalization is nothing more
than a nostalgic longing to return to the previous status quo. It is probably true that some protesters wish
they could turn back time, and go back to a past era "when everything was better". However, building on
the distinction made above, globalization is used here in its purely economical sense of interpenetration
of national economies; if the debate would indeed be limited to the question whether such
interpenetration can be reversed, its impact would be not so significant, since few seriously or
convincingly argue that it should be stopped.
However, a significant number of protesters have responded to this critique that they are not "antiglobal", at least not in the sense just described; they do take Globalization as a given, and acknowledge
its potential benefits. They claim that their goal instead is the countering of certain societal failings
which Globalization does not take into account. This probably explains the recent change in the meaning
of the word "globalization", described in the previous paragraph; unconsciously, such negative aspects
of society are included in the definition of globalization, broadening it considerably, or, if you wish,
giving the word a new meaning all together. The anti-globalization movement means then more
something like a "movement against certain failings of society which are worsened, or at least not
addressed, by Globalization". [viii] It now becomes clear why some sense that the anti-globalization
movement seems to have diverse (and maybe even opposite) goals; in a sense, it indeed has. The right
approach to the debate about anti-globalization seems therefore to be the one which first isolates and
names the different issues at stake, and then evaluates them in terms of desirability.
It is amongst those that understand anti-globalization in this second way, that the Author should be
situated. Proof thereof is the fact that the Author deplores her perceived status as an "anti-global leader";
she finds the term "anti-globalization" inappropriate and confusing, and expresses a preference for
calling herself a member of the "pro justice movement" or "global justice movement" [ix] (which
explains why - in her Book - she carefully avoids using the title "anti-globalization" when describing the
contemporary protest movement). This non-radical approach is unsurprising given the background of the
Author. She studied economics and philosophy at the University College London, and completed an
MBA at Wharton Business School, after which - at the age of 23 - she spent the summer in Leningrad to
help set up the Moscow Commodities Exchange. After being hired by the World Bank, the Author
returned to Russia to work on the economic reforms which followed the overthrow of communism, i.e.

mainly privatization programs; in this context, she found herself tutoring Boris Yeltsin's advisers in
market economics. These experiences have lead some commentators to describe the Author as "one of
them": someone coming from and familiar with the establishment. However, at the same time, they
were the causes of a fundamental change in her ideas and ideals. Indeed, the Author resigned from her
position at the World Bank, disillusioned by its inhumane attitude and "hidden political agenda", leaving
her with a certain mistrust for international institutions. During her period in Russia, the Author also saw
the disastrous impact uncontrolled market capitalism can have on people's life. After completing a PhD
in Economics at Cambridge, she traveled to the Middle-East, where she worked on establishing a system
of regional economic cooperation - which included assistance to the setting up of joint ventures between
Jordan (Palestinian) and Israeli businesses - the idea being that the private sector might play a role in the
peace process. [x] She is now Associate Director of the Center for International Business and
Management at the Judge Institute of Management Studies (University of Cambridge), and a regular
speaker on issues of globalization and world economics, taking her from the protests in the streets of
Genoa to speeches given for the World Economic Forum. [xi]
II. A Word on Methodology and Style
The Book has many of the typical characteristics of social science works. [xii] They often seem like the
easiest materials to read; many of the terms used are familiar to the readers, and the style of exposition is
usually narrative. Moreover, the subjects discussed are ones on which the reader already has strong
feelings and opinions. However, these very same elements of social works which create their apparent
ease of reading, are at the same time the source of significant reading difficulties. The terms, although
indeed familiar, are often used without definition; not because authors are careless, but because words
used by social scientists can not easily be squeezed into one all-encompassing definition. There is also
always a danger when strong opinions are concerned that the reader may not be as open to appreciating
the arguments made by the author; you cannot understand a book if you refuse to hear what he is saying.
Nothing more true can be said about the specific Book discussed here. The main concepts are regularly
invoked by all of us: e.g., globalization, capitalism and democracy. Also, the Author uses many
anecdotes throughout the Book; from the mythical Kingdom of Bhutan, to the visit of Prince Charles to
the London offices of a magazine sold by the homeless, to Granny D, the 90 years old woman who
walked over 3,000 miles across America to deliver a speech on electoral reform. Finally, the Book's
main ideas are very close to our heart; the way we structure society, whether we believe in redistributive
justice, the role of politics and so forth. But the Book therefore also suffers from the same problems as
described above. Indeed, many of the terms (such as democracy and capitalism) are used without
definition. Also, the Book has to be read objectively and with an open mind in order to comprehend the
full message the Author wants to pass on to her readers; this will become very clear when I will discuss
some of the often-heard critiques on the Book (see below, under section VI).
More specifically, the Book basically consists of a number of findings concerning (international)
economy and society, which are illustrated by numerous facts and examples. As mentioned, the Book is
- as a social science work - easy to read; in addition, the Author often repeats herself, and the language
used is sometimes rather sloganesk (see more about this below under section VII). The enigmatic titles
of the Chapters (e.g., "Let Them Eat Cake") also secure the reader's attention. The absence of a table of
contents, or an index belies the fact that the Book has a very well-thought structure, which I will discuss
further on in this review (under section III). Noteworthy is the Author's distinctive and deliberate

application of a methodological technique reminiscent of Protagoras' rhetorical dictum of "arguing both

sides of a case". [xiii] Indeed, for most subjects, the Author will first describe them in an almost overly
positive way, only to show in another part of the Book the many other sides of the same coin. This
division contributes to the general difficulty of reading social science (see above), by creating a risk of
misunderstanding when quotes are taken out of context: indeed, only looking at one of the sides at a
time might create an impression of over-simplification or one-sidedeness. Actually, the Author
sometimes explicitly warns her readers for this risk of misunderstanding ("In the previous chapter, I
might have risked giving the impression that [...]. The [...] story shows that this is not the case."). [xiv]
The concluding remark of this section on style and methodology is therefore that - if one wants to get
most out of the Book - it has to be read as a whole and in an open-minded manner.
III. Summary and Structure of the Book
In order to give a rough idea of the content and the structure of the Book, which is divided into eleven
Chapters, I here briefly summarize each of them. While doing so, I try to show how the Author
establishes links between her different ideas. To that end, I took the liberty of giving each Chapter an
alternative title, stating its main subject: this exercise allows the division of the Book into the following
five parts; (i) the ideology as well as the pro's and contra's of neo-liberal capitalism (Chapters 2 and 3),
(ii) the shift of power from government to the business sector (Chapters 4 and 5), (iii) the pro's and
contra's of consumer and shareholder activism as well as of the activists' protest movement (Chapters 6,
7 and the first part of Chapter 11), (iv) the pro's and contra's of philanthropical entrepreneurs and social
policies by private corporations (Chapters 8, 9 and 10), and (v) the protest movement as a catalyst for
political change (the second part of Chapter 11). For the avoidance of doubt, in what follows I tried to
purely describe, in a "re-arranged" way, the Author's views.
Chapter 1 - The Revolution Will Not Be Televised >(Introduction and General Overview)
Chapter 2 - Living in a Material World >(Neo-Liberal Capitalism - Ideology and Advantages)
The Author starts by describing the emergence of a model of a nation characterized by a large welfare
system, state ownership of major industries and (Keynesian) interventionist governments. During the
1970's, the New Right in the United Kingdom and the United States (under Margaret Thatcher and
Ronald Reagan respectively) replaced this model with neo-liberal (free market or laissez faire)
capitalism through privatization and de-regulation (I will discuss these variants of capitalism under
section IV). It is shown how this ideology was exported to other parts of the developed and developing
world, a process which was accelerated by the fall of communism, and the adoption of similar ideology
by the traditional Left. The Author explains how this dominant world ideology was accompanied by a
shrinking of the world: the result is one single ideology for one single world. The Chapter ends with an
overview of the significant advantages these developments brought to the world, but also with the
question: what price do we have to pay for these benefits?
Chapter 3 - Let Them Eat Cake (Neo-Liberal Capitalism - Disadvantages)
The Author answers the closing question of the previous Chapter by discussing the downside of neoliberal capitalism in both developing and developed countries. The Author points out the failure of living
standards of rich and poor countries lack to converge as predicted, and the fact that, even if there is

increased prosperity in developing countries, most of the gains go to multinationals and a minority of
mostly corrupt state officials. In relation to the West, the Author highlights the continuously growing
polarization between the rich and the poor. The low-wage-earning, often unskilled workers come under
increasing pressure of global mobility (multinationals moving to the lowest-cost location), the
"knowledge economy" (requiring less manpower), and increased competition between firms (which
leads to downsizing or streamlining). These disparities are exacerbated by the privatization of health
care. The Author draws attention to the fact that even many winners in our society are suffering: in
addition to work-related stress illnesses and suicides, they also bear the costs of this breakdown in
solidarity, such as climbing crime rates.
According to the Author, the future does not look too bright either. The increasingly portable nature of
multinational corporations created "beggar thy neighbor" phenomena, whereby these corporations set up
national governments against each other in order to obtain the most favorable treatment in terms of labor
regulations, environmental standards, taxes and direct subsidies. The correlating decrease of
governmental revenues makes redistributive strategies impossible, presenting a danger to the provision
of public services, which will only increase if - as anticipated - the burden on the state grows.
The Author warns that the current economic boom tends to hide or soften the trends described here - for
the time being - but that when the bubble bursts, all of us will be faced with the questions of whether we
want a ruthless Anglo-American style capitalism, and - if not - how we will change it given that
economic forces at present undermine government's ability to address the situation (which is the subject
of the following two chapters).
Chapter 4 - Manning the Door at the Private Sector HQ (Governments Serving Business' Interests)
This Chapter shows how governments increasingly, both actively and exclusively, serve the commercial
interests of corporations, in the hope of gaining a core of prosperity for their state. Our great wars are
trade wars, with governments engaging in industrial espionage to the benefit of their companies. Also,
unethical foreign policies are pursued, such as the sale of arms to repressive rulers. The Author raises
human rights concerns when Western governments engage in trade relations with questionable regimes;
she disputes the 'trade encourages democracy' argument which is raised in response to these concerns,
and is of the opinion that, instead, governments should consider taking more positive action in this area.
In addition to this erosion of human rights, commercial interests also undermine democracy. The Author
criticizes how the United States' foreign policy of promoting "democracy" is de facto purely dictated by
commercial interests, and often paradoxically involves backing authoritarian regimes. She states that
what is actually spread around the world is more an American flavor of liberal democracy, with an
emphasis on the economic side of the liberal component thereof.
Moreover, it are the economic interests of the corporations rather than states that prevail. In this context,
the Author critically examines the functioning of international organizations such as the World Trade
Organization (see my analysis thereof under section IV).
According to the Author, the result of all this is that democratically elected politicians have become the
puppets of business, and lost sight of the reason why they are elected, i.e. to serve the needs of the whole

society, of all of us, the people.

Chapter 5 - Politics for Sale (Lobbying and Private Financing of Political Parties)
The Author explains next how politicians, failing to offer meaningful policy alternatives (as
demonstrated in the previous Chapter), increasingly need expensive and businesslike campaigns to
attract votes. The costs associated therewith create a large reliance on funding by corporations, who
expect laws favorable for their business in return. The Author finds that they frighteningly often obtain
such regulations, citing numerous examples of connections between corporate donations and policy
decisions, and notes that, whereas in the United States such practices are simply legal, in other parts of
the world, it happens as often, but rather in an illegal manner.
While the electorate shows less and less loyalty vis--vis political parties, its belief in media on the other
hand increases; the media thus gains huge political power by its ability to influence public opinion.
The result is for the Author "the end of politics"; the electorate has turned its back to politicians, which
is proven by the fact that the turnout during elections, as well as the membership of political parties has
decreased all over the world. This lost of faith in conventional politics is the bridge to the next Chapter.
Chapter 6 - Shop, Don't Vote (Consumer Movement and Shareholder Activism - Advantages)
Indeed, the non-interest of the people in politics does not mean they have disengaged from society. On
the contrary, citizens try to do themselves what their governments can no longer do, i.e. inducing
corporations to act in a ethical, socially responsible and environmentally sound way. In this Chapter, the
Author looks at two ways in which the public attempts to hold corporations accountable on such noneconomical criteria: the consumer movement and shareholder activism. The first method consists of
boycotting and the subsequent creation of negative publicity, which endangers a company's (in the age
of brands and logos) very precious reputation. According to the Author, the factors which render this
possible are: increased globalization of information (e.g. Internet) and the financial well-being of the
Western middle class, allowing them to focus on issues such as quality of life and care for others. The
second attempt to hold corporations accountable, shareholder activism, is performed by (organized
groups of) individual investors and financial institutions. It can take the form of ethical investment: the
refusal to invest in companies that are known to act in unethical ways. The Author points out that
shareholder activism can also function in much the same way as consumer activism; at shareholders'
meetings, activists force votes on ethically sensitive issues, or show up dressed as polar bears.
The Author recounts several achievements of both strategies; she notes that, although often purely
reactive in the past, corporations have now started to adopt codes of conduct, allow environmental and
even social audits, and so forth. The Author finds the politicians' reaction to this change ambiguous; on
the one hand, they tacitly endorse these new phenomena, but on the other hand they do not dare to use
the muscle of the law to resist corporations directly.
Chapter 7 - All that Glitters ... (Consumer Movement and Shareholder Activism - Disadvantages)
The Author continues her discussion of the consumer movement and shareholder activism by exposing
three limitations thereof. First, the Author assesses the reliability of the available information sources,

since consumers and shareholders are forced to operate blind if they do not have access to enough
information; the independence of the press and the news broadcasting is under pressure from the high
degree of commercialization and consolidation (creating the dilemma between the truth and the
advertisers' interests); the information provided by the companies themselves is doubtful, although codes
of conduct and environmental audits have some limited value; and independent scientific research is rare
since decreased public funding has been replaced by increased private (corporate) funds. The Author
only sees some relief in the Internet, which she describes extensively, stressing its independence and
interactivity. Secondly, consumer and shareholder activists, having an inherent need to push the
consumers to effective action, often exaggerate risks, and present complex issues in a oversimplified,
"black and white" way. Finally, the Author questions the representativity of the consumer movement
and shareholder activism, asserting that these groups may have their own agenda and be too selfinterested. Moreover, this activism only empowers those with a certain purchasing power, thereby
creating the danger of a tyranny by those who can protest effectively.
These defaults bring the Author to the preliminary conclusion that representative democracy and
political equality (i.e. each one vote) ought not to be replaced by these non-representative alternatives.
Conventional democratic politics, although currently incapable of fulfilling their original functions,
remain necessary and worth restoring. Except maybe - and this is the bridge to the next Chapters - if big
business take over governmental functions in an acceptable way ...
Chapter 8 - Evangelical Entrepreneurs (Philanthropy - Advantages)
In this Chapter, the Author explores the ways in which various philanthropical business leaders are
performing social functions in society; having benefited largely from the capitalistic system, they are
now funding cultural, health and educational initiatives all over the world. Some of these "unelected
politicians" as the Author calls them, go further by taking up political roles on the international level;
they take positions, or even actively lobby for specific changes, in areas such as international security
and human rights.
Chapter 9 - Mother Business (Social Policies by Private Corporations - Advantages)
Whereas the previous Chapter dealt with individual entrepreneurs, the Author analyzes next how
multinationals are taking over traditional functions of the state. In the Third World, they (multinationals)
are no longer backing corrupt regimes, but instead start channeling profits directly into the local
communities, by investing in education, infrastructure, health and other basic social needs. In the West,
corporations act similarly by contributing to the revitalization of inner city areas, education, poverty and
crime prevention, protection of the environment, health care and support of the elderly.
The Author gives the following reasons why corporations started caring about sustaining societies. First,
civil unrest and instability in developing countries can result in violence towards the corporations.
Secondly, there is the need for skilled workers. This presupposes that there is neither illiteracy nor lack
of education. In extreme circumstances, the lethal lack of health care means increased costs for
corporations as they must continually replace employees. Employers in developed countries face
problems of staff loyalty and employee turnover; high-skilled workers are selective and refuse to work
for companies which are known to act in doubtful ways. In addition, the morale is low in such
companies. Thirdly, a bad reputation affects sales (which is linked to Chapter 6 about consumers'

action). Finally, competition between companies induces them to always do better in these fields.
As the capabilities of big business to achieve these objectives (i.e., huge resources, rapidity, limited
bureaucracy and global reach) are bigger than those of traditional governments, the Author concludes
her findings (of this and the previous Chapter) with the question of whether this "private delivery of
public goods" can be an acceptable solution for the failings of neo-liberal capitalism.
Chapter 10 - Who will Guard the Guards? (Philanthropy, and Social Policies by Private Corporations Disadvantages)
The Author has the following objections regarding the final question of Chapter 9. First, corporations
and their management are unelected; thus, they can not be held accountable, and the people (and
especially those amongst us with little voice) run the risk of having their opinions and views imposed
upon them.
Secondly, business' core activity is simply not social investment. They have no expertise in providing
state functions, and - even if they acquire such skills - profit becomes the raison d'etre of the services
provided, which has proven unsatisfactory in the past. It raises questions about their real motives,
especially in sectors such as education. In short, in the corporate decision-making process,
moneymaking will always triumph over social considerations when the two inevitably conflict, because
corporations are, as the Author puts it, "morally ambivalent".
Thirdly, the Author argues that corporations' social behavior is made economically feasible by the
current economic boom, and that companies will stop being a "charity" when there is an economic
downturn.
Finally, the corporations' social work is a disincentive for governments to develop the appropriate
institutions, and at the same time increases the dependence of the latter on the business world.
The conclusion of the Author is that governments should at least retain their role of last regulator.
Chapter 11 - Reclaim the State (Protest Movement as a Catalyst for Change)
The last Chapter starts by describing a third way (in addition to consumer and shareholder activism) in
which citizens react to the takeover of their interests by corporations' interests. Because of the people's
skepticism about government and politics, they voice their concern in a growing protest movement; on
the streets, Internet and in shopping malls, they question corporations, governments and international
organizations alike. The Author emphasizes the breadth of the movement's appeal, its ability to bring
together divergent views, the lack of fixed membership (creating more flexibility), and the significant
successes of this movement. However, although this process makes democracy more direct and
effectively places alternative policies on the agenda, the Author notes several critiques, similar to those
regarding consumer and shareholder activism; the focus on the protesters' own interests, the undesirable
consequences of the need to play the media, the use of violence, nationalistic undertones, or sometimes
even plain malicious intent.
Thus, neither consumer and shareholder activism, nor this protest movement, are long-term solutions for

the Author. Nevertheless, the Author finds that they do play a role, i.e. that of a catalyst for change; they
might force the political sphere's return to true democracy. In order to demonstrate the feasibility of this
argument, the Author refers to two previous examples of protests leading to political change. First, in the
beginning of the 20th century, Theodore Roosevelt's Progressive Party emerged in the United States
following people's negative reaction to the corruption and corporate dimension of politics at that time.
Secondly, the environmental movement in Europe in the 1960's was a reaction against the refusal of
politics to consider environmental concerns. The Author warns however that - although there is a change
in political rhetoric - there is no guarantee that politicians will indeed react in the same way as they did
in these two examples, given their desire to maintain the status quo, to preserve the system they have
produced. The final message therefore is to continue, for the time being, "to shop and protest rather
than vote".
IV. Analysis of The Three Main Themes
As mentioned before, one of the main themes of the Book is the taking over by the business world of
part of the governmental powers and authority. Evidence of this focus is not only the title of the Book
(i.e. the "takeover"), but also its whole structure, which the Author seems to have conceived around this
concept; the idea is that each Chapter, or some of them together, describe a different "step" in said
takeover, building up to a kind of final climax (e.g., towards the end of the Book, the Author writes
about "the spring shoots of the latest phase of the Silent Takeover"). Probably the Author does not see
the takeover necessarily as chronological or linear as this structure would first induce us to believe, but
rather as a methodological approach, allowing the Author to discuss different aspects of the takeover.
However, this approach tends to obscure the fact that the Book presents not one but three (separate, but
related) concerns. To formulate them in a very simplified way, they are: one, the fact that there is
something wrong with society, two, the apparent inability of national democracies to deal with it, and,
three, the current remedies for this democratic deficit. Another way to approach the Book is therefore to
group the Chapters around these themes: (i) Chapters 2, 3, part of Chapter 4, together with Chapters 8, 9
and 10 show the undesirable characteristics of contemporary society, (ii) another part of Chapter 4
combined with Chapter 5 deal with the failing of national democracy, and (iii) Chapters 6, 7 and 11
discuss societies' current and future remedies for said deficit. In this section, I will analyze the Author's
standpoint on these three themes.
1. Failing of Society (Primacy of Economic Interests, and Neo-Liberal Global Capitalism)
Failing of society, although not clearly presented as a separate theme, is the starting point of the Author's
reasoning: the idea is that the way we have structured society seems to be failing because of an
exaggerated primacy given to economic interests. The Author mentions in her Book several societal
problems which thus have been neglected, such as respect for human rights and protection of the
environment; however, since the Author's focuses almost exclusively on society's failure of being "just"
(this is confirmed by the mention made in section I to the Author's positioning herself as part of a "pro
justice or global justice movement"), [xv] I will do the same in this review.
As the subtitle of the Book (i.e. "Global Capitalism") already indicates, the cause of said injustice has to
do with capitalism: we need therefore to explore the Author's standpoint on capitalism, starting with a
definition of this term. Capitalism refers to a way of structuring society which differs fundamentally

from its predecessor, feudalism, because of the existence of free markets for production factors (i.e.
labor, land and capital). [xvi] Economists describe the essence of capitalism as a "psychological
orientation toward the pursuit of future wealth and property", or, a "belief that economic growth [...] is
possible and desirable", [xvii] and agree on certain minimum requirements which exist for any capitalist
system (i.e. organized around a market economy that emphasizes private property, entrepreneurial
opportunity, technological innovation, the sanctity of contracts, payment of wages in money, and the
ready availability of credit). However, capitalism is not a closed or homogeneous ideological system:
different ideologies exist based upon its foundations. [xviii]
The Author is clearly not opposed to these foundations as such, when she states that her "argument is
not intended to be anti-capitalist" and that "[c]apitalism is clearly the best system for generating wealth,
and [...] brought unprecedented economic growth to most if not all of the world.". [xix] What the
Author does question is that most nations seem to have agreed on one specific capitalism-based
ideology, described in Chapter 2. To designate this variant of capitalism, she uses the following
adjectives, of which I added a commonly used definition: [xx]
- "Anglo-American style": characterized by "an extreme form of competitive individualism [with the]
social costs [...] [being] very severe";
- "laissez-faire": "the principle that economy works best if private industry is not regulated and markets
are free";
- "free-market": "economic system in which businesses operate without government control in matters
such as pricing and wage levels"; and
- "neo-liberal": "political view, arising in the 1960s, that emphasizes the importance of economic growth
and asserts that social justice is best maintained by minimal government interference and free market
forces".
It is probably the last expression, i.e. neo-liberal capitalism, which best reflects the Author's message,
and which will therefore be used in this review ("Neo-Liberal Capitalism"). The traces of Neo-Liberal
Capitalism can be seen in the Author's challenge to those economists who claim that market mechanisms
will automatically correct the negative social impact of capitalism (the so-called "trickle down" effect),
and that therefore social intervention by the government is neither required nor allowed ("antiwelfarism"). It is this idea - that everything will eventually work out fine by itself - which the Author
questions by demonstrating the apparent persistence of the social injustices in the face of such inaction.
This is the main purpose of Chapter 3: present evidence of the growing inequalities, which are signs of a
"breakdown in solidarity", of a growing "economic and social exclusion" (as the Author puts it in a
recent article). [xxi] Such standpoint - that Neo-Liberalism has gone too far - is becoming more and
more mainstream: indeed, a recent work on the impact of Globalization on the welfare state concludes
that "neo-liberalism [...] pushed society toward market mechanism too far and thus toward too much
insecurity". [xxii]
To make her case complete, the Author analyzes in Chapters 8, 9 and 10 whether companies can maybe
take care of these social injustices, and thus in a sense perform the roles of a social intervening
government. The reason for such exercise is obvious: if this could work, it would mean that, ultimately,

Neo-Liberal Capitalism is not failing. However, the Author makes a compelling case that the corporate
provision of welfare is undesirable. Therefore, the conclusion of the previous findings remains: the NeoLiberal experiment seems to be malfunctioning.
To complete this overview of the Author's understanding of capitalism, it should be examined what is
meant by the term "Global Capitalism" (in the subtitle of the Book). One possibility is that it refers to
the following expression used by the Author: the "neo-liberal consensus on globalization". This is
however a rather unfortunate formulation since it is difficult to conceive something like a Globalization
based upon the premises of Neo-Liberal Capitalism: indeed, Globalization is the integration of national
economies, which can be Neo-Liberal Capitalistic systems, but also mixed economies (based on the
Keynesian model), or even centrally planned economies. In other parts of the Book - and this seems
more plausible - "Global Capitalism" seems to refer to the fact that Neo-Liberal Capitalism is being
exported throughout the world (the idea of "one ideology for one world").
Let us try to summarize the preceding paragraphs: the Author spends considerable effort presenting
evidence for the assertion that the Neo-Liberal promise of automatic social adjustment is not being
fulfilled. Although one might expect this, the Book's goal is nevertheless not to find a final solution to
this injustice: the Author's purpose is merely to revive the classical debate on "one of the central
problems of capitalist societies: [...] how to distribute equitably the bountiful fruits of economic growth".
[xxiii] In this sense, the Author is modest about her ambitions (evidence thereof is her statement in a
recent article that it is necessary to "[...] investigate the impact of economic globalization [...] [since w]e
do not know the answers to all these questions." [xxiv] ): she only wants to challenge the fact that this
matter is not even put on the table for discussion by our national politicians, who seem to be stuck in
their Neo-Liberal ways and approach. Thus, we enter the second theme of the Book: the failing of
national democracies.
2. Failing of National Democracies (Public Choice Theory, and International Economic Forces)
Before entering dans le vif du sujet, a word should be said on an almost implicit assumption made by the
Author, which is that the electorate indeed wants the politicians to examine and fight social inequalities.
This is not so obvious as it first seems: it might very well be that the people are willing to take the risk
of ultimately living in severe poverty, as long as there is a chance of either themselves or their children
becoming extremely wealthy (in other words, the idea of a "Winner-Take-All Society", such as that
which prevails in the United States [xxv] ). In the same line of thoughts, one of the Book's
commentators notes that the "constraint is political. It is not beastly capitalism that prevents countries
from raising the higher taxes Hertz wants, but the democracy she adores" (in my opinion, this comment
also goes too far, by presenting the people's unwillingness as a certainty). [xxvi] The possibility that the
unwillingness to tackle societies' failings might lay - not with the politicians - but with the citizenry
itself, has even greater implications for the attention that can be given to other concerns, such as the
enforcement of human rights and environmental protection, which are less close to our heart than
income equality. In the field of the human rights, even the Author seems to acknowledge - in a subtle
way - said possibility when she notes that "it is unclear whether Western electorates would favour
action (which may incur personal costs) over doing nothing" and that the electorate "is perceived to be
and perhaps is an ambivalent public". [xxvii] For the avoidance of doubt, I am not arguing that people
are indeed that short-minded and egocentric, but only that the Author should have dealt more explicitly
with this possibility. From here on, for the sake of the argument, I will take for granted the Author's

implicit assumption that (a majority of) the people wishes the politicians to react.
Definition of Democracy - This being said, the Author argues that the political bodies refuse or are
unable to examine whether society is unjust (or failing in one of the other ways described above), let
alone - if it would be established that this indeed is the case - to fight such injustice. This constitutes for
the Author a failing of (national) democracy: the "Death of Democracy" as the subtitle reads. Since the
Book does not explicitly contains a definition of democracy, and the term has been and continues to be
used indiscriminately, [xxviii] we need to clarify the way in which the Author understands it. The
Author seems to use "democracy" to signify a certain kind of rule (as opposed to a social system, or a
political or ethical idea), [xxix] more precisely a system of popular control over governmental policies
and decisions (this finding is based upon different sentences in the Book which seem to imply this, such
as "the implicit contract between state and citizen that lies at the heart of a democratic society",
"governments [...] fail to respect the wishes of many of their own citizens", "Governments [...] are
supposed to be social institutions, within which responsiveness to citizens is, or at least should be,
central", and "governments putting the people's interests first [...] [would constitute a] return to true
democracy"). [xxx] It is the idea of a rule by the people or demos - a sovereign authority that decides
important political matters either directly in popular assemblies or indirectly through its representatives with a government of the state responsive and accountable to this demos. [xxxi] In other words, if the
Author claims that (national) democracy is failing, what she means by this is that somehow (national)
governments are no longer responding to the people.
Causes: Corporations - As far the causes which the Author sees for this failing, a fundamental
distinction has to be made between the influence of, on the one hand, corporations, and on the other,
international economic forces. It should be noted that while the first matter results in an "unwillingness"
of politicians (although in theory still capable) to take certain policy decisions, the second cause
involves an "inability" to do so.
Let us begin with the influence of corporations: as the Author stressed during an interview, her
standpoint is not that Big Business is more powerful than governments, [xxxii] but rather that
corporations have grown so strong that they do pose a threat to national democracies. Her argument (as
we see in expressions such as "Politics for Sale" and "The price of politics") [xxxiii] is essentially one
of, what is called in Law and Economics, "public choice theory". This theory is build around the core
conviction that well-organized groups - seeking to advance their members' self-interest at someone else's
cost - tend to win out in the "public policy market". It is further "rational behavior" for politicians to
seek to maximize their chances of reelection by behaving most favorably towards those interest groups
that give him most (e.g., financial) support, and, similarly, for interest groups to not use their resources
to seek legislation benefitting others. Although this seems to contribute to a flourishing and robust
democracy - a pluralist model of democratic decision-making - this is only the case if all interests
compete equally in the "political marketplace for legislative favor". However, public choice theory
observes that effective lobbying is costly: the consequent cost-benefit calculus tends to work in favor of
homogenous interests shared by a small number of citizens (with relatively large and obvious individual
effects), but against diverse interests shared by many citizens (with relatively small or non-obvious
individual effects). Thus, the phenomena of self-serving lobbying and legislative capture will result in
public policy systematically biased towards narrow interests at the expense of overall social welfare.
[xxxiv] In other words, the potential imbalances - which result from the unequal share of wealth held by
the participants in a presumptively egalitarian system of governance - is said to be challenging the

notion of democratic "rule of the people, by the people, and for the people". [xxxv] It now becomes clear
how this fits in the Author's reasoning: the powerful and organized interest groups are the business
corporations ("[...] link between corporate funding and policy changes that favour a donor company
[...]") [xxxvi] , who obtain favorable legislation to the detriment of us, the citizens. [xxxvii] This being
said, other academics argue that corporations have a right to be heard, just as any other group in society
with legitimate political concerns and responsibilities. Moreover, they consider this "corporate political
speech" to be indispensable in protecting business' interests against "ever-increasing and potentially
unwise government regulation": by attempting to correct such unwise public policies, corporations speak
beyond their own narrow self-interest. [xxxviii] Thus, we can conclude that the Author's concerns
regarding the corporations' influence on national public policy are plausible, but not undebated.
Causes (continued): International Economic Forces - The Author's second concern for national
democracy is the influence of international economic forces. This concern finds it origin in the following
rather simple observations. [xxxix] The spatial boundaries of a nation state define - within the
"pluriverse" of nation states - a limited territory: this territory gives the nation's citizens the right to
participate in decision-making procedures. However, since citizens are also acting economically, they
construe an economic space which transcends the limited political territory. The result is a continuous
tension between "economic boundlessness" and "political limitedness", which is inseparably woven into
the world's system of nation-states. In other words, the said tension was already inherently present at the
very creation of the "Westphalian order" of nation states. However, it has significantly intensified
because of the increased Globalization (in its economic sense of increased economic interpenetration of
nations). The result is that national governments find their economic and social policy choices more and
more constrained by a "complex of external legal obligations and transborder economic exchanges":
thus, formal authority is matched less and less by effective control. [xl] It is therefore not surprising that
one of the most full-on debates on Globalization is its long-term implications for the sovereign power of
states.
The general contours of the debate being exposed, I will now briefly discuss the three specific
international economic forces that the Author mentions. The first one is, again, the business world:
indeed, to the extent private companies become multinationals, they curtail governmental decisionmaking power by their mobility to move abroad. This is the so-called "beggah thy neighbor"
phenomenon, which has to be distinguished from the Author's argument regarding "public choice
theory". Indeed, while the latter theory only dealt with the influence of big business over politicians still leaving them the final word - the "beggah thy neighbor" phenomenon results in "politicians' hands
[being] tied" [xli] : in politicians who no longer have the last word.
Secondly, the Author points to the fact that "global market forces [...] seem to challenge state
sovereignty itself": since the Author is very brief on this subject, I will limit myself to noting that this
also is an on-going debate (e.g., one scholar concludes his study by stating that "it seems [...] that the
domestic political impact of the global integration of markets in goods, services and capital essentially
depends on domestic conditions in particular countries", [xlii] which means as much that the precise
impact is unknown).
Finally, the Author mentions international organizations; the Author finds that - although it is ultimately
the route to be taken (as we will see in the next paragraph) - many of these institutions are
"unaccountable" in their current form. For example, the Author accuses the World Trade Organization

("WTO") of exclusively taking care of trade interests - without any possibility for the governments to
give priority to other policies - and of failing to take into account the weak position of the developing
countries. The Author's concerns are reasonably justified, and shared by many other writers (e.g., "Our
purpose here it to document a insidious shift on decision-making [...] to distant, secretive and
unaccountable international bodies [...]"). [xliii] However - as was the case with her other concerns they are subject of a vigorous, on-going debate, which I will not fully explore in this review; it is worth
noting, though, that the debate's central theme is the dilemma between maintaining small democratic
units (which provides citizens with greater opportunities to participate in governing, but of which the
government is likely to be unable to deal effectively with broader matters) or enlarging these units (in
which case the government will be able to deal with such matters, but which will diminish the citizens'
capacity to participate effectively in governing). [xliv] Still with regard to the WTO, the Author warns
also that this organization is almost purely driven by corporate interests: this problem is mutatis
mutandis the same as the one of the companies' influence on domestic institutions, and I refer to the
explanation in the previous paragraph about public choice theory.
3. The Remedies for the Democratic Deficit (International Institutions, and Civil Society)
The Author describes two ways in which society is handling the democratic deficit described above. The
first one is the use of international organizations, which she fundamentally favors when she writes that
"[a]ttempts to set national policies within supranational programs, and moves towards more
international governance - essential if national governments are to have any hope of restraining global
corporations". [xlv] However, as we have seen in the previous paragraph, the current international
organizations represent for the Author both a solution and a problem.
In addition to international organizations, the Author also describes civil society's dealing with the
democratic deficit (i.e. consumer and shareholder activism, and activists' protest movement). As I have
pointed out in the summary of the Book, the Author evaluates this movement negatively as a long term
solution, since it leaves traditional politics outside of the arena. On the other hand, the Author gives while acknowledging the defaults as a long term solution - this movement a function as "catalyst for
change". This idea is based upon the assumption that democracy can fail: it might occur that a majority
of the people wants a change, but that the democratic institutions simply do not respond to this wish,
because of particular circumstances (which, so the Author argues, is the case nowadays; see the previous
paragraphs). In that case, the citizens will at a certain point "step outside" of the traditional democratic
system, in order to have their voice heard and, most importantly, with the goal - once results have been
obtained (i.e., democracy is restored) - to "re-enter" said system. It should be noted that the Author
stands not alone with these ideas, and that other scholars also acknowledge this role of civil society.
[xlvi] The central and final message is thus to not loose faith in democracy and traditional politics, but,
on the contrary, to endeavor to make democratic governments stronger again: seen the many
commentators who do not seem to see this message, one could see it as a flaw of the Book that the
Author has not made this point more explicit.
V. Evaluation of Background Information
The previous section dealt with the general findings of the Author. Another major part of every
reviewer's task is the assessment a work's background information; this is even more true for this Book,
given the numerous illustrating facts and examples (omitted in the summary given above). It is of course

not within the scope of this review to analyze all these figures individually. This being said, the
following general observations can be made regarding the quality of the Book's information.
On the one hand, there is sufficient ground to say that the Author has generally avoided one-sided views
on the matters presented. Indeed - as already mentioned in the section of this review relating to style and
methodology - the Author repeatedly examines both sides of phenomena. This is not only true for most
of the main themes (i.e. free market capitalism, consumer and shareholder activism, activists' protest
movement, philanthropical entrepreneurs and social policies by private corporations) - as is clearly
shown by the preceding expos on the structure of the Book - but also for a majority of the positions
taken on more specific issues. Examples include the Author's discussion of questions such as whether or
not capitalism is materially benefiting the people (respectively "[...] an unprecedented rate of growth of
material prosperity [...]", and "inequality has risen significantly over the past two decades") [xlvii] and
whether multinational companies are ratcheting environmental standards up or down (respectively "[...]
companies, fearful of being singled out as environmentally unsound, are following suit [...] agreeing to
match BP's [environmental] targets [...]", and "[...] 'pollution havens' are created as environmentally
unfriendly policies are allowed far below socially desirable levels [...]") [xlviii] , as well as her
assessment - analyzed at the end of this paragraph - of the efficiency of economic sanctions against
Third World countries. Maybe an even better evidence of the Book's balanced approach is the fact that it
has been vigorously attacked by both sides of the Globalization debate; both by the establishment as by
anti-globalization writers (the Author has been described as a "corporate wolf in activist sheep
clothing"). Also, on the question of whether there was balanced geographic and regional coverage, the
Author covers both the developed and developing world, and - as part of this coverage - makes where
necessary the distinction between what happens in the (poor, developing) South and in the (rich,
developed) North. However, as far as the latter region is concerned there might be a too large focus on
the situation in the United States and in the United Kingdom. Finally, it should be mentioned that one of
the most repeated critiques on the Book is that it merely restates "old" news [xlix] : a way of seeing this
as a positive rather than negative thing is to note that this effectively means that the factual premise of
the Author's arguments are rather undisputed.
On the other hand, the previous comments obviously do not guarantee a detailed and accurate
description of each phenomenon mentioned by the Author. Instead, there were times where the Author
made rather unfortunate use of figures. One example is the Author's findings that "51 of the 100 biggest
economies of the world are now corporations" and that "the sales of GM and Ford are greater than the
GDP of the whole of sub-Saharan Africa" (underlining by author). These statements are misleading
because they involve a comparison of the companies' sales with the countries' GDP, when it has been
pointed out that GDP is a measure of value added, and that therefore the variable according to which the
companies are measured in this comparison should be, not their sales, but also their value added (i.e. the
value of their sales minus the cost of their inputs). [l] In an interview, the Author acknowledged that
another criterion might have been better, but asserted that nevertheless there would still be twenty
companies on the list of hundred biggest companies.
Further, even descriptions which show both sides of an issue are not necessarily free from critique;
sometimes the Author seems to fault within the balanced description of certain phenomena. For
example, in the evaluation of the Western countries' foreign policy, the Author mentions the possibility
of these countries imposing economic sanctions on oppressive regimes in the Third World, while at the
same time warning that the context in which they are imposed should be taken into account. To show the

importance of the context, she notes that - while the sanctions against South-Africa and Burma were
"appropriate" - those imposed on Iraq were "wrong", which she illustrates by taking the following quote
from an article on the subject: "UN's own agencies admit that up to 5,300 children are dying every
month from disease, malnutrition and related conditions. All told, it is believed that 500,000 Iraqi's have
died since 1991 as an indirect result of the sanctions". [li] The fault lies in the fact that the Author
presents the allegation that sanctions lead to such a number of casualties as a certainty; however, these
figures are rigorously debated and their usage has even been described as a "mangling [of] the facts to
prove a debatable point". [lii]
However, this example of the Author's presumption of certainty and the example of misrepresentation
by a lack of preciseness should not belie the fact that most of the time the Book represents a relatively
well balanced and researched presentation of the facts.
VI. Discussion of Three Critiques
In this section, I examine three often heard critiques on the Book, starting with the most easiest one to
refute: certain commentators seem to find it problematic that the Author is a well-dressed, young woman
(which lead to her title of "antiglobal babe" [liii] ). The evident reply to this - which can even be found
in a children's book [liv] - is that a work should be judged on its content, and not on the author's
appearance (or, as the Author puts it in an interview "as soon as they start talking about my boots, I
know they are in a weak position") [lv] .
Secondly, some find that the Book lacks originality, and that it only reformulates what has been said
before. It is certainly the case that the Book refers to many other works, and that several of the Author's
findings are based upon theories developed by other scholars. However, this is not per se a bad thing: it
all depends on the role the Author has envisaged her Book to play (i.e., in my opinion, a call for action:
see section VII).
Finally, it is said that the Author over-simplifies complex issues: there are two replies against such
critique. One is that there will always be discussion about the dividing line between making difficult
matters accessible to the public on the one hand, and over-simplification on the other. The second reply
is that a major part of this critique is based on a misunderstanding of the Author's standpoint, many of
which are due to the Author's technique of "arguing both sides of a case" (see section II).
VII. Conclusion: The Author's Double Message, and Solutions
In this last section, I will make two final remarks. The first one is that, in my opinion, the Book has a
double message: it is both a warning to the politicians that they should regain control over society, as
well as an encouragement for the people to continue with the protest movement until democracy is
restored (which might explain the sometimes sloganesk style). As far as the second message is
concerned, we are confronted with a kind of dilemma: indeed, this kind of "tyranny by the people"
should not be a permanent solution, but - temporarily - it is acceptable.
The second closing remark is that, at the end of the Book - when the Author has convinced us that the
political system ought to change - we are left with the difficult part: how will we change it? As such, this
is not a flaw of the Book: the awareness, and not the solution, of the problem was the Author's goal. In

this respect, it should be noted that in a recent article, the Author picks up where her Book ended, and
starts formulating certain proposals to address the situation (e.g., the creation of a "World Social
Organization", the investigation by an international independent commission of the impact of
globalization, and so forth). [lvi]
***

[i] JOHN BRAITHWAITE & PETER DRAHOS, GLOBAL BUSINESS REGULATION 172
(Cambridge University Press 2000).
[ii] Extracts of the Book have been published in separate articles, more precisely: Noreena Hertz, Better
to shop than to vote, NEW STATESMAN (June 21, 1999); Noreena Hertz, Why we must stay silent no
longer, OBSERVER OF LONDON (April 8, 2001); Noreena Hertz, Why consumer power is not
enough, NEW STATESMAN (April 30, 2001). The Book is also accompanied by a documentary
entitled "The End of Politics" (aired on the British "Channel 4"), and described in: Andrew Billen, A
serious Business, NEW STATESMAN (May 21, 2001), Vol. 14, Iss. 657, 47.
[iii] The Author includes references to Klein's work in her Book.
[iv] Louis Uchitelle, Challenging the Dogmas of Free Trade, N.Y. TIMES, February 9, 2002, at B7.
[v] ROBERT HEILBRONER & LESTER THUROW, ECONOMICS EXPLAINED 195 (Touchstone
1998) (1982). A similar definition ("increasing interaction of national economic systems") is given by:
Alan Greenspan, Trade Policy, Testimony before the Committee on Finance - U.S. Senate, available at
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/testimony/2001/200104042/default.htm.
[vi] Robert O. Keohane, Governance in a Partially Globalized World - Presidential Address, American
Political Science Association, 95 APSR 1 (2000), 1.
[vii] ANTHONY GIDDENS, THE CONSEQUENCE OF MODERNITY 64 (1990), cited in Philippe
Sands, Turtles and Torturers: The Transformation of International Law, 33 N.Y.U. J. INT'L L. & POL.
527 (2001) 537.
[viii] John Kay, INSIDE TRACK: The great paradox of globalisation: Rich-country multinationals
benefit from wider markets. But they also face more competition, F.T., November 14, 2001 , available at
http://globalarchive.ft.com/globalarchive/article.html?id=011114001573&query=john+kay#docAnchor0
11114001573 ("[...] it is time to ask what exactly we mean by globalisation. [...] the term globalisation
came to encompass measures [...] that had no direct relationship to internationalisation of the world
economy.").
[ix] Hans Steketee, Interview - Econoom Noreena Hertz, het Britse gezicht van de anti-globalisten (Free
translation: Interview - Economist Noreena Hertz, the British face of the anti-globalists), DE

STANDAARD (Belgian newspaper), February 12, 2002, available at www.standaard.be.

[x] Michael Porter, Yagil Weinberg & Noreena Hertz, Making Real Progress in the Middle East - The
Bottom-Up, Economic Solution, available at www.alumni.hbs.edu/bulletin/1997/december/opinion.html.
[xi] Info about Author's life: Hans Steketee, Interview - Econoom Noreena Hertz, het Britse gezicht van
de anti-globalisten (Free translation: Interview - Economist Noreena Hertz, the British face of the antiglobalists), DE STANDAARD (Belgian newspaper), February 12, 2002, available at
www.standaard.be; Marco Visscher, De nieuwe wereldorde van Noreena Hertz, ODE (Dutch
Magazine),
May
2002,
Iss.
46,
available
at
http://62.250.7.129/ode/mijn_ode/1dezemaand/1frameset.htm; Penelope Dening, Hertz in the Right
Place
Noreena
Hertz:
No
auto-didact
eco-warrior,
available
at
www.ireland.com/dublin/entertainment/books/noreena_hertz260501.htm.
[xii] MORTIMER ADLER & CHARLES VAN DOREN, HOW TO READ A BOOK 300 (Touchstone
1972) (1940).
[xiii] Protagoras was an Ancient Greek philosopher, belonging to the School of the Sophists.
[xiv] Page 136 of Book.
[xv] Another concern is the preservation of cultural identity; during an interview, the Author explicitly
states that that is not her goal (and that she leaves this up to Naomi Klein). See: Hans Steketee,
Interview - Econoom Noreena Hertz, het Britse gezicht van de anti-globalisten (Free translation:
Interview - Economist Noreena Hertz, the British face of the anti-globalists), DE STANDAARD
(Belgian newspaper), February 12, 2002, available at www.standaard.be.
[xvi] ROBERT HEILBRONER & LESTER THUROW, ECONOMICS EXPLAINED 14 (Touchstone
1998) (1982).
[xvii] THOMAS K. McCRAW, CREATING MODERN CAPITALISM 4-5 (Harvard University Press
2000) (1995).
[xviii] Mihaly Simai, The democratization process and the market, in TAKASHI INOGUCHI,
EDWARD NEWMAN & JOHN KEANE, THE CHANGING NATURE OF DEMOCRACY 120
(United Nations University Press 1998).
[xix] Page 10 of Book.
[xx] Source for these definitions is the Encarta World English Dictionary On-Line (North American
Edition: available at www.dictionary.msn.com), except for the definition of Anglo-American capitalism
(THOMAS K. McCRAW, CREATING MODERN CAPITALISM 348 (Harvard University Press 2000)
(1995)).
[xxi] Noreena Hertz, A plan for the world: Exclusion, NEW STATESMAN (October 22, 2001), Vol. 14,

Iss. 679, 22.

[xxii] , HIROTO TSUKADA, ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION AND CITIZENS' WELFARE STATE
216 (Ashgate 2002).
[xxiii] THOMAS K. McCRAW, CREATING MODERN CAPITALISM 7 (Harvard University Press
2000) (1995).
[xxiv] Noreena Hertz, A plan for the world: Exclusion, NEW STATESMAN (October 22, 2001), Vol.
14, Iss. 679, 22.
[xxv] FRANK H. ROBERT & PHILIP J. COOK, THE WINNER-TAKE-ALL-SOCIETY (Penguin
Books 1996).
[xxvi] Martin Wolf, Infantile Leftist, PROSPECT (June 14, 2001), 3.
[xxvii] Page 77 of Book.
[xxviii] Robert A. Dahl, Can international organizations be democratic? A skeptic's view, in IAN
SHAPIRO & CASIANO HACKER-CORDON, DEMOCRACY'S EDGES 19 (Cambridge University
Press 1999).
[xxix] JENS A. CHRISTOPHERSEN,
(Universitetsforlaget 1966).

THE

MEANING

OF

"DEMOCRACY"

285

[xxx] Respectively pages 11, 76, 196 and 205 of Book.

[xxxi] Robert A. Dahl, Can international organizations be democratic? A skeptic's view, in IAN
SHAPIRO & CASIANO HACKER-CORDON, DEMOCRACY'S EDGES 20 (Cambridge University
Press 1999).
[xxxii] Hans Steketee, Interview - Econoom Noreena Hertz, het Britse gezicht van de anti-globalisten
(Free translation: Interview - Economist Noreena Hertz, the British face of the anti-globalists), DE
STANDAARD (Belgian newspaper), February 12, 2002, available at www.standaard.be.
[xxxiii] Respectively pages 89 and 93 of Book.
[xxxiv] Andrew C. Geddis, Democratic Visions and Third-Party Independent Expenditures: A
Comparative View, 9 Tul. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 5 (2001); Cynthia R. Farina & Jeffrey J. Rachlinski,
Foreword to Symposium Getting Beyond Cynicism: New Theories of the Regulatory State, 87 Cornell L.
Rev. 267 (2002), available at WL 87 CNLLR 267.
[xxxv] Andrew C. Geddis, Democratic Visions and Third-Party Independent Expenditures: A
Comparative View, 9 Tul. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 5 (2001); Ian Marsh, Political Representation and
Economic Competitiveness: Is a New Democratic Synthesis Conceivable?, in TAKASHI INOGUCHI,
EDWARD NEWMAN & JOHN KEANE, THE CHANGING NATURE OF DEMOCRACY 136

(United Nations University Press 1998).

[xxxvi] Page 96 of Book.
[xxxvii] This should be understood as "the citizens behind the corporations" versus "the citizens outside
the corporate world".
[xxxviii] Nicole Bremner Casarez, Corruption, Corrosion and Corporate Political Speech, 70 Neb. L.
Rev. 689 (1991), available at WL 70 NELR 689.
[xxxix] Elmar Altvater, The democratic order, economic global, and ecological restrictions - on the
relation of material and formal democracy, in IAN SHAPIRO & CASIANO HACKER-CORDON,
DEMOCRACY'S EDGES 41 (Cambridge University Press 1999).
[xl] Dermot McCann, Small States in Globalizing Markets: The End of National Economic
Sovereignty?, 34 N.Y.U. J. INT'L L. & POL. 281 (2001) 281.
[xli] Page 108 of Book.
[xlii] Kyung Won Kim, Trade, Monetary Policy, and Democracy, in MARC F. PLATTNER &
ALEKSANDER SMOLAR, GLOBALIZATION, POWER, AND DEMOCRACY 130 (John Hopkins
University Press 2000).
[xliii] LORI WALLACH, & MICHELLE SFORZA, THE WTO - FIVE YEARS OF REASONS TO
RESIST CORPORATE GLOBALIZATION 14 (Seven Stories Press 1999).
[xliv] Robert A. Dahl, Can international organizations be democratic? A skeptic's view, in IAN
SHAPIRO & CASIANO HACKER-CORDON, DEMOCRACY'S EDGES 22 (Cambridge University
Press 1999).
[xlv] Page 210 and 211 of Book.
[xlvi] John S. Dryzek, Transnational Democracy, in JOURNAL OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
(1999), vol. 7, nr. 1, 44 ("civil society [...] as public action in response to failure in either the state or the
economy"); Iris Marion Young, State, civil society, and social justice, in IAN SHAPIRO & CASIANO
HACKER-CORDON, DEMOCRACY'S VALUES 152 and 153 (Cambridge University Press 1999)
("People acting in civil society [...] debate problems either in order to influence change in state or
corporate policy, or to foster change in society directly").
[xlvii] Respectively pages 35 and 41 of Book.
[xlviii] Respectively pages 183 and 42 of Book.
[xlix] Jennifer Szalai, We can't, we won't, NEW STATESMAN (June 11, 2001) ("[...] the examples in
this book are nothing new."); Sander Pleij, De Volgende Onheilsprofeet, DE GROENE
AMSTERDAMMER
(Dutch
Magazine)
(August
11,
2001),
available
at

http://www.groene.nl/2001/0132/sp_noreena.html ("De kritiek op haar boek - ze [...] zegt niet veel

nieuws" - free translation "The critique on her book - she [...] does not say much new"); Charles
Leadbeater,
Untitled,
MANAGEMENT
TODAY,
available
at
http://www.clickmt.com/books/archive/book0104271618041200.cfm ("[...] little new in the argument
[...]").
[l] Martin Wolf, Infantile Leftist, PROSPECT (June 14, 2001), 2 and 3.
[li] Page 75 of Book.
[lii] Matt Welch, The Politics of Dead Children - Have Sanctions against Iraq murdered Millions?,
REASON (March 2002), 3.03, 56.
[liii] Hans Steketee, Interview - Econoom Noreena Hertz, het Britse gezicht van de anti-globalisten
(Free translation: Interview - Economist Noreena Hertz, the British face of the anti-globalists), DE
STANDAARD (Belgian newspaper), February 12, 2002, available at www.standaard.be.
[liv] ANTOINE DE SAINT EXUPERY, LE PETIT PRINCE (Chapter 4: "[...] the astronomer had
presented it to the [...] Congress, in a great demonstration. But he was in Turkish costume, and so
nobody would believe what he said. [...] Fortunately, however, [...] a Turkish dictator made a law that
his subjects, under pain of death, should change to European costume. So in 1920 the astronomer gave
his demonstration all over again, dressed with impressive style and elegance. And this time everybody
accepted his report.").
[lv] Marco Visscher, De nieuwe wereldorde van Noreena Hertz, ODE (Dutch Magazine), May 2002,
Iss. 46, available at http://62.250.7.129/ode/mijn_ode/1dezemaand/1frameset.htm.
[lvi] Noreena Hertz, A plan for the world: Exclusion, NEW STATESMAN (October 22, 2001), Vol. 14,
Iss. 679, 22.