I'm curious if the commenter meant "free trade" in the sense it's used by most politicians, which is to say deals between nations involving trade, which is to say effectively the opposite of "freedom of trade."
I read the book a while ago, and the general point was that it is a misconception that capitalistic free trade was a driver of high growth in today's powerful western economies. These countries actually engaged in significant levels of industrial protectionism during key parts of their economic history.
I don't think the book was making a point about what is best for developing nations today, just attacking the the idea that laissez-faire capitalism built the US economy.
It's quite a good, short book, if you want to get a perspective on capitalism that's neither from a Communist or a university's Business & Commerce faculty.
I don't think the book was making a point about what is best for developing nations today, just attacking the the idea that laissez-faire capitalism built the US economy.
It's quite a good, short book, if you want to get a perspective on capitalism that's neither from a Communist or a university's Business & Commerce faculty.