J.E Stiglitz, Nobel Prize winner in economics, published his latest book in 2024, entitled The Roads of Freedom. Economics and Good Society, which has just been translated into French. In it, he traces his “intellectual journey over the last half-century”, which has been marked by multiple theoretical currents, economic crises and social events. In his book, the author analyzes the economic systems implemented in several countries and internationally, according to the type of risk they pose to markets and their main actors: businesses, citizen-consumers and public institutions. He supports systems that ensure a “balance between economic and political freedoms”. He distinguishes several types of freedoms: “to work, to enjoy the fruits of one’s labor, to own property and manage it, to participate in a free market, but also, to be free from want and fear”. He shows the complexity of the concept of freedom, whose determinants, inherited from the history of each nation-state, are more or less compatible. J.E. Stiglitz deals with the issue of freedom through a discourse analysis – or “rhetoric” – and the actions of the main actors of economic and social life, including governments and the media.  Freedom has an “intrinsic link with the notions of equity, justice and well-being.” Its enjoyment is directly conditioned by the dominant economic system in the country. The exercise of these freedoms should contribute to “the development and realization of the potential” of citizens. The author is thus led to analyze the different forms of capitalism, and especially that of neoliberal capitalism – which he calls “unfettered” – inspired by Hayek and Friedman and became dominant in the late 1970s. According to Stiglitz, this system is based on a deliberate underestimation of its externalities and on the mistaken belief in a strong efficiency of economic, monetary and financial markets. He focuses his analysis on the system applied in the United States, which he recognizes the strengths – including dynamism and flexibility – but denounces the weaknesses, mainly economic instability and social insecurity. He denounces the biases of measurement systems of economic exchanges and social inequalities, which contribute to “shrinking the societal well-being”. J.E. Stiglitz therefore proposes to “rebuild the global economic and legal system”.  He rejects international capitalism in its present form, preferring a more balanced form of capitalism oriented towards a “shared societal prosperity”. As a good neo-Keynesian, he advocates a new form of “progressive capitalism” coupled with a “social democracy” based on “knowledge – innovation and living together – and on a decentralized economy regulated by institutions adapted to the management of the common good”. Among the exemplary social actors, he cites some major American universities, cooperative associations, etc., but he castigates the current excesses of the policies of certain rulers. He is also critical of some press, whose “misinformation and disinformation” maintain divisions and populism. In his book, J.E. Stiglitz refers to the work of the most recognized economists, with whom he has cooperated or opposed. He often refers to the thinking of Adam Smith, as set out in his Theory of Moral Sentiments. J.E. Stiglitz (Nobel Prize in Economics in 2001) was chief economist of the World Bank. He is the author of numerous books and scientific articles, as well as several official reports, including in 2008, the one on the change of instruments for measuring French growth (jointly with Amartya Sen and Jean-Paul Fitoussi. review by JJ  Pluchart

The latest book by Denis Olivennes has a specific and urgent objective, which he summarizes in its title: How to increase the productive power of France and better remunerate work?. He believes that the French are victims of “outdated software”: “spending and taxing more while working less”. He engages in a classical analysis of the factors of the “Great Decline” of France, comparing its main economic indicators to European standards, and in particular to those of Germany.  He deplores the propensity of the French to increasingly prefer leisure to work and to maintain a “culture of conflict” based on slogans such as “tax the rich” and “the praise of laziness”. He also denounces the tendency of elected officials to adopt populist and electoral postures and their propensity to prefer “taxing the rich” to reducing public spending. Beyond this commonplace observation shared by most economists and sociologists, the author makes three main proposals to restore the value of work: stabilize public debt through budgetary savings and not through new taxes on businesses and consumers; promote work by revaluing it through a reduction in social security contributions and taxes; increase labor productivity through a “Work Shield” based on a faster diffusion of innovation, better training, favorable conditions for returning to work after unemployment, and an extension of the retirement age. He also advocates an intergenerational transfer of resources from retirees to the working population, by “shifting the tax base from work to land and environmental protection”. The author draws his sources from the best scientific and professional articles. His strength of conviction and his “common sense” reasoning are served by a direct and didactic style. Denis Olivennes (a graduate of the Ecole Normale and the Ecole Nationale d’Administration) is president of a press, publishing and television group. He is the author of numerous articles and books. Notes by J-J.Pluchart

The author traces the processes of industrialization and then, from the 1980s, the deindustrialization of France. She questions the reasons and the stakes of the transition from an industrial society to a post-industrial society. She bases her reasoning on the notion of the imaginary, which provides the link between the symbolic and the real. The industrial imagination is filled with myths, illusions, even utopias, but it is also haunted by fears, prejudices and simulacra. The author analyzes the myths of industrialization, from the “catechism” of Saint Simon under the Second Empire to the challenges of reconstruction and “national champions” during the “glorious thirties”.  She attributes the cause of the deindustrialization of France – which quickly became a “country without factories” – to purely economic factors, such as the relocation of production to third countries, attributable to the search for an ever more optimized value chain, but also to more cultural causes, such as the devaluation of “manual labor”, the downgrading of technological sectors and the abandonment of learning.   Anaïs Voy-Gillis then strives to recognize the ways in which to reconstruct an imaginary favorable to the reindustrialization of France. She favors new activities located in France rather than the relocation of old ones. She explores projects that promote sustainable development and environmental protection, as well as high value-added industries in the fields of high technology, the food chain, luxury and culture. She criticizes France’s “start-up nation” policy, which is more of a slogan than a strategy based on structured networks and a deep digital culture. She advocates reforming the roles of the investing state, national education, research communities and business financing channels. The book is well documented with references to philosophy, historical reminders and practical examples.   Anais Voy-Gillis is a doctor of geography and the author of several books on industrial history. Note by Jean-Jacques Pluchart

The author, a connoisseur of China, takes us on a fascinating journey into China through the profound changes he has witnessed under the leadership of the new Master, XI JINPING. Until he came of age, XI suffered the bullying that followed the fall of his father, Vice Premier and close associate of President MAO, and then the humiliations of the Cultural Revolution. It was during this time that his political commitment was born. Since Mao, China has experienced a moderate but steady improvement in its economy and the living conditions of its population, but it is since Xi Jinping’s presidency that this has accelerated. A change of pace, driven by an ambition to economically surpass its great rival, the United States of America, and to propose a new model of world order. The concept of a “Global Approach” best describes the strategy adopted by China under Xi Jinping, which has been successfully translated into many sectors: Research, Trade, International Relations, Education, Military, Nuclear, Space Conquest, Environment… This remarkable expansion is facilitated externally by the growing dependence and increasing weakness of the West, and internally by the proverbial passivity of the Chinese people. The Chinese population appreciates the improved living conditions, reduced corruption, and improved security. The authorities tolerate a certain freedom of criticism about decisions deemed unnecessary or too restrictive. Apart from a few closely monitored and imprisoned dissidents, the population shares the official historical narrative but ignores, or pretends to ignore, the persecution of minorities: Tibetans, Uyghurs and the restrictions on religious practices. As a counterpoint to this optimistic picture for China, the author evokes some future clouds: aging population and low birth rate, more educated youth therefore a priori more sensitive to the values ​​of the West… Frédéric LEMAITRE, “Le Monde” correspondent in China Hubert Acaraz

After a scholarly work on the past of Russia and its perspective with the war in Ukraine, Jean-François COLOSSIMO tells the story of the ancient empires of the 19th century, Tsarist, Ottoman, Persian, Ging, Mughal which seemed to have disappeared forever. In reality, “they had only hibernated, they reappeared, radically transformed”; and this is the thesis of the book that explains how this reappearance took place, the consequences for the West (the enemy) and the measures that the West should consider to protect itself against this “surge of hatred” “War is declared”: this is the title of the first chapter, which describes how “the domestication of the masses inside necessarily corresponds to the domination of the peoples outside. Whoever says empire means exponential seizures and embezzlements, unlimited enlargement and enslavement in order to sanctify war. The following chapters explain, according to the author’s usual methodology, historical reviews of empires explaining the present, their unsuccessful Europeanization from the 18th century, their artificial westernization in the 19th century, their crazy totalitarian modernization in the 20th century, their cultural self-destruction. The book ends with a long development on “The Great Rearmament” through a recourse “to the old religious beliefs” to revitalize the oppressive and repressive “imperial” systems. After World War II, the old world became bipolar between the communist East and the capitalist West.  On the one hand, the establishment of the new world requires the creation of a rational cult, where the human is completely detached from the divine. On the other hand, the restoration of the old world requires the creation of a streamlined cult where the human bends completely to the divine. The United States is subject to types of patterns similar to those of empires. America is its own religion. The founding narrative of the United States is that of a supernatural election to happiness. Oppositions, contrary to the initial analysis, are frontal. When quickly, writes the author, “the West became the imperial nickname of Washington,” the “opprobrium” that could only be thrown on the United States is in fact on the West, which has become “world enemy No. 1.” What is the situation of France? That of a great loneliness! Alone as a priority target for authoritarian empires to denigrate it in the eyes of “this fiction of the global South.” Alone, but also the only country in the European Union to hold the bomb. It must therefore rearm its power, redeploy its influence by “demonstrating that it has always been more than the West. Finally, the author defends the thesis that the real battle to be fought is not against de-westernization, but for de-globalization. Where we recognize that geopolitics meets the new economic expectations of the West. Basically, as General de Gaulle said: France’s policy is not made on the stock market. A statement that Jean François COLOSSIMO invited us to meditate on again! Review written by Dominique CHESNEAU

Climatology is far from an exact science, and there is a great deal of research that does not support the one-sided conclusions of the IPCC, the political body created by Thatcher and Reagan. Since 1950, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) has been studying the major thermal oscillations in the Pacific Ocean. The “el niño” phenomenon occurs every 5 to 7 years and moves huge ocean masses from east to west, triggering torrential rains here, droughts elsewhere and giant fires in Australia and Indonesia. Its influence is global. The temperature peak (+2 degrees Celsius) lasts from nine to twelve months and is followed by a reverse episode of cold anomaly. Over the past 50 years, the WMO has observed no increase in the frequency or amplitude of the phenomenon. With such erratic behaviour, it is impossible to blame carbon dioxide, which is released continuously rather than in bursts every two to seven years. The author shows us that the planet’s climate system is above all an oceanic machine. The mechanisms involved – in these oscillations – lie at the bottom of the oceans, in the powerful underwater currents that link the Pacific and the Atlantic, via the Antarctic Circumpolar Current that plunges into the abyss here and rises up along the coasts. Euler’s fluid mechanics teaches us that a fluid flows because of a pressure difference between the back and the front. As far as the Gulf Stream is concerned (over a hundred kilometres wide and over a kilometre high), it flows because of a difference in thermal tension between the poles and the equator, because as long as the sun shines and as long as the Earth’s axis remains tilted, the pole will remain a cold spot and the equator a hot spot. The ocean’s thermal inertia explains the difference between continental and oceanic climates. Even in the polar regions, everything stems from this property of storage and resistance to temperature variations. The North Pole is less cold than the Antarctic, which sits on a rocky base. Everywhere on the planet, it is the ocean that dictates to the atmosphere and not the other way round. All the laws of climate identified by Euler, Fourier, Planck, Angstrom and Coriolis apply to us and cannot be reduced to the greenhouse effect alone. Planck’s law tells us that if the earth’s temperature were to rise by 1 degree, the amount of radiation sent back into the cosmos would instantly increase by 4%, causing the earth to cool.  Life on Earth is entirely dependent on solar radiation. Without it, the planet would cool down very quickly. The Earth receives and re-emits millions of billions of watts of solar radiation into the cosmos, without which the Earth would have boiled over a long time ago, wiping out all life. It’s worth remembering this when so many people believe that it’s carbon dioxide that’s warming us up. First-year physics students learn to calculate the balance of incoming and outgoing radiation. The ratio of temperatures leads to a remarkable result that is equal to a simple ratio of lengths: radius of the sun to distance between the Earth and the sun. This equation says that our planet could see its temperature rise (or fall) to worrying proportions as a result of three changes: the diameter of the Sun, its surface temperature and its distance from the Earth. Taken as a whole, this explains the remarkable stability of the planet’s climate over thousands of centuries and argues against any dramatic acceleration. The climate is not driven by carbon dioxide; it is fundamentally regulated by the sun. In his book, the author tries to play it down. We are undoubtedly going through a phase of slow warming, but Planck’s response is a powerful brake on runaway warming, as the atmosphere-ocean system is able to moderate any lurching. For millions of years, the planet has been expelling its excess heat into space by radiation and internally by Fourier conduction and atmospheric convection – including Halley’s equatorial cell – three moderating effects that combine forces to ensure climate stability. As for the ideal culprit, C0². The sharp rise in temperatures at the time of the Vikings is in no way attributable to CO², as it enabled them to colonise Greenland and grow vines there before the cold returned. The decisive argument is provided by Al Gore himself. The inconvenient truth revealed to the public the ice cores taken from the depths of Antarctica. This fossil air is a precious archive, tracing the spectacular parallel between carbon dioxide levels and palaeo-temperatures over a period of 650,000 years. So have we returned to the great fears of the year 1000? It’s time to abandon facile emotion in favour of reason and describe the climate machine in all its complexity, governed by the placid inertia of deep ocean currents. Daniel HUSSON holds a doctorate in particle physics and is a lecturer in thermodynamics and Einstein’s relativity at the Université Louis Pasteur in Strasbourg. He is the author or co-author of more than seventy international scientific publications, and has also published the book Quarks, the story of a discovery. Review wrritten by Michel Gabet