Commanding Heights

Commanding the height is a six hour documentary aired from PBS and its main theme is on economics; the different principles that have been applied in the management of market in different parts of the world. These ideologies include explanations such as how a certain economy is where it is now and what the scope of the contemporary world economy is. This documentary gives an in-depth analysis and an objective exploration of the various economic aspects. Commanding height is a documentary that has a critical flaw and can be in a few words expressed as conflict of interest. It has three episodes that will be explored in his paper.

In the first episode of the documentary, then battle of ideas is mainly focused on two main competing initiatives about the economy of the world. These ideas are the free market that is advocated for by economist Hayek and the planned economy that is advocated for by Keynes. This episode trails on how the ideological climate reallocated from one to the other over the time of a century, with consequent effects on the policies of the government. The state of influential economic thinkers Hayek and Keynes is the most sensible section of this first episode of commanding the heights. Economically, this episode in a consistent manner shapes the difference between the economic and political systems. The economic system includes Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism. On the other hand, the political system includes such as Democracy, Fascism and Totalitarianism. There is bias in this episode as the element of Capitalism is showed as the real economic system for a free society and Capitalism only accepts the free market and declines any element of Socialism.

The second episode, the agony of reform entails a viewpoint at the nations and how they shift from the federal and planned economies to the markets that are less regulated in the world. I contrast to the first episode that focuses on the UK and the United States, this episode focuses on other countries in the world such as Chile, china, Poland, Bolivia, and the former Soviet Union and studies their economic tribulations and how they attempt to solve them. This episode achieves its objective on a global focal point. The argument of this of the program on the agony of reform is that market economies perform better internationally. They reach a conclusion on this thesis by looking at the limitation of a free market of the above stated countries, the assumptions behind these limitations, the possible consequences of the market on the public and on the environment.

The third episode of commanding heights is the new rules of the game; this episode precisely addresses the issue of the state of globalization and the world economy. This episode offers answers to the possible questions that would have come from an individual who has watched the first and the second episodes. For example, does globalization recommend the world whatever thing apart from a type of economic and artistic imperialism from countries such as the United States? This is an episode that raises vital considerations on the issue free market. It argues that the accomplishment of a free-market plan like NAFTA can be considered, not just in the rise in trade, but in its consequence on the quality of life of personnel and its effect on labor rights and the society. This last episode does a commendable job in avoiding deliberately clear bias in the whole documentary. However, I believe that the documentary does not have a critical standpoint on the material at hand, and again and again it avoids any material that would provide proof against its free-market point.

1. What are the basic differences between Hayek and Keynes and their economic philosophy?

The fundamental difference between Hayek and Keynes and their economic philosophy is that Hayek thought that macro equilibrium would be reinstated via the free operations of markets as the major roots of imbalance would be the objectionable interference in the natural market place. On the other hand, Keynes believed in macro economic systems that could by no means achieve stability due to the fact that the several factors of a macro economy do not need to be stable at all times as it can result to negative consequences such as shortage of labor.

2. What are some ways that Keynes economic philosophy influenced the United States during the depression?

The Keynesian theory helped the United States the era of the depression by applying the mixed economy system whereby both the states and the private sector usually direct the economy and thus replicating the attributes of both the planned and the market economies. Another philosophy that helped the United States was the philosophy Phillips curve designated that increased employment, and a decrease the rate of unemployment was an implication of an increase in inflation in the United States.

3. Give some examples of ways that both Hayek and Keynes are applicable to economies in developing countries.

Hayek and Keynes policies have been applied in developing countries such as India; Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India was promoted industrialization supported progresses that were government-controlled, and the system of government that developed muffled innovation. At this same time, many well-known economists studied the economy of India and tied to set its central planning. By the early 1990, this government began to apply Hayek and Keynes policies and relax their strict rules and the Indian economy blossomed under the new effects of outsourcing and exports.

4. How does sustainability relate to either or both of these economic theories?

Keynes assumptions were that as incomes rises people opt to save more. As a result, the society’s tendency to use reduces as more of income is being saved. Due to this, society’sinvestment will be low. This is not healthy for the sustainability of a growing economy. This is due to the fact that there is a connection between the economic management theory and sustainability; economic traditions are shifting on the direction of developments that are sustainable and thus elevating the necessity for an indulgent of operational ideologies of Sustainability.

5. Do you see how either Obama or Romney relates to the economic theories of Hayek or Keynes? Give some examples and express your own opinion on how well you think these theories apply to our economy today.

As the president of the United States gears for the race to the white house against Romney, it’s vivid that these elections are more that a battle between Obama and Romney but significantly between two economists: Keynes and Hayek. Obama makes the Keynesian theory for government expenditure to increase demand; whereas Romney argues that there are no quick fixes: just like Hayek, Romney states the seeds of the catastrophe were planted prior to the bust. On my own viewpoint, the philosophical theories by Keynes and Hayek, attempts to outline the rise of free markets through the last century and as well as the course of globalization, both of these theories are much applicable in the contemporary society. The most fundamental thing to note is that economic freedom is freedom that is achieved from the intervention of the government in the making and supply of goods and services. After the Second World War II, many governments were attempting to restructure their economies from the base. As a result, they focused to the thoughts of the highest ranking economists for direction. These ideas by Keynes and Hayek have come up with economic systems and the initiative of economic liberty for many years.