The Manhattan Institute is taking nominations for its “F.A. Hayek Book Prize,” the author(s) of which will receive $50,000. From the website,
The Manhattan Institute is currently gathering nominations for our Hayek Prize, which will honor the book published within the past two years that best reflects F.A. Hayek’s vision of economic and individual liberty.
Admittedly, I haven’t really kept up to date with recent libertarian books. I have so much other stuff going on it’s difficult to keep track of new literature. For this reason, I’d be interested in what others think: I’d be interested in reading a libertarian book that I’ve overlooked and a lot of people appreciate.
On Twitter, a book I thought of is Daron Acemoglu’s and James A. Robinson’s Why Nations Fail. I don’t agree with all the details and nuances in the book, although I misplaced the notes I took so it’s hard for me to quickly look back and see precise examples, but the general thesis is an important one. As far as what I disagree with goes, that will have to wait for a book review (which I’ll hopefully get to once winter break begins). But, the general thesis is powerful: global inequality between nations comes down to inclusive versus exclusive governments (some may prefer relatively less exclusive versus relatively more exclusive governments). The argument is not really that unique, but Acemoglu and Robinson are two renown economists in their field and it’s this type of arguments that needs repeating.
Another book that immediately comes to mind is Peter Boettke’s Living Economics. This is one of those books that you recommend when someone asks you for an interesting, persuasive, not-too-academic, yet informative book to read for them or a friend. One of the most commendable features is that Boettke’s expansive knowledge of the literature is represented in the book, providing the reader open-minded and inclusive insight into various topics, all of which synthesize into the common thread of the market process.
Other than these books, nothing else comes to mind, undoubtedly because of my limited interaction with what’s out there. What do you think?