Great ideas, but I left the book less convinced of the theses than after reading the blurb.
Ideas: Nations succeed or fail because of ’extractive’ political and economic institutions. After the industrial revolution, a random walk of events led some countries to enter virtuous cycles, and others to enter vicious cycles, often through the ‘iron law of oligarchy’. Institutions are the primary, if not sole cause of national success.
The author provides evidence for this thesis by telling vignettes about he history of various countries and why it matters. While this was interesting history in its own right (and I’ve never read about the glorious revolution), anytime the authors touched on subjects familiar to me, I felt their descriptions lacking, and using the conclusions to paint the narrative and thus support their conclusions. In this way, it felt like reading the Old Testament to prove the existence of God. Lots of stories with God’s obvious involvement, but nothing to convince the skeptic.
I would have wanted to know: What defines ’extractive’ political and economic institutions? Is it sustainability, inequality, some index of rent-seeking vs. creative destruction? I think it’s a powerful idea if defined carefully, here it is not. What happens when there is an ‘inclusive’ economic system but ’extractive’ political system? A more nuanced look at China and economic growth during the Soviet Union would have convinced me much more than the quick dismissals.
What breaks a country out of the iron law of oligarchy (or perhaps we should call it the not-so-iron law of oligarchy?) Is there any evidence beyond a random walk and critical junctures?