Acemoglu and Robinson set out to answer the question why are some nations rich and others poor? The book begins by analyzing Nogales Arizona and Nogales Mexico. In essence this is a city with a national border that divides one portion of the city from the other. The United States side of Nogales is far more prosperous and safe than the Mexican side. The authors attempt to explain why this is the case. Another example given is North and South Korea.
The authors next go through a few theories regarding why some nations succeed and others fail and explain why each of those theories is wrong. They included the geography hypothesis, the culture hypothesis, and the ignorance hypothesis.
The authors state “to understand world inequality we have to understand why some societies are organized in a very inefficient and socially undesirable ways.” They continued “poor countries are poor because those who have power make choices that create poverty. They get it wrong not by mistake or ignorance but on purpose.”
The authors outline numerous historical examples of successful and unsuccessful nations. They argue that successful nations have inclusive political and economic institutions and that poor nations have extractive political and economic institutions. One of the ways to secure inclusive institutions is to have secure property rights. They note that communism is extractive and it’s abhorrence of private property will always lead to poverty.
Innovation is necessary for wealth generation. Inclusive institutions allow for the creative destruction necessary for innovation and countries that are extractive stifle creative destruction.
This was a well researched book with numerous examples. At times it seemed repetitive. The book jumped from time period to time period and might be in Ancient Rome on one page and 18th century Europe on the next. I found their conclusion weak but overall it was a good book.
Overall I give this book 4 stars out of 5.
Great literature should do more than entertain us. It should provide a roadmap to improving our lives.
In A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens introduced readers to Sydney Carton, one of literature's most compelling and deeply flawed characters. Dickens also gives him an unusual title: the Jackal.
His struggles raise questions that remain relevant today.
Are we defined by our past mistakes? Can we overcome our weaknesses? What separates the people we are from the people we could become?
Lessons From the Jackal is a 25-day character study exploring these questions through Sydney Carton’s life, decisions, relationships, and personal development.
This is not a traditional course on A Tale of Two Cities. Our reading assignments will focus specifically on Carton, with sufficient background provided to understand his story. No previous knowledge of the novel is necessary.
Each day will feature selected readings, historical comparisons, reflection questions, discussions, and practical challenges ...
Lessons From the Jackal will return next week. Based on the first five days are there any thoughts you want to share? Are there any changes you would like to see? What do you like most about the course? What do you like least? Any feedback would be great as a finalize the next lessons in the series.
Five days ago, we began with a simple question: How do you measure potential?
Over the course of this week, Sydney Carton has challenged us to reconsider what potential really means.
We met a man whose careless appearance concealed remarkable intelligence. We watched him make observations that others overlooked, only to receive little recognition for his contributions.
We discovered a man who recognized in Charles Darnay a reflection of what he might have become, yet seemed unwilling or unable to pursue that possibility.
We examined his relationship with Mr. Stryver and considered what it means to become a jackal: someone who possesses the ability to contribute to another person’s success while neglecting the pursuit of his own.
Finally, we learned that Carton’s habits began long before his professional career. Even as a schoolboy, he devoted his abilities to completing the work of others while neglecting his own.
Carton attributes some of his disappointments to bad luck. Perhaps circumstances have indeed worked ...
