EDIT: Thanks everyone for the great questions—I had a great time answering them and really appreciate all of them. Hope to be back soon! -James
Hello, Reddit!
My name is James Robinson—I’m a University Professor at the Harris School for Public Policy at the University of Chicago and the director of the Pearson Institute https://thepearsoninstitute.org/.
Last month Penguin published my most recent book (with Daron Acemoglu) The Narrow Corridor https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/555400/the-narrow-corridor-by-daron-acemoglu-and-james-a-robinson/
which provides a simple framework for understanding why societies vary so much in the extent to which their citizens enjoy basic freedoms. The book builds on our previous work on the long-run dynamics of political institutions (lots of things we don’t understand!) and is also an attempt to broaden the discussion about what constitutes a society.
Apart from this I continue to conduct field research and collect data in Africa, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Nigeria currently, and in Latin America in Bolivia and Colombia where I teach every summer at the University of the Andes in Bogotá. I have also been trying to help the Interamerican Development Bank evaluate their project to help build Haitian state institutions which has been quite a challenge given the political situation there of late (though of course it has been most challenging for the Haitian people).
The Pearson Institute was started in 2016 to examine the roots and causes of violent conflict and to better understand strategies for resolving them. In addition to recruiting top researchers working in these areas, like Chris Blattman, Oeindrila Dube and Nobel Laureate Roger Myerson, we also sponsor a variety of events where we bring together practitioners and people actually involved in resolving conflicts, such as Sergio Jaramillo the Colombian High Commissioner for Peace and Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair’s former chief of staff: https://thepearsoninstitute.org/events/pearson-annual-lecture
Ask me anything—I'll be back to answer your questions around 2PM CT!
PROOF: https://imgur.com/a/VFGtQzB
I just finished reading Why Nations Fail, and wanted to bring up a thought I just had.
Is it possible to have a socialist, or even communist, government that actually works if there were established inclusive institutions where elites can never be in power?
For example, Venezuela shit the bed because I assume it's elites in power had more say than the rest of the society. Therefore, they couldn't be stopped. But if a socialist regime had enough political inclusivity, where votes and rights were respected for all citizens, then can it actually prosper?
I guess a more specific question can be: Do socialist regimes only fail because it creates a powerful elite that sways the economy to empower and benefit them exclusively?
I've seen people talk about this book a lot on this sub but ill be honest idk anything about it. Whats it about and why are Neoliberals so into it? Sorry if this is like a cringe comp question lol
This book demystify a lot of Right-Wing points, specially racists ones (Social Democracy works in the Nordic countries because they are all white, protestants and have this communitarian working culture!), by talking how economic progress has nothing to do with races, cultures, geography, weather or religion.
The main point of this books is explaining how progress comes from the Rule of Law, legal equality among their citizens, some sort of centralization of power and transparency in their democratic institutions. It shows beautiful examples about how oppression and inequality (legal, social and economic) was perpetuated in colonized countries, even after the colonizer left.
It has a lot of good reviews in Amazon made by economics and political scientists.
The authors:
> James A. Robinson, a political scientist and an economist, is one of 8 current University Professors at University of Chicago. Focused on Latin America and Africa, he is currently conducting research in Bolivia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sierra Leone, Haiti and in Colombia where he has taught for many years during the summer at the University of the Andes in Bogotá.
> Daron Acemoglu is the Killian Professor of Economics at MIT. In 2005 he received the John Bates Clark Medal awarded to economists under forty judged to have made the most significant contribution to economic thought and knowledge.
Currently sitting in my reserved seat, watching the utter pandemonium that is British people trying to get their heads round reserved seating.
Flustered, middle aged women faffing about looking for "E46". This is coach B.
Balding middle aged men, for some reason insisting on sitting in someone else's reserved seat, who's yet to board, as if sitting where you're supposed to is a challenge to their masculinity.
Befuddled pensioners insisting someone else sits in their reserved seat because they don't want to trouble anybody.
People who have a reservation sitting in the first unreserved seat they come to because "this'll do" leaving no unreserved seating for people who actually need it.
Fucking just sit in the seat with the number on your ticket you daft cunts.
Britain, sort yourself out.
I read the book Why Nations Fail by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, and was wondering how it was regarded by historians rather than economists or political scientists.
There are many historical stories in the book used in support of the authors' arguments such as the transfer of power from monarchy to legislature in England, or administration of colonies by different European powers. Are the depictions of these countries generally accurate or taking liberty with the source material?
It couldn't take a normal ribbing.
Chapter: You Can't Engineer Prosperity
...These engineering attempts come in two flavors.
The first, often advocated by international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), recognizes that poor development is caused by bad economic policies and institutions, and then proposes a list of improvements these international organizations attempt to induce poor countries to adopt. (The Washington consensus makes up one such list.)
These improvements focus on sensible things such as macroeconomic stability and seemingly attractive macroeconomic goals such as reduction in the size of the government sector, flexible exchange rates, and capital account liberalization. They also focus on more microeconomic goals, such as privatization, improvements in the efficiency of public service provision, and perhaps also suggestions as to how to improve the functioning of the state itself by emphasizing anti corruption measures. Though on their own many of these reforms might be sensible, the approach of international organizations in Washington, London, Paris, and elsewhere is still steeped in an incorrect perspective that fails to recognize the role of political institutions and the constraints they place on policymaking.
Attempts by international institutions to engineer economic growth by hectoring poor countries into adopting better policies and institutions are not successful because they do not take place in the context of an explanation of why bad policies and institutions are there in the first place except that the leaders of poor countries are ignorant. The consequence is that the policies are not adopted and not implemented, or are implemented in name only.
...The second approach to engineering prosperity is much more in vogue nowadays. It recognizes that there are no easy fixes for lifting a nation from poverty to prosperity overnight or even in the course of a few decades. Instead, it claims, there are many "micro-market failures" that can be redressed with good advice, and prosperity will result if policymakers take advantage of these opportunities—which, again, can be achieved with the help and vision of economists and others.
Small market failures are everywhere in poor countries, this approach claims—for example, in their education systems, healthcare delivery, and the way their markets are organized. This is undoubtedly true. But the problem is that these small market failures may be only the tip of the iceberg, the symptom o
... keep reading on reddit ➡In the Lord of the Rings series of fantasy novels, written by JRR Tolkien, the dark lord Sauron crafted 9 rings of power, that he granted to the great lords of elves, dwarves and men as gifts. Although the rings granted great powers to their bearers, they also allowed Sauron to corrupt and dominate those who wore the rings. One can analogize the rings of power in the Lord of the Rings to the discovery of natural resources in developing countries with weak institutions. The discovery oil or diamonds often results in an explosion of corruption and civil conflict. The natural resource curse has hit sub-Saharan Africa especially hard, as many nations have the dubious gift of abundant natural resources, but inherited a colonial legacy of bad institutions. In today's podcast episode, I will be exploring how countries in Africa are dealing with the natural resource curse. In part one, I will discuss how Chad, a nation with an unstable dictatorship, has wasted its natural resource boom on weapons and the military. In part two, I will discuss how Uganda under the more stable dictatorship of Yoweri Museveni, has seen the state monopolize natural resource rents both for purposes of development and self-enrichment. Finally, I will discuss how strong institutions and the rule of law have allowed Botswana to ensure rapid growth, and broad based prosperity for its people.
Chad has a long and grim history of civil war and political instability. No change of head of state has occurred outside of civil war and revolution, and the country has seen non-stop war between the Christian south from 1965 to 2010. It was threfore, with some trepidation, that the World Bank agreed to finance 1,070 km pipeline in 2003, at the time the largest private sector investment in sub-Saharan Africa. The World Bank hoped that innovative governance systems would help ensu
... keep reading on reddit ➡Hello everyone. This is my first post here. I am thinking of putting my English skills into practice to have them developed. For writing, I think I am going to write some book reviews from time to time. Below is a review of a book titled "Why Nations Fail". I will appreciate if you go through it and point out mistakes and raise comments for me to develop my English writing further. Thank you in advance.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CvCDemAOscaUrL415ttsrszit5N8RMOpHXjhwDIy2jc/edit?usp=sharing
I've been thinking about a seeming contradiction in WNF, or at least, an argument I don't quite follow.
Broadly speaking, they argue that a set of values - towards inclusive economic and political institutions - developed in England. They emphasise that England's historical development was "contingent", that is, that small moments of chance and historical happenstance could lead to big changes. They even then attribute this to the contingent development of the Americas, with the areas settled by English people and influenced by English norms (i.e. the USA) developing more inclusive institutions, as opposed the areas settled by Spanish/Portuguese/French people being influenced by their (at the time) more exclusive, extractive norms.
At the same time, they generally explain the continuing domination of exclusive, extractive institutions in Africa (in particular) as a relic of similar values being imposed by British colonialism. In some cases, they point to examples of British colonialists actually creating exclusive institutions, such as centralised kingships, that didn't previously exist and imposing them on the populations for ease of administration.
Do you think they adequately explain how a country that was developing more inclusive institutions could simultaneously be responsible for exporting more exclusive, extractive institutions?
Desde que unos cuantos sugirieron este gran libro en mi post pasado sobre libros, acá está el PDF. Sugiero que lo lean!
Thank you for your interest in the UKPolitics Book Club!
This week we will be discussing Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power
Thank you to everyone who has suggested books for next month's book. On Wednesday 14th Sept I will create a new topic with a link where we can vote for next month's book.
The UKPolitics Book Club: We'll aim for a selection of current affairs, history, philosophy, biography - as long as there is some relevance. Please still participate even if your favored book wasn't chosen on a given month. Popular second choices can be put on next month's list - but hopefully people will use the book club to read outside their preferences and comfort zone! There have been lots of other suggestions - feel free to PM and we will slowly work through voting for the suggestions.
Update
I appreciate a new thread hasn't been created for next month's book. I thought it might be useful to give people more time to reply to this stickied thread. I will post a Google poll based on people's suggestions this weekend.
I've just finished reading the book "Why Nations Fail" by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson and would like to know your thoughts on it and perhaps follow up with some intellectual brainstorming.
I come accross a few socialists who will explain why the USSR was just as good as capitalist western nations, if this is the case then why did it fail?
I'm reading through "Why Nations Fail" (only on the preface) but it seems to take the opposite road of Friedman in regards to his idea that economic freedom creates political freedom (in this case that political freedom leads out of poverty and to economic freedom.) It seems like modern China refutes his idea entirely. I find the WNF argument more compelling and Milton to be a bit dogmatic. I posted another question earlier about his views on the Fed and got a good answer. Since I'm not an economist or a master of geopolitics, I'm wondering what else from C&F may be outdated or a little dogmatic.
Again, I'm only on the preface and I could be totally off base.
Thank you!
In the Lord of the Rings series of fantasy novels, written by JRR Tolkien, the dark lord Sauron crafted 9 rings of power, that he granted to the great lords of elves, dwarves and men as gifts. Although the rings granted great powers to their bearers, they also allowed Sauron to corrupt and dominate those who wore the rings. One can analogize the rings of power in the Lord of the Rings to the discovery of natural resources in developing countries with weak institutions. The discovery oil or diamonds often results in an explosion of corruption and civil conflict. The natural resource curse has hit sub-Saharan Africa especially hard, as many nations have the dubious gift of abundant natural resources, but inherited a colonial legacy of bad institutions. In today's podcast episode, I will be exploring how countries in Africa are dealing with the natural resource curse. In part one, I will discuss how Chad, a nation with an unstable dictatorship, has wasted its natural resource boom on weapons and the military. In part two, I will discuss how Uganda under the more stable dictatorship of Yoweri Museveni, has seen the state monopolize natural resource rents both for purposes of development and self-enrichment. Finally, I will discuss how strong institutions and the rule of law have allowed Botswana to ensure rapid growth, and broad based prosperity for its people.
Chad has a long and grim history of civil war and political instability. No change of head of state has occurred outside of civil war and revolution, and the country has seen non-stop war between the Christian south from 1965 to 2010. It was threfore, with some trepidation, that the World Bank agreed to finance 1,070 km pipeline in 2003, at the time the largest private sector investment in sub-Saharan Africa. The World Bank hoped that innovative governance systems would help
... keep reading on reddit ➡