In The Tyranny of Experts: Economists, Dictators, and the Forgotten Rights of the Poor, economist William Easterly explores the concept of state-led “experts” who design economic development and foreign aid policies, often with disastrous results. Drawing on experiences in Africa and Latin America, Easterly shows how experts, in the pursuit of their own goals, all too often impose their own preconceived notions on the people they are supposed to be helping.Easterly casts doubt on the power of foreign aid and “silver-bullet” quick-fix solutions to poverty and inequality, and posits that meaningful change must come from within communities themselves. He argues that “experts” often have too much faith in their own theories and strategies, and imposes them on poor countries without being aware of their real-world consequences. He discusses the implications of this “tyranny of experts” on the rights of poor people, who are most impacted by their policies, and on the necessity of respecting human rights in development efforts.The Tyranny of Experts is an informed and poignant challenge to existing orthodoxy on foreign aid and economic development. Easterly uses powerful arguments and compelling examples to demonstrate how our current approach to economic development has been ineffective and counterproductive. This book is essential reading for anyone who is interested in understanding economic development, social justice and human rights.
Add missing EndorsementHere's the reading list that the Kochs are recommending to their donors this week.
Nassim Nicholas Taleb (Flaneur) The fact that top-down development methods are great on paper but have not produced benefits ("so far") is a point Easterly has made before, heavily influencing yours truly in the formation his own argument against naive interventionism and the collection of "humanitarians" fulfilling their personal growth and shielding themselves from their conscience... This is more powerful: the West has been putting development ahead of moral issues, patronizingly setting aside the right of the people to decide their own fate, including whether they want these "improvements", hence compounding failure and turning much of development into an agenda that benefits the careers (and angst) of "humanitarians", imperial policies, and, not least, local autocrats *without* any moral contribution. Talking about a sucker problem. *** To put it in an aphorism, they didn't ask the people if they would rather get respect and no aid rather than aid and no respe