Maybe five years ago – I couldn’t tell you to be honest – people started sending me links to a Ted Talk by Hans Rosling. In it he said two things that those on the extreme centre find completely irresistible. The first is that despite the fact that everyone knows that the world is becoming worse, a sober analysis of the data proves that simply isn’t the case. In fact, poverty has never decreased at a faster rate at any other time in human history. This is due to the wonders of our economic system of free markets and rampant economic inequality – who’d have thought that would prove such a great boon?
The second is that the reason why we think the opposite is happening is ‘the bloody media cycle’, where bad news always trumps good news – and so we get shown images of children starving somewhere in the Horn of Africa, rather than of people across the rest of Africa going about their rather boring little lives becoming increasingly prosperous.
At the time this story felt decidedly wrong to me – so, I Googled to see what criticism there was of Rosling and his Gapminder website. Now look, I could, but won’t, talk to you about the problems of log scales and how they make it look like the rich aren’t getting any richer at all, while the poor are accelerating towards catching them in prosperity – but you probably hated mathematics at school and have no idea what a logarithm is anyway, and could care less, and so the fact he made his graphs using in them seems neither here nor there to you...
At around the same time, I became aware of Pinker’s book The Better Angels of Our Nature, and then there was Bill Gates running around praising radical free market economics as the cure not only of poverty but of all other evils too.
This book shows that virtually all of this is not only nonsense, but is about as close to the very opposite of what is actually happening as it is possible to get. In the main, these ‘good news’ stories are an artifact of very creative accountancy – true enough, not always, but in the main. Mostly, this accountancy involves lowering the poverty rate to levels so low that those living at or near this rate literally have to remain sedentary because they are not receiving enough calories to allow them to move. It involves shifting targets from absolute numbers of people in poverty to proportions of people in poverty. It involves shifting the dates you measure from so that you ignore the massive increase in wellbeing that occurred in the 1960s and 70s when the developing world could still direct some of it wealth to social development before structural adjustments imposed on them made that impossible. It further ignores the reversal in the 1980s and then conveniently includes the 1990s when China lifted virtually its whole population out of poverty – something that could then be claimed as proof of progress.
I like to think of China as the Schrödinger nation. Anything good that happens there is because it is capitalist, anything bad because it is communist. But two things are certain – virtually everyone on the planet who has been lifted out of poverty since the 1980s has been Chinese, and China achieved this because it ignored the kinds of advice given to the rest of the developing world by the IMF and World Bank. As this book makes clear, if you take China out of the picture, poverty has increased across the world, and not just in absolute terms, but also in proportionate terms as well.
But this book isn’t just a way of explaining why a Polly-Anna Swedish statistician got things so terribly wrong. In fact, Rosling barely rates a mention. Rather, this book provides a history of neo-colonialism and the bleeding white of the developing world by the world’s richest nations. Rivers of gold flow out of the developing world and into the centres of first-world capital and in there place is left rivers of blood. The gold removed ensures the extremes of human misery in the developing countries – and this is justified on the basis of our twisted notions of ‘debt’. This book provides a thumbnail history of this obscenity, this inversion of reality.
It also is an explanation of the various myths of economics – always presented as positive truths – such as comparative advantage. These myths that somehow always seem to work in the interests of the rich and powerful, and decidedly against the interests of the poor. Economics is an odd field of study – so much of it is pure ideology, but its proponents would fight you to the death for saying so. Rather, they provide endless justifications for why the current state of the world is both the natural and best of all possible worlds. This book is particularly useful in providing the history and politics that are so often left out of the story spun by the Dr Panglosses of the economics profession.
I don’t know how to get you to read this book, but you really should. It is short, clearly written, and it tells a story that demands to be understood. Not just because it might encourage us all to do something to address a criminal wrong that continues to be committed against the vast majority of humanity – as if WE have ever lifted a finger for that – but because the rapaciousness that is destroying the lives of the very poorest on the planet are also destroying the very basis for all human existence on this planet – you know, not just the poor, but all of us. We literally cannot afford the rich anymore – just as we can no longer afford their apologists. Reading this book should put fire in your belly, and dear god, the time is ripe for that.