Review: The Decadent Society: How We Became the Victims of Our Own Success

The Decadent Society: How We Became the Victims of Our Own Success by Ross Douthat
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book reminded me a great deal of Tyler Cowen's "The Great Stagnation" (which the author then mentioned several times). This book, however, then takes it further and is more updated. Unfortunately, it isn't updated enough since it was written before COVID (although he does mention that if a pandemic occurs under Trump it would be a disaster) and before Russia's invasion of Ukraine. 

Some interesting points:

He quotes the same scenario quoted by Cowen in "The Great Stagnation", which still holds now as it did 10 years ago, and which I'll paste in full here below:

<blockquote>

Picture a man or woman of the late 19th century, perhaps your own great-grandfather or great-great-grandmother, sitting in an ordinary American home of 1890. And now pitch him forward in an H G Wells machine, not to our time but about halfway – to that same ordinary American home, circa 1950.

Why, the poor gentleman of 1890 would be astonished. His old home is full of mechanical contraptions. There is a huge machine in the corner of the kitchen, full of food and keeping the milk fresh and cold! There is another shiny device whirring away and seemingly washing milady's bloomers with no human assistance whatsoever! Even more amazingly, there is a full orchestra playing somewhere within his very house. No, wait, it's coming from a tiny box on the countertop!

The music is briefly disturbed by a low rumble from the front yard, and our time-traveler glances through the window: A metal conveyance is coming up the street at an incredible speed – with not a horse in sight. It's enclosed with doors and windows, like a house on wheels, and it turns into the yard, and the doors open all at once, and two grown-ups and four children all get out - just like that, as if it's the most natural thing in the world! He notices there is snow on the ground, and yet the house is toasty warm, even though no fire is lit and there appears to be no stove. A bell jingles from a small black instrument on the hall table. Good heavens! Is this a "telephone"? He'd heard about such things, and that the important people in the big cities had them. But to think one would be here in his very own home! He picks up the speaking tube. A voice at the other end says there is a call from across the country - and immediately there she is, a lady from California talking as if she were standing next to him, without having to shout, or even raise her voice! And she says she'll see him tomorrow!

Oh, very funny. They've got horseless carriages in the sky now, have they?

What marvels! In a mere 60 years!

But then he espies his Victorian time machine sitting invitingly in the corner of the parlor. Suppose he were to climb on and ride even further into the future. After all, if this is what an ordinary American home looks like in 1950, imagine the wonders he will see if he pushes on another six decades!

So on he gets, and sets the dial for our own time.

And when he dismounts he wonders if he's made a mistake. Because, aside from a few design adjustments, everything looks pretty much as it did in 1950: The layout of the kitchen, the washer, the telephone... Oh, wait. It's got buttons instead of a dial. And the station wagon in the front yard has dropped the woody look and seems boxier than it did. And the folks getting out seem ...larger, and dressed like overgrown children.

And the refrigerator has a magnet on it holding up an endless list from a municipal agency detailing what trash you have to put in which colored boxes on what collection days.

But other than that, and a few cosmetic changes, he might as well have stayed in 1950.

</blockquote>

Another section I will quote (paraphrase) in full:

<blockquote>

A glance at the historical record suggests that something more than just inequality and austerity and outsourcing is contributing to deceleration and stagnation. If an unequal society and an entrenched ruling class were sufficient to choke off growth, the industrial revolution would have never gotten off the ground. If soaring incomes fortunes came at the expense of middle class incomes, the 1990's would've been the worst decade for the middle class rather than the best. If correcting neoliberalism with socialism were the ticket, then Venezuela would be the tiger of Latin America, rather than the basketcase. If Austerity has weakened western economies, it is the austerity that would've been considered profligate 50 years ago, with far more welfare spending and higher deficits in the 1950s and 1960s. 

</blockquote>

Anyway, this book doesn't have all the solutions, but it does at least raise almost all the questions and outline various possible scenarios and outcomes. Not all of them are very palatable. 

I would still like an update, or at least to know how recent events have altered the author's views. 

View all my reviews

Review: Ten Lessons for a Post-Pandemic World

Ten Lessons for a Post-Pandemic World by Fareed Zakaria
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Quite frankly I don't think there was anything earth-shattering here, but it is probably the best compendium of the state of the world up to this point, so should probably be required reading nonetheless. I haven't read a book by Zakaria since The Future of Freedom, and I remember that as being more of a 'quake book' than this. 

Regardless, be sure to read this if you are interested in the state of the world post-2020 (this was written in late 2020, so toward the end of the Trump presidency). 

View all my reviews

Review: Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty

Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty by Daron Acemoğlu
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is a second read for me. I like to read books like this when they are a bit out of date to see if they stand the test of time. This one seemed to, at least re: China. 

I agreed with his premise, but disagreed with some of their examples, at least toward the beginning.

It is true that some countries will not prosper because it isn't in their leaders' interest to allow a democratic government. The authors seem against the idea that these leaders just "need to be educated" as to the correct strategy, a la IMF and World bank, and I tend to agree. 

The poorest parts of South America are the parts that were most under control of the conquistadores (is this true?)

Section 256 of Alabama's constitution still has segregation. Segregation is still law in Alabama. (This is still true today. I looked it up).

I like the idea that (Schumpeter's) Creative Destruction is required for an economy to persevere in the long term, i.e. past the downturns. 

All in all this was a good second read. I'm curious to see how these theories have been updated by the authors.

View all my reviews

Review: Cognitive Gadgets: The Cultural Evolution of Thinking

Cognitive Gadgets: The Cultural Evolution of Thinking by Cecilia Heyes
My rating: 0 of 5 stars

To be frank, I don't think I'm smart enough to understand this book. As least with regards to its subject matter. I probably should have given up after a chapter or two. I only stuck with it because what little I did understand was interesting, and I was curious about the chapter on language (which also confused me).

Keeping all that in mind, this is probably a moronic comment, but it seemed to me that many of her conclusions could have been reached by just noting the differences between various cultures, which would show proof of cultural evolutionary psychology as opposed to purely biological evolution. Then, taking that as a starting point, we could analyze whether the commonalities evolved from a fixed proto-human culture or not.

View all my reviews

Review: Class: A Guide Through the American Status System

Class: A Guide Through the American Status System by Paul Fussell
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Like any good satire, this has a lot of truth in it. At least it did once upon a time, and according to the author.

Unfortunately many, if not most, of the points are pretty much out of date, but it's still an entertaining read, and (somewhat) thought-provoking.
I do wish someone would write an updated version, preferably with the same satirical tone. Probably the most interesting chapter was the last one, talking about Class X people, and I imagine any update would feature these heavily, since this category seems to have grown immensely in recent years.


Higher classes tend to drive buicks and chevys, while lower (middle) ones drive BMWs and Mercedes. Proles will have speedboats in their driveway.

A lot of points seem to work on a scale, as in:
The more you weigh the lower your class
The more writing on your clothing, the lower your class
The sweeter the food you eat, the lower the class
The faster you drive, the lower your class
The smaller the balls in the sport you play, the higher your class
The more electronics you buy, the lower the class (would this still be true??)


All in all a fun read. On the other hand, if you're going to make fun of middle classes with their "peudo-latinisms", like "in Suburbia", don't carry on to say how they don't honor the accusative case and say "in Suburbiam". I'm pretty sure "in Suburbia" wouldn't call for the accusative. Possibly the Ablative?



View all my reviews

Review: How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States

How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States by Daniel Immerwahr
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This book is depressing to read. It is extremely interesting. I grew up in Europe, but I imagine this will be most impactful to those who grew up in the US, since it discusses many points that were glossed over or ignored in the US curriculum (namely, the US territories that are colonies in all but name, and the treatment of said territories).

It is also depressing to read for another reason. It is one of those books that show you how everything you learned in history class was wrong. I can't help wondering how, even though we always feel that history will vindicate those who were in the right, this really isn't the case. So future generations could end up having extremely contorted views of what was right and wrong in these days in ways we can't foresee.

The second half of the book was a bit weaker. His discussions about James bond and the Beatles rang a bit hollow (and didn't seem to mesh very well with the rest of his thesis).

I would have loved an attempt to foresee what the next steps would be. If the US is an empire, and all empires crumble, how and when would it happen for the US (with the understanding that it would just be an educated guess)

Having said that, it is certainly edifying.

Fun fact:
Manhattan's stoplights, in 1927, used green to mean stop and yellow for go (I think. I can't find the exact passage now).


View all my reviews

Review: Upheaval: Turning Points for Nations in Crisis

Upheaval: Turning Points for Nations in Crisis by Jared Diamond
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This was an extremely interesting book, although I'm not sure how useful it is. It is a review of the recent history of 7 countries that Diamond has some connection, experience, or ties with. The countries were Finland (extremely interesting to me, given how little I knew of their recent history), Japan, Chile, Germany (also interesting, given how much I thought I already knew), Indonesia, Australia, and the United States.

To his credit, he does mention, in the final chapter, that a quantitative study should be made of this ideas. I agree, although I think he should have done this since he was writing the book.

All of this isn't to say I disagree with his 12-part model. But that sort of is the point. This model may or may not be correct, and whether I agree or disagree makes no difference until quantitative analysis is applied to it, rather than anecdotal info taken from his non-random assortment of countries.

Having said that, I reiterate that the histories of each country were extremely interesting.

I liked his statement that if he were a dictator trying to engineer Japan's downfall, he would institute the exact policy they have right now

Some notes I took regarding the US:
- Since 2005 (especially with the advent of the tea party), there has been much less will to compromise, which means fewer laws have been passed, budgets have been late more than once, and the government has shut down more than ever before.
- Under our first 43 presidents (over 220 years), only 68 nominees for government positions were opposed by filibuster. But when Obama was president republicans blocked 79 nominees in 4 years. This forced a change in laws which means minority opinions will be less represented in the future.
- "There is no way China or Mexico can destroy the US. Only we can destroy the US"

3.5 Stars

View all my reviews

Review: The Elephant in the Brain: Hidden Motives in Everyday Life

The Elephant in the Brain: Hidden Motives in Everyday Life by Kevin Simler
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I was going to give up on the book early on, since it started mentioning things I thought were quite obvious as if they were revelations. Their first point seems to be that we do things for selfish reasons, (which Adam Smith also said a few centuries ago), and then it discusses Signaling. These are both well-known concepts in the world of economics.
Then it talks about societal norms and how to enforce them, and that we need to punish those who don't punish transgressions: "In the US, for example, it is unlawful to witness a crime without reporting it". Is this true though??

Later it states how we repress bad memories (in which we did bad things or things we're embarrassed about). Do we though? I feel like memories of embarrassing things I did keep coming back to me at random times. I'd hate to think what I'm repressing if that's the case.

However, I stuck with it, and there were some interesting points later on. For example, how we have to deceive ourselves in order to deceive others (politicians do this a lot). It isn't enough to lie, but we have to lie to ourselves in order to make it work.
I really liked the section about how we do not get into discussions with other people to learn new things, but to prove how much we already know. It always bothered me in a sense. If A and B get in an argument, and A clearly wins, then B will go home feeling bad, while A will feel good about himself. However, the fact is B Is better off, since B learned something new, while A didn't gain anything. This seems like a flaw in human wiring, but it was sort of explained here (getting into discussions is another way of displaying how "fit" we are in an evolutionary sense, not of gaining new information. So the more arguments we win, the more we show we have the resources to 'survive').

The chapter on art seemed a bit odd (why do we like the original art work so much more than a copy?). I think they don't take into account the appreciation factor, in the sense of appreciating what humankind is capable of. Seeing the Mona Lisa in its original helps us "feel closer" (as faulty as that reasoning may be) to Davinci and his genius.

A couple more interesting tidbits:
There used to laws against feeding lobsters to inmates more than once a week because it was considered cruel and unusual (like eating rats).
Aluminum spoons are better than silver spoons in every sense, yet we prefer silver spoons


So, over all, pretty hit or miss. They did state that the average reader would agree with 70% of the points they make. I probably agree with a bit more, but I feel like a lot of it had been covered in other books. The few new points, however, were enlightening.

View all my reviews

Review: 21 Lessons for the 21st Century

21 Lessons for the 21st Century by Yuval Noah Harari
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This book should probably be translated for the US audience. It talks at great length about "Liberalism", which many Americans probably take to mean 'left-leaning', or 'democrat', while it is used in the sense (used outside the US) of Free markets, Democracies, Freedom of speech, etc. To be fair, he addresses this a little ways in, but it would have probably been more clear to just find another term for the US edition.

Once again, Harari's grasp of economics (or lack thereof) sort of annoys me. As an example of how humans may not be needed anymore, not even as consumers, he discusses how a mining company could be providing metals for a robotic company, which in turn produces robots for the same mining company, and so on back and forth. Obviously, if this were the whole sum of the economy then this economy wouldn't survive. It would basically be one giant ponzi scheme of an economy.

Aside from this, however, it was once again an excellent book. As with his others, it is fascinating, and it made me wish I could get everyone else to read it.

Some of my notes:
Democracy has learned, from communism, to take everyone into account. Before it only meant well to-do men from their general area. Example: The Netherlands fought for 3 years not to lose their freedom to the Nazis. As soon as they regained it, however, they fought for 30 years to take this freedom away from Indonesia.
The future will likely be much more similar to Huxley's Brave New World than to Orwell's 1984.
Terrorists are actually very bad at destruction. But they are very good, as the word suggests, at scaring people with as little destruction as possible (highly targeted, maximum impact). Reactions to terrorism often cause more damage and disruption than any attack itself.

I probably could've done without the final section about how he discovered Vipassana yoga, although I understand that's his conclusion to the whole book (more or less), in that we should understand ourselves better, since all the algorithms and bots are going to be understanding us very very well in the near future, and can easily gain an upper hand.

View all my reviews

Review: Storia minima della popolazione del mondo

Storia minima della popolazione del mondo by Massimo Livi Bacci
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This is all new to me and much of it is a tad too technical for me. There were some fascinating tidbits, however (for example, apparently in the year 0 the world population was 252 million).

There were parts that reminded me of Yuval Harari (the paleolithic had a lower mortality rate than the subsequent neolithic age, mainly because the former was a hunter/gatherer society while the latter was a farming society, so viruses and sicknesses could spread), as well as Matt Ridley (in the short and medium term demographic changes cause problems, but in the long term they tend to get solved).

Also, I had always heard that the world population would peak at around 10-11 billion, and then, as fertility rates decreased worldwide, they would drop somewhat. Now I'm not as convinced.

On the other hand, parts of it were just outdated (it was written in 1989), and other parts seemed to be wanting. It mentions how, as societies tend to get richer the fertility rate seems to decline, although sometimes it doesn't (sub-saharan Africa's GDP / capita in the 1950's equaled that of France 100 years prior, but the fertility rate hadn't dropped accordingly) and so we can't be sure if an increase in population is good or bad for well-being (??). This seems to be confusing cause and effect. When countries have high fertility, as in bigger families, resources are used up more quickly, but when countries start getting better off, their population increases (through higher fertility in general, not bigger families, and through immigration), which tends to be good. As it mentions, 4 million people are more likely to produce a genius than 400 people. But once again, this isn't my field so maybe I missed something.

Some of my notes:
The diet of hunter-gatherers was probably more complete than that of settlers.
Malthus's theory becomes less compelling when taking into account industrial advances and technological innovation
Population growth can be both dependent and independent. e.g.: better land leads to more people moving there, but more people moving there can improve the land through new methods of cultivation.
Black death caused less vegetable consumption (fewer fields being farmed)
Long distance emigration occurred from countries with an increase in agricultural employment
There is no reason to believe that poor country fertility will decline to rich country levels, even once they attain the same level of richness.
Abortion was widespread and easily attainable in China in the 1970s.

View all my reviews

Review: The Case Against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money

The Case Against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money by Bryan Caplan
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This should probably be required reading not only for lawmakers, but for all voters (since lawmakers won't make uncomfortable changes without having voters on board).
It deals with Signaling in education, and the Sheepskin effect.
I'm not sure about the makeshift dialog of the final chapter. It's in a Socratic style (which tends to annoy me), although it's probably useful if some of the main points didn't stick the first time around.

Some of my notes:
Signaling exists, but not the only factor (Around 80% signaling, 20% not)
High school is almost always worth it.
College worth it if you're a decent student
Masters is almost never worth it.

Implications: If not signaling, if everyone gets a degree it's better. More education for everyone.
If signaling, if everyone gets a degree it's worse. Everyone is at the same level, so like no one got education.
Signaling is zero sum (it doesn't increase the pie). So, society doesn't benefit from more education if education is signaling.
Most education spending is useless, so--> make it harder to attend schools? Not for skills they will actually use in life (bad readers are better than illiterate people). For other subjects, Yes. Only the best should study Arts, Music, etc.
Signaling: If we subsidize diamond rings for marriage, the rich will find something else to show wealth. Diamond rings will be deemed worthless.
We are against child labor unless A) It is unpaid (internships must not be to company's benefit) or B) It is school (so, no real use for the future if 80% signaling)
If people were interested in cultural issues, they would find everything they need on the internet--> humanities is shoving cultural topics down the throats of the unwilling.
Most professors (around 51% for universities) are liberal, but most students tend to become more conservative the more they are educated.
More education raises levels of civic awareness and lowers racism and sexism. More education raises support for capitalism, free markets, and globalization.
More education makes individuals less religious, but makes society more religious.

View all my reviews