I have to say that this book was a bit of a disappointing read for me.
I expected more of this book which having heard so many fantastic things about the author and her supposedly new ideas and voice.

This book doesn't show that if its true.
Its filled with statistics, and statements made by the author that i couldn't see the truth in. The author leaves from facts to her own conclusion that too me are not realistic.

This book feels a bit naive and overly optimistic without actually offering realistic options or views into economics.

Maybe i am just not the right reader for this book. But it didn't read like a well researched, thought out and checked over story that was written by someone really trying to find realistic solutions but rather someone that is writing a think piece for school.

Moyo’s thesis is that the world’s economy is in a downward spiral, is not working for people of nation-states, countries and politicians are responding to recession, poverty and debt by stooping to knee-jerk, populist, short-term, reactionary policies (by making protectionist laws aimed at anti-immigration / anti-globalisation, rejecting bilateral trade deals or by taking more foreign aid), and to stop all of it, the democratic project needs to be overhauled.

To do this, her 10-point agenda, as given in paragraph-format in Chapter Seven (‘Blueprint for a New Democracy’), is as follows:

The quantity and quality of voters needs to be increased: Voting in elections should be made mandatory. Voter education should be compulsory. Voters should have aptitude / knowledge-based tests to check how informed they are of the problems / issues that need to be looked into for progress. The result will make a tier / hierarchy of voters: qualified, unqualified, highly-qualified. Higher marks / points should be reserved for the voting behavior of those more educated (i.e. lawyers, doctors, teacher) i.e. more ‘weight’ should be given to the vote of a ‘professionally qualified person’ or level of education or level of employment status or the one who scores higher in the civics test, than the rest, because poor quality of voters will keep selecting leaders of lower potential or ‘an administration that implements poor policies that damage economic growth’. Moyo understands that this view may be seen as discriminatory and may not be fool-proof but she believes it’s the best way forward for better economic future of each democratic country. She says, ‘There is a direct link between the individuals voters elect and the economic decisions that elected officials make......In a liberal democratic system, at the heart of virtually all voting decisions are economic choices. While it is true that purely social questions make their way onto the ballot, even many issues that are viewed mostly through the lens of social policy, such as health care or immigration, end up having an economic impact. Economic choices are at the core of politics.’

Secondly, she proposes a list of changes to the elected government itself to increase its quality: Minimum standards should be installed for public office holders beyond their age and political or academic experience, i.e. prefer ‘real-world experience are more likely to understands the sorts of policies that are needed in a modern economy than those conditioned on a diet of polls and political tactics’. Representatives should be elected for longer terms/ periods (e.g. 6-8 years) so that economic policies generated by one can continue without disruption, just like in a normal business cycle, and to match ‘political attention spans to longer-term economic challenges’. She says, ‘At its core, mature liberal democracy reflects a contract between governments and its citizens. n the most efficient democracies, governments provide a suite of public goods to their voters in return for tax revenue. If an incumbent officeholder fails to deliver on their promise to help effectively oversee the government’s provision of public goods, they are voted out of office.....frequent elections can incentivize officeholders to be too responsive to voters today at the expense of making the wisest decisions for the long-term health of the economy.’ The pay scales of the representatives need to be increased to match the private sector so that better quality / learned/ technical people can come into politics. Bonuses / deferred pay packages should be given on jobs well done - especially if a policy initiative brings fruition after 6 years / country performs well on key development goals or long-term, broader achievements. The terms of office-holders need to be capped to term limits. Campaign funding should be restricted strictly. Basically, Moyo is suggesting that technocrats be elected to office for better running of governance because they have more experience dealing with real-life public policy and are trained, and will take a hard-nosed approach than the populist politician who gives a volley of feel-good short-term objectives that don’t take the country forward.

Moyo believes that since the people in the system will try to protect the system, hence the change / reform in democratic project can only occur if retired politicians, think tanks, non-partisan organizations, and the private sector take the lead.

Dambias Moyo is touted as a fresh and important new voice in economics. The Edge of Chaos, her analysis of the global economy and democracy, plus her ten recommendations to fix it all, does not affirm that reputation. It is superficial, naïve and unimpressive. On the other hand, if you know very little about the state of the world, it is a very helpful overview.

The book is chock full of statistics. Moyo summarizes every major economy with them. Then she keeps telling readers that it puts the countries involved on the edge of chaos, which is clearly not the case.

She writes about infrastructure in the USA putting the country on edge of chaos. I remember (and still have) a fat 1970 issue of Business Week saying the same thing. At the time, it would have taken an impossible $50 billion to fix the crumbling bridges, roads, ports, trains and airports that were sending the country to the edge of chaos. Today, the bill is a trillion, which interestingly is not an impossible number. And rather than all the many reasons she gives for that money being unavailable, the simple truth is if the USA hadn’t invaded Iraq for no reason, it would have all the money it needs today to fix all those things.

Moyo leaps from facts to conclusions with abandon. As I read, I kept thinking things like – but that’s not the reason…. this has nothing to do with that… correlation is not causation…. that’s not why this is happening… we’ve known the real reason for that for decades…

Globalization isn’t working at its optimum because it isn’t real globalization. Free trade is anything but free trade. Treaties are a thousand pages long, with carve-outs, exceptions and workarounds that make them a fraud. Globalization is shrinking under its own pointless baggage, not because it is a failing strategy.

Sadly, her answer to every economic situation is growth, the more the better. We can grow our way out of any problem. This is so grossly naïve and wrong, it should be coming Donald Trump, not Moyo.

Her prescriptions for saving democracy are similarly superficial, old hat, and impossible. A country that can’t escape the Electoral College is not about to implement weighted voting. In deploring the descent of voter participation, she does not account for the simple fact that voters are offered no quality choices. And she certainly has no scope to examine the fact the two party system prevents quality candidates from even bothering. They are much better off avoiding the swamp and influencing those who choose to be there. If citizens had to serve, if terms were unique, if representatives were elected by issue instead of party, things would be different. Capping expenditures, fining nonvoters and all the other usual patches she proposes will fix nothing.

And despite it all, we stumble on, reducing poverty, improving lives, and by the way, somehow avoiding chaos.

David Wineberg