Scan barcode
A review by lenzen
The Changing World Order: Why Nations Succeed and Fail by Ray Dalio
4.0
In this book, Dalio presents his model of the rise and fall of "empires". The closer it gets to the present day the more interesting the book is. The last three chapters of the book which deal with the rise of China, the current tensions between China and the US, the United States's current decline and Dalio's conjectures regarding the future are five stars. The build up to the final three chapters is decent, although only occasionally riveting: The book is only three stars before the strong close.
It is hard to evaluate the merits of Dalio's historical model given that he is only presenting it at moderate depths so as to introduce it all in one volume. The model says that empires rise and fall, no surprise, and talks about the interplay of economic, internal, and external factors that take an empire through the cycle. Dalio also mentions that inside the Big Cycle there are other cycles, and inside those cycles other cycles. He does not, however, go into much detail regarding the sub-cycles. This sounds reminiscent of Robert Prechter's Elliot Waves or perhaps, even, pre-Copernican astrology. Is this a model so loose, like Elliot Waves, that it can be found to fit anything that could happen? Is it falsifiable? Along the way was the validity tested by approaching an empire that there was little prior knowledge of to make "forward predictions" regarding what would happen? Has Dalio merely cherry picked the three examples which best seem to demonstrate the soundness of the model while omitting more problematic cases? There is not enough in this book to do a rigorous analysis.
The United States Civil War is a good example of something I had trouble thinking about in terms of the model. According to the model the final stage in an empire's breakdown is civil war or revolution. In the case of the United States, however, the Civil War occurred while the United States was still ascendant: in stage 2 out of 6 with stage 3 being the peak. Certainly there was no debt crisis which caused the Civil War and the United States had little going on in terms of external conflict at the time. So perhaps that could have been taken as a "prediction" that the United States would almost certainly have survived the Civil War in tact? The truth, however, is that the South came very close to winning the Civil War, in the sense of being recognized as independent, according to McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom.
Another thing that I am not sure how to evaluate using the model is the United States after the Civil War and after the Revolution. Although these were periods of rebuilding they do not seem to fit well into Dalio's model. After victory in these conflicts Americans were very magnanimous (as it was later after World War II). Far from being purged those who were on the wrong side of history ended up facing rather little in the way of consequences. So how does this fit into the model? Obviously, there will be some "rebuilding" after a Revolution or Civil War so is the model just saying there will be something which could not not happen? Indeed although the United States was vibrant after the Revolution, the period after the Civil War as described in Richard White's The Republic for Which it Stands seems in decline compared to the Antebellum period. According to Dalio's model, however, the United States was stage 2 rising into stage 3 during this period.
Regardless of the merits of the model, which would probably require many in depth books to evaluate fully, there is definitely some good high level overviews of Chinese, European, and American history. There are many interesting charts and statistics thrown in.
As mentioned, the close of the book is far and away the best part of it. Dalio describes the cultural differences between Americans and Chinese people and their different outlooks toward governing. Dalio does not seem to be pushing any political agenda, at least not too hard, but rather what he has carefully measured to be objectively true. Although clearly an admirer of much about China, he is also willing to criticize some aspects of China. At the same time, his criticism omits its surveillance state.
Looking forward Dalio presents some very interesting charts and statistics regarding America's growing internal conflicts. He even has a graph to show how bad it is now compared to early points in history. Dalio is willing to stick his neck out and quantify what his model is predicting as the probability of civil war in the United States and the probability of military war with China in the next decade.
Although very thought provoking overall, one particularly persistent problem throughout the book is that many of the charts are very hard to read. There are graphs with eight different lines with some of the colors very hard to distinguish between. The book also almost never references its sources. Indeed, given how much history Dalio has obviously studied, a bibliography, or at least a list of recommendations, would be very nice.
Dalio is very repetitive regarding the inevitable death of fiat currencies through money printing. At the same time he also does provide concrete advise of how to prepare. He gives some definite timelines and the dates are very close. To qualify this, somewhat, however, his company Bridgewater Associates has basically had a "lost decade" using his models to generate any kinds of returns since his departure around 2012. Nevertheless it is interesting to think about whether or the US is on the verge of multiple simultaneous crises.
It is hard to evaluate the merits of Dalio's historical model given that he is only presenting it at moderate depths so as to introduce it all in one volume. The model says that empires rise and fall, no surprise, and talks about the interplay of economic, internal, and external factors that take an empire through the cycle. Dalio also mentions that inside the Big Cycle there are other cycles, and inside those cycles other cycles. He does not, however, go into much detail regarding the sub-cycles. This sounds reminiscent of Robert Prechter's Elliot Waves or perhaps, even, pre-Copernican astrology. Is this a model so loose, like Elliot Waves, that it can be found to fit anything that could happen? Is it falsifiable? Along the way was the validity tested by approaching an empire that there was little prior knowledge of to make "forward predictions" regarding what would happen? Has Dalio merely cherry picked the three examples which best seem to demonstrate the soundness of the model while omitting more problematic cases? There is not enough in this book to do a rigorous analysis.
The United States Civil War is a good example of something I had trouble thinking about in terms of the model. According to the model the final stage in an empire's breakdown is civil war or revolution. In the case of the United States, however, the Civil War occurred while the United States was still ascendant: in stage 2 out of 6 with stage 3 being the peak. Certainly there was no debt crisis which caused the Civil War and the United States had little going on in terms of external conflict at the time. So perhaps that could have been taken as a "prediction" that the United States would almost certainly have survived the Civil War in tact? The truth, however, is that the South came very close to winning the Civil War, in the sense of being recognized as independent, according to McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom.
Another thing that I am not sure how to evaluate using the model is the United States after the Civil War and after the Revolution. Although these were periods of rebuilding they do not seem to fit well into Dalio's model. After victory in these conflicts Americans were very magnanimous (as it was later after World War II). Far from being purged those who were on the wrong side of history ended up facing rather little in the way of consequences. So how does this fit into the model? Obviously, there will be some "rebuilding" after a Revolution or Civil War so is the model just saying there will be something which could not not happen? Indeed although the United States was vibrant after the Revolution, the period after the Civil War as described in Richard White's The Republic for Which it Stands seems in decline compared to the Antebellum period. According to Dalio's model, however, the United States was stage 2 rising into stage 3 during this period.
Regardless of the merits of the model, which would probably require many in depth books to evaluate fully, there is definitely some good high level overviews of Chinese, European, and American history. There are many interesting charts and statistics thrown in.
As mentioned, the close of the book is far and away the best part of it. Dalio describes the cultural differences between Americans and Chinese people and their different outlooks toward governing. Dalio does not seem to be pushing any political agenda, at least not too hard, but rather what he has carefully measured to be objectively true. Although clearly an admirer of much about China, he is also willing to criticize some aspects of China. At the same time, his criticism omits its surveillance state.
Looking forward Dalio presents some very interesting charts and statistics regarding America's growing internal conflicts. He even has a graph to show how bad it is now compared to early points in history. Dalio is willing to stick his neck out and quantify what his model is predicting as the probability of civil war in the United States and the probability of military war with China in the next decade.
Although very thought provoking overall, one particularly persistent problem throughout the book is that many of the charts are very hard to read. There are graphs with eight different lines with some of the colors very hard to distinguish between. The book also almost never references its sources. Indeed, given how much history Dalio has obviously studied, a bibliography, or at least a list of recommendations, would be very nice.
Dalio is very repetitive regarding the inevitable death of fiat currencies through money printing. At the same time he also does provide concrete advise of how to prepare. He gives some definite timelines and the dates are very close. To qualify this, somewhat, however, his company Bridgewater Associates has basically had a "lost decade" using his models to generate any kinds of returns since his departure around 2012. Nevertheless it is interesting to think about whether or the US is on the verge of multiple simultaneous crises.