William Easterly's The Tyranny Of Experts

The Tyranny of Experts In The Tyranny of Experts, William Easterly raises the important critique of modern humanitarian relief efforts. He does this by discussing four great debates and by showing the hypocrisy of organizations as they aid the regimes that they stand to eradicate. I find the most convincing of his many debates to be the Blank Slate versus learning from history and I do not agree with Easterly’s opinions of the pragmatic approach. Easterly’s debate of Blank Slate versus learning from history is the most convincing of the four. While each of the other debates are convincing in their own right, they leave too much room for political ideological interpretation. On the other hand, the Blank Slate versus learning from history debate is much more objective, and thus, more convincing. For example, Easterly’s story regarding child mortality rates in Ethiopia clearly shows that people choose the Blank Slate approach in order to see results where there are none. Easterly’s objective tone and …show more content…
He states, “Neither Gates nor Blair noted that the Ethiopian government was an autocracy, which, among other things, denied food aid to its political opponents. But maybe Gates believes (and is possibly correct) that solutions in health are technical and politics is indeed irrelevant” (125). While the ethics of a governmental regime is certainly an issue that should not be overlooked and requires consideration, I have to agree with Jim Grant’s position. His statement that “You want to wait to launch the campaign until all governments are respectable?” from his eulogy by Peter Adamson resonated with me because of our lack of governmental moral metrics. It is incredibly difficult to define a good or bad government and differentiate between the two. Furthermore, I do not believe it is the role of an aid organization to