The Fatal Conceit of Foreign Intervention
The fatal conceit is the assumption that the world can be shaped according to human desires. This paper argues that the logic of the fatal conceit can be applied to foreign interventions which go beyond the limits of what can be rationally constructed by reason alone. In suffering from the fatal conceit, these interventions are characterized by: (1) the realization that intentions do not equal results, (2) a reliance on top-down planning, (3) the view of development as a technological issue, (4) a reliance on bureaucracy over markets, and (5) the primacy of collectivism over individualism. These characteristics explain why interventions extending beyond the limits of what can be rationally constructed tend to fail.
|Date of creation:||2009|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (304) 293-7859
Fax: (304) 293-2233
Web page: http://be.wvu.edu/phd_economics/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- William Easterly & Tobias Pfutze, 2008. "Where Does the Money Go? Best and Worst Practices in Foreign Aid," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(2), pages 29-52, Spring.
- Randall G. Holcombe, 2004. "National Income Accounting and Public Policy," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 387-405, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wvu:wpaper:09-06. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Josh Hall)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.