The following is an interview conducted by Archbridge Chief Economist Justin Callais with Johan Norberg, author of the new book, Peak Human: What We Can Learn From History’s Greatest Civilizations.
Justin Callais: In reading your book, I noticed two commonalities among history’s successful societies: private property rights and personal liberties. Would you say this is accurate, and are there other similarities you think are important to add?
Johan Norberg: Yes, those are crucial preconditions, because this is what allows people to be creative and innovative, and indeed, rewards them for it. As the economic historian Joel Mokyr puts it, every major act of technological innovation is “an act of rebellion against conventional wisdom and vested interests,” so you need to give rebels some space to test their eccentric ideas. In most historical societies, the ruler and his cronies also simply take everything from those who have worked hard and invested in the future, so you need the rule of law and property rights to restrain arbitrary rules and confiscation, to give people an incentive to think long-term.
The one thing I would add is that the golden ages had a remarkable openness to the rest of the world, which provided them not just with goods and opportunities to specialize, but also access to more ideas that they could learn and borrow from. This happened in different ways: Often, like Athens, the Dutch, and the British, they were maritime, trading cultures that picked up new ideas on their business trips. Ancient Rome was slightly different, but they perfected a way to constantly absorb new talent, ideas, and methods after conquest in a surprisingly meritocratic way. The Abbasid Califate in Baghdad simply invited scholars and scientists of all faiths and countries to come and share their ideas. What they all had in common was that merchants, migrants, and missionaries gave them a constant supply of new ideas and methods.
Justin: What are the main lessons we can learn from history’s Golden Ages?
Johan: I think that the counter-intuitive lesson is that we don’t become strong by having strongmen and centralized bureaucracies telling us what to do. These cultures became strong because they were open to surprises. They empowered more people, through tolerance and property rights, to test new intellectual hypotheses and business ventures. In freer markets, when someone stumbled on a new innovation, it could quickly be shared, tested by consumer markets, and improved on by competitors.
I think this is an incredibly important lesson today, when there seems to be a bipartisan consensus that governments should step in and command the economy—whether through regulation or protection—pick winners with an active industrial policy, and even take stakes in private companies. The lesson from history is that every time we centralize decisions, we lose the knowledge and creativity of millions, who could have come up with something better through more experiments, trial and error, and constant adaptation after market feedback.
Justin: Which group highlighted in your book do you think more closely resembles the United States?
Johan: You can find similarities with the U.S. in each of these civilizations, but if I have to pick one, I would say the Dutch Republic in the 17th century. It was also born in a war of independence—against the Spanish, in their case—populated through tolerance and immigration, and established a system of rule of law, free markets, and free speech, which unleashed an incredible spirit of entrepreneurship and innovation and turned it into the hitherto richest country on the planet.
Unfortunately, it also faced some similar challenges and threats, related to geopolitical threats, partisan anger, and anxiety about its future, that made the Dutch then and many Americans now clamor for a strongman and stifling orthodoxies. In 1672, facing an invasion by the English and the French simultaneously, the population panicked, lynched their previous de facto prime minister, and handed total power to a prince of Orange and the Calvinist Church, who went on to dismantle checks and balances and purge the universities of Enlightenment thinkers. If even the sensible Dutch could do such things when desperate, it tells you something about what lurks there in the shadowy parts of our human nature when we become fearful.
Justin: What are the biggest threats to the Golden Age of the United States? How can we learn from the fall of other once-great civilizations?
Johan: Try not to be invaded by Germanic tribes and Mongol hordes. At least, that’s how many great cultures ended. But many of them had already undermined their own atmosphere of openness, innovation, and growth for a long time before, so that they were weak and ripe for the picking. The fall of most golden ages came in two ways, in the style of Hemingway: First gradually, then suddenly.
If I limit myself to four risks that are not completely outlandish, they are: unsustainable debts; regulations that hurt growth and mobility; tariffs that stifle specialization and innovation; and the wrecking of independent institutions and the rule of law. Those are some ever-present risks that tend to undermine societies in the long term. But remember, America has been threatened before and managed to bounce back. It can do so again, if it wants to.
Justin: Of the seven eras that you researched in this book, did any in particular surprise you?
Johan: If I am allowed to mention two, I would say that it is remarkable that the Islamic world was so prosperous and so close to unleashing an Enlightenment era in the 9th century, and that China under the Song dynasty was such a thoroughly commercialized and mobile society and, according to some economic historians, was close to starting an Industrial Revolution 400 years before it got going in the United Kingdom.
Since we are often stuck in present-day perceptions, it is eye-opening to see that completely different cultures were much more developed than our own, but then sadly lost it by going down the wrong route. Such civilizations are a reminder that progress can happen everywhere, but it is not guaranteed anywhere.
Justin: There are many mentions of social mobility in your book, a topic we care deeply about at Profectus and the Archbridge Institute. What lessons from history can we learn about achieving and embracing social mobility today?
Johan: That’s a great question. One of the striking lessons from history is that social mobility has never thrived in rigidly planned or stratified societies, but in open ones where talent can flow upward. In Athens, Rome, the Dutch Republic, and Song China, we see that dynamism came when barriers of birth or guild were lowered and when institutions rewarded merit, enterprise, and creativity rather than lineage.
So, we should look to remove similar barriers in our time—from stagnant construction and occupational licensing to welfare traps that create huge disincentives to get a job or move to a new one. Societies can encourage social mobility by protecting property rights for everyone, making capital and education accessible, and allowing ideas and people to circulate freely. Every golden age shows us that when we widen the circle of opportunity, we get more invention, more prosperity, and, just as importantly, a sense of hope that tomorrow can be better than today. And when that happens, we all benefit from it.
