The Shock of the Old | Book review | Ruffer

WELCOME TO RUFFER

All-weather investing

Seeking consistent positive returns.

Come rain or shine.

Ruffer provides investment management services for institutions, pension funds, charities, financial planners and individual investors.

London

Ruffer LLP
80 Victoria Street
London SW1E 5JL

Directions | Map +44 (0)20 7963 8100

Paris

Ruffer S.A.
103 boulevard Haussmann
75008 Paris, France

Directions | Map +33 (0)1 88 45 02 54

New York

Ruffer LLC
300 Park Avenue
New York NY 10022

Directions | Map +1 917 947 3003

Edinburgh

Ruffer LLP
31 Charlotte Square
Edinburgh EH2 4ET

Directions | Map +44 (0)131 202 1602

11 July 2022

At the heart of historical enquiry are two simple questions: ‘What has changed?’ and ‘What has stayed the same?’ For investors, concerned with the future value of assets, these questions can be reframed: ‘What will change?’ and ‘What will stay the same?’

In uncertain times, we have a tendency to construct neat and orderly narratives of the past to help us understand the present. But these narratives can omit important details. A more nuanced understanding of history can help us identify what will change when everyone else expects continuity. Perhaps even more usefully, it can suggest what might stay the same when everyone else expects change.

A NOSTALGIC FUTURE

Technology is a particularly fine example. Since the eighteenth century, we have been taught to expect near constant change as a result of ever-improving science and technology. Each generation has reheated breathless futurology; our current age is no exception. The assumption of perpetual technological progress is employed to support both utopian and dystopian visions of the future. The coming of artificial intelligence is said to bring either a leisure- filled, post-scarcity future or the extinction of the human race.

So our idea of the future is quite old-fashioned. Physical space, nations, distances, manufacturing and objects, so the argument goes, become less important. Replacing them is a world defined by ideas, brands and services that can be transmitted instantaneously and at no cost between increasingly identical parts of the world. But the knowledge economy has existed for hundreds of years. We still live in a world in which huge amounts of raw materials are shipped around the globe, where nations and national identity still matter. This future has never arrived, yet the vision is still with us.

CONTINUOUS INVENTION?

David Edgerton’s book teaches us to be sceptical. We tend to focus far too much on novel things and the process of creating novelty. Invention and innovation trump continuity and resilience. Yet many of the fundamentally transformative impacts of technology have been diffusions of technology to new regions, classes or uses – decades or centuries after their invention. Both the motor vehicle and the bicycle remain transformative technologies. When we think about engineers, we think about people building (or coding) new things. Yet most engineers are engaged in maintaining things that already exist.

There is a tendency amongst public policy experts to associate innovation and invention with economic success: Germany and America were inventive nations in the twentieth century and therefore grew quickly. Spending sizeable proportions of GDP on research and development (3% rather than 1%) is encouraged; failure to do so causes hand-wringing. Yet it is not true to say that countries that innovate more, grow more. In 1900, Great Britain had a much higher output per head of population than Italy. Throughout the twentieth century, Great Britain spent considerably more on research and development. Yet, by the 1980s, both countries were shocked by il sorpasso – when Italy overtook Great Britain in output per head.

IMPERIAL TECHNOLOGY

Historically, technology has been considered as an indicator of civilisation, and has been used to fuel the narrative of western supremacy. Institutions of the British Empire – the merchant navy and the Indian railways, for instance – brought European technology to new places and put white technicians in charge. Non-whites were judged, explicitly, to lack both inventive and technical ability; they were carefully excluded. These arguments have been remarkably persistent.

The technological progress which emerged from East Asia in the 1980s drew accusations of imitation and plagiarism. The implication was that non-white nations lacked some fundamental spark of ideation.

A NOVEL PAST

In many ways, Edgerton prefigured a modern turn in this book. It is easier to imagine today, 14 years after publication, that older technologies may have benefits, and new technologies may have costs. In a world increasingly concerned with the climate emergency and where governments are more willing to implement drastic policies to deal with it, the idea that an old-fashioned technology might come back into use is conceivable again. Think of the shifting significance of wind power. Fracking, invented in the 1940s, has also re-emerged.

In a world that has seen steel, coal, cement and motor vehicle production reach new highs as China has risen to power, the transformative power of old technologies should not be underestimated.

The inconvenient characteristics of the material world – nationhood, manufacturing, physical distance – are fast reasserting themselves.

Your privacy matters

Book review – The Shock of the Old