March 2026 marks the 250th anniversary of the publication of Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). But Adam Smith was also the author of The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759), and it was through continued revision of this early work that his most famous book was born. One of the most notable passages in TMS criticizes the “system man.” In contrast, Smith depicts a “public-spirited” person, emphasizing the humility inherent in this person. Unlike the institutional person, who insists on the correctness of his ideal plan and tries to impose it on others, the public-spirited person has humility. They do not claim the right to impose their concept of the good on others. Instead, they rely solely on persuasion and consent, and never resort to violence.
Unfortunately, throughout the long history of colonialism, slavery, and the treatment of Indigenous peoples, many professionals have been institutional people rather than public-spirited people. I will introduce William Easterly’s criticism of the “developmental savior” in “A Violent Messiah” (2025). This book represents one of the most important contributions to date to the moral and methodological foundations of development economics. His argument challenges the technocratic view that development is primarily a technical matter of expert design and policy implementation. Easterly situates development within a broader liberal tradition that emphasizes freedom, dignity, and the consent of those whose lives are affected by economic policies. In this respect, Easterly’s work can be seen as a revival of the core insight most articulated by Adam Smith. That is, development must result from voluntary cooperation among individuals, not from plans imposed by external authorities. Easterly explicitly resists the “West vs. Other” framework that prevails in much of development economics.
He frames the debate over development as a conflict between two intellectual traditions. On the one hand are the “saviors” who believe that enlightened experts can plan the progress of poor societies through carefully designed policies and institutional reforms. On the other side are the “skeptics” who emphasize the limits of expertise and the importance of allowing individuals and communities to shape their own social and economic development paths. The roots of this division can be traced back to the 18th century, when Adam Smith made a powerful critique of the paternalistic logic that justified imperial conquest in the name of progress.
Easterly has consistently argued that those affected by development plans should be given a voice in the process. The increase in a country’s material wealth does not justify prioritizing institutional goals over individual needs. “Nothing about us without us” is a slogan that sums up the message of Easter.
European powers often justified their conquests by claiming that they were bringing civilization, Christianity, and economic improvements to the conquered peoples. Smith denied this theory. In The Wealth of Nations, Smith speaks not of benevolent improvement but of the “brutal injustice” of European colonial expansion, conquest, and exploitation. Rather than imposing progress by force, Smith envisioned an alternative based on mutual benefit through voluntary exchange and trade. The meeting of different societies, he argued, would have brought great benefits if it had taken place through peaceful commerce rather than coercion.
For Smith and Easterly, the important question was not simply whether development would increase material production, but whether it would respect the autonomy of individuals and communities. The exchange requires mutual consent and is therefore morally legitimate. Each party must decide for themselves whether the transaction will improve their well-being. Coercive arrangements, whether colonial rule or paternalistic policies, violate this principle because they replace the agency of directly affected individuals with the judgment of external authorities. The central question was not simply whether development policies “work” but whether they respected the freedom and dignity of the people targeted by them. Rather than efficiency, capital accumulation, or economic growth, dignity, respect, agency, and autonomy are the guiding principles.
To commemorate the publication of one of humanity’s greatest achievements, we pair Adam Smith with William Easterly. Smith’s liberal program included the pursuit of liberty, equality, and justice, which were the cornerstones of his political and economic principles. Bill Easterly is a worthy successor to this project, exploring not only the nature and causes of a nation’s wealth, but also the dignity, respect, and freedom of the individuals who inhabit it.
