"Who would you dine with? Scott or Amundsen?" Malcolm Gladwell and Tim Harford in Discussion.
25:14 Share

So I have some big news for vegans and vegetarians everywhere. It's Hellman's plant-based mayo spread and dressing. Made for people with a plant-based diet or anyone really who wants to enjoy the great taste of Hellman's real without the eggs. Hellman's plant-based is perfect for sandwiches, salads, veggie burgers, or any of your family favorites.

To celebrate, Hellman's is sharing some easy, delicious plant-based recipes at hellmans.com. Hellman's plant-based mayo spread and dressing. Same great taste, plant-based. I'm Malcolm Gladwell, and I'd like to take a moment to talk about an amazing new podcast I'm hosting called Medal of Honor.

It's a moving podcast series celebrating the untold stories of those who protect our country. And it's brought to you by LifeLock, the leader in identity theft protection. Your personal info is in a lot of places that can accidentally expose you to identity theft. And not everyone who handles your personal info is as careful as you.

LifeLock makes it easy to take control of your identity and will work to fix identity theft if it happens. Join the millions of Americans who trust LifeLock. Visit LifeLock.com slash metal today to save up to 40% off your first year.

The most innovative companies are going further with T-Mobile for Business. Red Bull harnessed the strength of the T-Mobile 5G network to launch point-of-view drones and give fans unmatched views of their extreme sports, while broadcasting in real time from some of the most remote locations in America. This is heart-pounding fan experiences. This is Red Bull with T-Mobile for Business.

Take your business further at T-Mobile.com slash now. Pushkin.

Wait, beware. Ahead of you lie yawning crevasses, rampaging killer whales and Malcolm Gladwell bearing spoilers. You are about to hear a conversation about our epic Race to the South Pole trilogy. So before you do, please have a listen to the trilogy itself, which should have arrived in your Cautionary Tales podcast feed over the past few weeks. I'll wait. Don't worry.

Right, as you will now know, the trilogy makes reference to Malcolm Gladwell's work. Malcolm is, of course, the author of David and Goliath, The Bomber Mafia, and other bestsellers, and the creator of the Revisionist History podcast. I was so excited when he agreed to come and talk about the South Pole Trilogy. Why Captain Scott's access to money and patrons...

turned out to be more a curse than a blessing. What it cost Roald Amundsen to rip up the conventional rules of behaviour, and the astonishing subplot in which absolutely everybody seemed to forget the scientific evidence and come down with scurvy. Now, I had assumed I'd be asking Malcolm about David and Goliath, but that is not how it went down.

Malcolm had questions for me. So many questions. And I just loved trying to keep up with him. I think you're going to enjoy the conversation as much as I did. So, now, Cautionary Tales presents a conversation between me, Tim Harford, and Malcolm Gladwell himself.

Tim, I've listened to all three of your episodes, and I must say I liked them very much. I thought it was fascinating. I actually knew none of this. None at all? I couldn't. Yeah, it was all kind of a blur to me, all of these explorers from long ago. And there were all these dimensions that I didn't understand.

But I wanted to start with this contrast between Scott and Amundsen. The complex thing, and the thing that makes it really fascinating, is that Scott is really the innovator, isn't he? Yeah, he sees himself as the scientific innovator. He wants to break ground in terms of exploring, measuring magnetic fields, discovering new applications.

aspects of the flora and fungi of Antarctica. There's this crazy side quest they do when they're trying to get a penguin egg, which is described as the worst journey in the world because they have to travel in the Antarctic winter. I mean, it's crazy. He's doing technological innovation. He has these three motorized sleds, which I think partly paved the way for tanks in the First World War.

And people who think that Scott is awesome emphasize all of this ambition, all of the things he was trying to do. But of course, Amundsen just wanted to use the best possible way to get to the South Pole first. And actually, that was innovative in some small ways, the precise design of the sled and the kind of containers that won't leak. But it was basically using techniques that have been used in...

Greenland by indigenous people for, well, I mean, we don't know how long, a very long time. This is actually what I loved about the story is that it's so incredibly contemporary because Scott is really the kind of, he's the Silicon Valley startup who gets an enormous amount of venture funding and proceeds to blow it all on a series of ideas and solving problems that aren't problems. And Amundsen is the kind of bootstrap entrepreneur

entrepreneur in the middle of the country that no one's paying attention to who's, you know, forced to use the tried and true. The original sin, it sounds like, is the fact that Scott was given everything he wanted. Yeah.

Everything he wanted plus a lot of baggage he didn't want. All kinds of interference and all kinds of people telling him they wanted to do this and they wanted to do that and they wanted to achieve all of these great things, which means he can't focus. He's got far too much money. He's got far too many people. His ship nearly sinks simply because it's so overladen. There's just so much on it that it's nearly capsized by a storm on the way to the Antarctic.

But Amundsen, meanwhile, is not only is no one paying attention to him, he's actively engaging in disinformation. He's even lying to his own crew about where he's going. He's telling people he's going north and he's actually going south. I love the way that you phrase this. He's a Silicon Valley startup. Because for me, I'm thinking he's a British Navy guy. He's kind of a government man. He's a military man. He's very bureaucratic. But you're seeing a different quality in him and a different problem that he's facing.

He's given everything he wants, and then as a result, he has lots of things he doesn't want. Those two things are linked. That's what happens when you get everything you want. It's the careful what you wish for problem, right? The things he don't want are a consequence of getting everything he wants in the beginning.

He has so many people who are pitching in to quote unquote help him that he ends up being burdened by all of their expectations, which is another Silicon Valley kind of conundrum. The venture capitalist gives you $50 million and then has a seat at the table and complicates your vision with all of their sense of where you should be going.

The funder, the venture capitalist in this particular case is a guy called Sir Clements Markham, who is just this incredibly British, incredibly intimidating fellow. I've got this portrait of him.

And it looks to me like the expression on his face is like the photographer has just broken wind. And he just looks so unhappy that someone is daring to point a camera at him. And he was just pulling the strings at the Royal Geographical Society in London for decades. He's so tight with Scott and Scott's family that Scott names his son Peter R.

after Sir Clements. And Scott is clearly terrified of him. And it's one of these, you know, he puts Scott where he is and he can put him right back again if he wants to. And Sir Clements, who's never been to the Antarctic, who's got no idea what it's like down there,

just has these views. Obviously, there should be no dogs. Everybody who knows anything about Arctic exploration knows you should use dogs for any number of reasons I explain in the episodes. But Sir Clements is sitting there in London going, no, no ski, no dogs. And Scott's kind of got to do what he says. It's so funny that any story about English life

in this period always boils down to the stupidity of the British ruling class. Sir Clements is such a familiar figure, this kind of arrogant, pig-headed authority figure who has a kind of abstract notion of the way things ought to be. Yes, absolutely. Which triumphs over the way things actually are. But the interesting thing for me about Amundsen

is that he also has these certain bureaucratic constraints. So the king is the patron of his expedition, and he's got funding from the Norwegian government and all this kind of stuff. But he just doesn't care. So he lies to the king, he lies to parliament, he's borrowed all this money, and then he basically runs away. One of the things he's doing going to Antarctica is getting out of reach of his creditors. And it's only when they can't impound his ship

that he actually tells people exactly what he's doing. So yes, it is partly this kind of this hidebound British bureaucracy, but it is also Scott's deference to it in a way that Amundsen was not interested for a second in any of that. Yeah. To bring up the second Silicon Valley analogy, there's a little bit of Elizabeth Holmes in Amundsen. It's fake it till you make it kind of thing.

Yeah, except he made it. Yeah, except that he made it. But that idea that for someone who's attempting something incredibly difficult, that it may be necessary at some time to engage in acts of deception at the outset. Or maybe a better way of saying it is that the kind of...

person who is focused and singular enough to pull off a feat like this is willing to engage in deception. Doesn't have any kind of moral qualm. Nothing trumps the goal of reaching the South Pole. Everything else is secondary, including the truth.

Yeah, and he doesn't seem to have lost any sleep over that. And I think Amundsen had this very clear vision that it would all be forgiven if he succeeded. And which I suspect that to the extent that Elizabeth Holmes at Theranos had a vision of what was going on, that does the same thing. They'll forgive me once it all works. Oh, I think she very clearly had that, Tim. I think that's absolutely what's driving the whole train there is that I can lie and cheat and deceive because if I pull this off, I'm a hero.

Yeah. Tell me a little bit about your personal feelings about the two men. I mean, it's clear you're partial to Amundsen. If you eat a choice between dining with two of them, who's your first choice for dinner tonight? Oh, actually, I think they would both be...

Well, they'd both be interesting, but they'd be pretty awkward both ways. Because I think they both have these huge egos. I don't really like either of them as people. Amundsen is this anti-hero. I'm excited by Amundsen's daring and his willingness to get things done. And he makes sacrifices and he succeeds in the end. And Scott just seems like this tragic blunderer. But I'm not sure I'd really want to have dinner with either of them, if I'm honest. Who would you rather? Scott.

Yeah. I came away from listening to your episodes liking Amundsen. And I felt very sorry for him because the world doesn't reward him in the way that he ought to have been rewarded. He's the hero. He made it look too easy. That's the problem. He made it look too easy. But Scott would just be fascinating. And he's so British. He's so of that period. I mean, and you would dine out on Scott stories for the rest of your life.

But if you had dinner with him, get him drunk. He was a brilliant storyteller. And the story was of the tragic hero. And he was writing this story of the tragic hero who's going to fail all the way along. It's almost like he knew how it was going to end. Yeah. There's this myth-making that goes on afterwards as well, of course, around Scott. The British establishment at first, he's an inspiration for the soldiers who are going over the top in World War I.

And, you know, this is a man who knows how to die with dignity as a hero for his country. Then later that parallel is maintained, but the moral flips, which is, oh, he was just so stupid and incompetent. And so were the generals in World War I. So the whole narrative that the British are telling about themselves throughout the 20th century, the ebbs and flows, Scott seems to be the exemplar, no matter what story you want to tell, he's there in the middle of it.

That was something that thought that I was thinking about when I was listening, this whole idea of the parallels with the First World War, which is, you know, this kind of epic example of the ability of the English to romanticize failure and stupidity and just kind of

The tragedy, I mean, just like that idea that dying nobly in pursuit of some futile, stupid cause, we think of that as being the highest of all. There's nothing that can stop the myth-making machinery of early 20th century England or of kind of late British Empire England. I just find it endlessly fascinating the way the kind of the minds of these people work.

Yeah. When they finally find Scott, I mean, and it was never guaranteed that they would find him. I mean, he could have just been buried under the snow forever. When they finally find him in this terrible scene of him and the last two men he's with, and they're trying to recover his diaries and they move his arm and his arm just shatters because it's ice. It's just, it's horrific. Yeah.

And they're dragging with them about 20 or 30 pounds worth of fossils. And they haven't got any strength more and any strength to go any further. And they all die. And they've still got the fossils with them. And there was one commentator who said, I think they could have saved themselves the weight.

But all the British were just, isn't it epic? They were still trying to do the science even up to the last moment. And, you know, the sensible response is, well, maybe they should have stopped doing the science at the point at which they were all clearly about to die. Yeah. It's all part of the story, all part of the myth. It's a mixture of a suicidal impulse and...

You know, it's like what happens when grandiose national dreams coincide with psychological neuroses? You end up dragging the fossils with you. And it's really this weird kind of turning point in the British Empire as well. And the British Empire is...

lasts another half a century really until after the Second World War but the glory days or if you if you prefer that you know the the terrible days of moral outrage they're all in the past all the conquering the exploitation the stealing other people's land the telling other people what to do the the slave trade in the earlier centuries that's all happened and Scott and his crew

are just trying to race to be the first person to this arbitrary point on this icy desert. There's nothing there. There's no resources. There's nothing. There are no people. And yet it still matters to them. It's that last gasp of empire. Yeah. Malcolm Gladwell and I will be back in a moment to discuss how Scott and Amundsen viewed their own chances, why Amundsen didn't seem to get the recognition he deserves, and what we can learn from imperfect experiments.

AI might be the most important new computer technology ever. It's storming every industry, and literally billions of dollars are being invested. So, buckle up. The problem is that AI needs a lot of speed and processing power. So how do you compete without costs spiraling out of control? It's time to upgrade to the next generation of the cloud, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, or OCI.

OCI is a single platform for your infrastructure, database, application development, and AI needs. OCI has 4 to 8 times the bandwidth of other clouds, offers one consistent price instead of variable regional pricing, and of course, nobody does data better than Oracle. So now you can train your AI models at twice the speed and less than half the cost of other clouds.

If you want to do more and spend less, like Uber, 8x8, and Databricks Mosaic, take a free test drive of OCI at oracle.com slash strategic. That's oracle.com slash strategic. oracle.com slash strategic. I love cycling, and I'm eager to get my kids cycling too. It's a great way for them to stay fit and move around our home city independently. But of course, I also want them to be confident and safe.

which is where Guardian Bikes comes in. The bike comes in a box and it's easy to assemble with all the tools you need and simple online instructions. My son and I unboxed his bike together, spent about 20 minutes working as a team to assemble it and then he was on the bike and ready to ride.

The bike looks great and with the SureStop braking system it brakes quickly and safely without locking the front wheel and sending you over the handlebars. Guardian Bikes offer a 365 day money back guarantee covering returns, repairs and spare parts. Join hundreds of thousands of happy families by getting a Guardian Bike today. Visit GuardianBikes.com to save up to 25% off bikes. No code needed. Plus

Plus, receive a free bike lock and pump with your first purchase after signing up for the newsletter. That's GuardianBikes.com. Happy riding! If you're listening to this right now, you probably like to stay on top of things, which is why I want to mention The Economist. Today, the world seems to be moving faster than ever. Climate and economics, politics and culture, science and technology, wherever you look, events are unfolding quickly. But now you can save 20% off an annual subscription to The Economist,

so you won't miss a thing. The Economist broadens your perspective with fact-checked, rigorous reporting and analysis. It's journalism you can truly trust. There is a lot going on these days, but with 20% off, you get access to in-depth, independent coverage of world events through podcasts, webinars, expert analysis, and even their extensive archives. So,

Whether you want to catch up on current events or dive deeper into specific issues, The Economist delivers global perspectives with distinctive clarity. Just to give an example, What's Next for Amazon as it turns 30? analyzes how Amazon's fourth decade looks like an area of integration for the company. Go beyond the headlines with The Economist. Save 20% for a limited time on an annual subscription. Go to economist.com and subscribe today. I'm back with Malcolm Gladwell.

I was curious about who do you think, at the moment both men get off their boats and strike out on this expedition, who do you think is more confident in their heart of pulling it off? Does Scott think he has a realistic chance?

I think without a doubt Amundsen. Scott is worried about Amundsen from the start. He knows Amundsen has started closer to the pole. He knows that because Amundsen is traveling with dogs, which have certain advantages, that Amundsen is going to start earlier in the spring. So for those two reasons alone,

He knows Amundsen has this fantastic advantage. Scott is very confused in the way he expresses this because he will sometimes say, well, I'm not really a big fan of dogs. They don't really work. And then in the same letter, he'll say, well, Amundsen has a big advantage because he's using dogs. And you go, well, how can you write those two paragraphs on the same page? Amundsen is always concerned that maybe Scott will...

will beat him. But I think he's very confident. He has a plan. He knows exactly how it's going to go. The main risk to Amundsen is that he's so eager, he starts too early. He hits bad weather. And so there's a false start. But once he really gets going, there's never really any doubt. Yeah, yeah.

The whole thing's so Norwegian with the skiers going out ahead. It's just like... It's crazy. The diaries, you've got these diary entries from Scott saying, oh, it's terrible. The ice is falling on the nostrils of the ponies. They're sinking through the ice. Our spirits are very low. This is really hard. And Amundsen's diaries,

he's telling stories about racing with this world champion skier and trying to do these sharp turns and falling over. And isn't it fun? And, you know, he telemarking. Yeah. He's doing these telemark turns and he's, he's joking that, Oh, I don't, he, at least this guy pretended not to see me fall over. And they're just having fun on fresh powder. And it,

could not be more different, the impression that they're painting of themselves in their diaries. Now maybe their experiences were more similar than their diaries described, although I kind of suspect not.

This is a massive hypothetical, but there was something in Scott's attempt that seems very late empire. But there was a moment when the British Empire's kind of ability to pull off these kinds of feats would have looked a lot more like Amundsen. I'm wondering if the British Empire is beginning in the late 19th century as opposed to ending. Yeah.

Does Scott work? In other words, is he a victim of the kind of encroaching bureaucratization and sclerosis that attends to a country in decline, an empire in decline? My sense is that a lot of it is the conservatism that comes from having something to defend.

The feeling that you should be winning every battle, that you've got loads to lose and not much extra stuff to gain. And then that conservatism sets in. That's a guess. And earlier on in the British Empire, they're the plucky underdogs. I mean, you can object to the morality of it. And I think we do now from the 21st century object to the morality of it. But it's this tiny country that is just conquering vast swathes of the world. And it is incredible morality.

how they're managing to pull it off. And it's much more entrepreneurial, much more dynamic, much more improvisational, much cleverer than Scott and his cohorts, his contemporaries seem to be able to pull off. Maybe another way of saying is that Amundsen sounds, he sounds like an 18th century English explorer.

He does. And Amundsen is from a very young country. I mean, Norway has only just got its independence. So it's very aware of its need to establish itself and to show the big boys that it can do something. So that, I think, comes across very much in what Amundsen is doing. And he's like that as well. He's got that scrappy underdog mentality. But this brings up my last puzzle about the story, which is that

the British sort of readjust their expectations and turn him into a hero. And Amundsen does not, even in his own country, he isn't the conquering hero that he expected to be, which makes no sense to me. I grew up in Canada. Canada is psychologically a lot like Norway. You know, we're too small. And if you win a bronze medal in the Olympics for Canada, you're treated as if you won the gold.

Bronze is considered to be. It's been unbelievable. All bronze, you know what I mean? So Norway, it's tiny. They had nothing going on. And this guy, one of their own, goes and defeats the English at one of the great adventure prizes of the era. And yet there they come back and they're like, eh.

They're excited at the time. I mean, it's huge at the time. But then the question is, well, what's the second act? And actually, in the end, Amundsen gets tied up with the same kinds of obligations that wrapped around the

around Scott's neck. And he has to do this scientific experiment because he owes somebody a fame. He has to do all this stuff and he hates it. He doesn't want to do it, but he feels that he has to do it. And there's this slow, slow decline and this feeling of the one-hit wonder rock star. It's not fair to describe him as a one-hit wonder because he did several other amazing things that no one had ever done before.

But this sense of fading glory and 10 years later after the first world war and people are saying, oh, yeah, he, oh, he's still alive. He's still doing it. And he becomes this slightly ridiculous figure who's, who's striving for relevance. He needs money. And people who, who once thought of him as a hero now think of him as a bit, you know, a has been. Yeah. And it's, it's a very sad end. Yeah.

If you make a list of most famous Norwegians of all time, if you ask Norwegians for their list, you know, Magnus Carlsen, Jacob Ingebrigtsen, where is Amundsen on that list? Has he recovered his reputation with the passage of time? He must have. He must have. And fun fact, Roald Dahl, the great children's author, and not just children's author, was named after Roald Amundsen. Oh, yeah.

Yeah. So, I mean, Ronald Evans, he was big news for a time. At a certain moment, he was one of the first, he was one of the most famous people around. But then the First World War, people had other things to worry about. Yeah. One question that I wanted to ask you, having worked on this, one of the subplots of this epic race between these two men is scurvy. Absolutely.

And what's weird about scurvy is we're told that James Lind, a Royal Navy surgeon, proved how to cure and indeed how to prevent scurvy in 1747. This is nearly two centuries before this race, which is in the early 1900s. You just need lemons or oranges. It's fine. And he's a British Navy surgeon. So the British Navy, among all the institutions, should understand this.

and Robert Scott is also a British Navy officer. And yet somehow by the time we get to the age of Arctic exploration, people have either forgotten or they no longer believe

the result of James Lynn's experiment. And that's a puzzle that I wrestle with in the episode. But your most recent season of Revisionist History is all about experiments and what we learn from them or what we don't learn from them. And are you surprised to hear of this great experiment that proved this wonderful thing and then everyone somehow managed to ignore it? Well, I thought the way you

talk this through to me was very, in the episode, was very convincing, which was, Lin does an experiment, but he doesn't finish the experiment, or he can't. Yeah. He can't tell you why it works.

He's made a general observation. You put it all the ways in which lemons aren't as good as oranges. If you boil the orange juice, the vitamin C disappears. If you use copper, that leaches out the ascorbic acid, which is what you need for scurvy. Lynn discovers something, but you realize that a piece of knowledge has to exist within an ecosystem to be useful, and there's no ecosystem.

Lynn discovers a stray fact, and a stray fact is of limited use in the real world. And without that fact being anchored, you know, you end up with these paradoxes of 200 years later. Scott is like his men are dying of scurvy.

you're you know you're left baffled i'm curious is that a a tendency that you see more often you've you've been thinking about all these experiments you've you've told all these stories about these different experiments that have happened that have been deliberately designed that have accidentally occurred do we often conduct experiments and then not realize what it is that we've actually found because we've got nowhere to take advantage of the knowledge or to plug the knowledge into some wider theory of the world

Well, I would say, you know, the most interesting point you make in that episode is that they didn't understand that there was a kind of, for a long time, that there was a window that you could go without vitamin C for a while and be fine. And then, boom, the hammer comes down. Yeah. Which is an incredibly, first of all, a difficult thing to, as you point out, to find out.

And the implications of that is you can think you've solved the problem and you haven't. I guess what this is saying is that the thing that people often misunderstand, I guess, about modern science is

the value of having a vast number of academics out there who are treading over the same territory. We sometimes roll our eyes about, oh my God, do we really need to have 100 research facilities funded by the whatever? But we do. This is what was the problem with Scurvy, right? You need to have 25 different labs around England doing work on Scurvy in the 19th century so we could have teased out all of these little

qualifying facts and so we could have populated the kind of ecosystem. Yeah. And it actually wasn't just Lind. I mean, there was somebody before Lind, there were people after Lind, but there weren't enough of them. Not only was this discovered and then forgotten or misunderstood, it was discovered and then misunderstood and then forgotten multiple times. Then we went through this whole cycle of people believing in this thing and then not believing in this thing.

Because they just didn't have enough of that extra work to attach it to their understanding of how the world works. Yeah, yeah. It's funny because reporters and scientists, I think, learn the same lesson over the course of their careers, which is you think you're done and you're not.

You know, all those qualifying facts you lay out about scurvy that were misunderstood. There's more to scurvy than lemons, than oranges, rather, right? I mean, just the lemon. I thought just the lemon distinction. I was thinking, who on earth would have thought there was a difference between lemons and oranges in their ability to kind of deliver the crucial ingredient for stopping scurvy? Yeah, well, it's the limes. The limes is the real... Because they're just green lemons, right? Limes are just green lemons, except...

turns out they're not. And the Brits are falsely called limeys. They should be called oranges. Yeah. Well, they are correctly called limeys because they're drinking lime juice and that's their problem because they wrongly think that limes are just like oranges and lemons. Yeah. When I'm cooking, if a recipe calls for lemon juice or lime juice, it's like, yeah, it's the same. It's not the same. It's not the same, but it

But since you don't know what vitamin C is... Oh, right. I misspoke. It's the difference between oranges and lemons on the one hand and limes on the other. Yes. The crucial... You see, it's so subtle. It's so easy to lose track. A commission in the British Navy awaits, Malcolm, for your failure to have fully internalized the distinction between different citrus fruits. This was so much fun. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Tim. It's a wonderful series. Thank you to Malcolm Gladwell. And if you've not done so, subscribe and listen to the latest season of his podcast, Revisionist History. I'm Malcolm Gladwell, and I'd like to take a moment to talk about an amazing new podcast I'm hosting called Medal of Honor.

It's a moving podcast series celebrating the untold stories of those who protect our country. And it's brought to you by LifeLock, the leader in identity theft protection. Your personal info is in a lot of places that can accidentally expose you to identity theft. And not everyone who handles your personal info is as careful as you.

LifeLock makes it easy to take control of your identity and will work to fix identity theft if it happens. Join the millions of Americans who trust LifeLock. Visit LifeLock.com slash metal today to save up to 40% off your first year.

So I have some big news for vegans and vegetarians everywhere. It's Hellman's plant-based mayo spread and dressing. Made for people with a plant-based diet or anyone really who wants to enjoy the great taste of Hellman's real without the eggs. Hellman's plant-based is perfect for sandwiches, salads, veggie burgers, or any of your family favorites.

To celebrate, Hellman's is sharing some easy, delicious plant-based recipes at hellmans.com. Hellman's Plant-Based Mayo Spread and Dressing. Same great taste, plant-based.

The news isn't always good news, but when you're getting quality journalism and in-depth expert analysis that's held up for more than 180 years, that is definitely good news. So if you haven't already, save 20% with The Economist's summer sale today and stay on top of the stories that matter to you. You'll instantly gain unlimited digital access to daily articles, special reports, award-winning podcasts, subscriber-only events, and so much more. Now that's

Good news. Go to economist.com and subscribe today.