Summary: Anthropological look at the history of debt, currency and economics.
I have read a fair amount of economics. I find it interesting, both because its importance, but also because of its explanatory process. However, as has been increasingly shown empirically, people are not perfectly rational, and economic models that require perfectly rational people have limited value.
Similarly, economics has been critiqued by some (The Economics of Good and Evil is an example) for its over reliance on its limited predictive power and a lack of focus on its the ethical underpinnings.
David Graeber’s book is not quite either of these. Graeber teaches anthropology at the London School of Economics, but is also a vocal crusader against the World Bank, the IMF and some parts of globalized trade agreements. Where the book really shines is its focus on anthropology. Where it is weaker is when his critique of modern economic theory becomes too repetitive or when he occasionally moves beyond the evidence.
Social Science, for the most, part is about taking the evidence and then weaving a narrative to connect the evidence in a plausible method. Graeber’s story is compelling. His central critique of the rise of currency not as an advance over barter societies, but as a regression from ‘human economies’ that were focused on mutual debt is strong. The regression is not so much about levels of economics, but of a regression of trust. Currency was more prevalent when war and distance trade made longer term debt relationships more problematic.

Takeaway: The globalization of the world in economics, travel and relationships require the US courts to grapple with international law.
Takeaway: A strong monarchy does not prevent political complaints about taxes and the economy.