The author repeatedly highlights a glaring lack of investment in research, innovation and digital transformation. To close the gap, France would need to increase its R&D spending to 3% of GDP, compared to 2.19% in 2023. Unlike Germany, which uses its investments abroad to strengthen its domestic economy, France has focused on the internationalisation of its multinationals, whose success brings little benefit to the country. Another weakness highlighted is the management of public spending: despite budgets above the European average in key areas such as health and education, the tangible results are struggling to convince the public. In conclusion, this book, which is rich in factual data, offers a nuanced view of France: a country that is performing well in some areas, struggling in others, and sometimes in decline. However, solutions do exist, as the country possesses strengths and potential that urgently need to be harnessed. This book is recommended for all curious minds seeking a clear, well-documented view of France today. Pierre-André Buigues is an economist. For 22 years, he held senior positions at the European Commission, and subsequently worked as a lecturer at Toulouse Business School. An expert on European affairs, he has also worked as an international consultant and adviser for various global institutions. He is the author of numerous reference works. Book review by Sophie FRIOT

The object of our desires, the driving force behind our ingenuity… What if money were also humanity’s greatest invention? Did you know that the piastre was the predecessor of the dollar? That Hitler and Lenin used currency to manipulate the masses? That *The Wizard of Oz* is actually about the deflation associated with the gold standard? That our financial future lies not in Bitcoin but in phone credit? From the Sumerians’ barley grains to cryptocurrencies, via the revolutionary assignats and the invention of the dollar, David McWilliams traces, with a lively and accessible pen, the history of this invention which—just like the wheel or fire—has shaped human relationships. Far from the dry economic treatises, David McWilliams shows us that money is not merely an instrument of power. It can also lead to cooperation and collective progress. This is not the first book on money in literature or in the Cercle Turgot’s list of reviews. The renewed interest in this type of work lies in the author’s background and his own perception of money. This informs his choice of historical timeline and examples. Admittedly, we begin with Part 1, which is devoted to antiquity and the famous “fortune,” and continue with: money in the Middle Ages, revolutionary money, modern money, and finally, liberated money (who controls money, the psychology of money, the evolution of money, modern monetary theory, and M-Pesa). The book also explores numerous cultures that have contributed to the development of money and the innovations each has brought. The mastery of money coincided with other major advances such as writing, mathematics, law, democracy, and philosophy. This evolution raises a question: was money the cause of these other developments, or did these developments lead to the evolution of money? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This is the originality of this book, which was named Book of the Year by the Financial Times: it provides food for thought in an attempt to answer that question. David McWilliams is a social commentator, so he has drawn on a wide range of advice and contributions, and expresses opinions—and… errors—that are his own and those of the people cited in the book. The reader’s task is not to identify any potential blunders, but to understand the intellectual journey of the contributors that may have led to “deviations from the consensus of economists specializing in monetary matters.” A book that should be read by anyone curious about ideas and their interpretation: money and currency are personal concepts. It is a common good and an…individual good as well! Dominique Chesneau

Europe, probably the greatest political and human enterprise of modern times, was built upon the reconciliation between France and Germany, as well as the definitive rejection of the use of force between these two nations. This project, born in the minds and voices of former deportees as early as the autumn of 1945, was the prelude to the creation of the Common Market and later the European Union, which grew from six to twenty-seven member states within a few decades. However, Europe poorly understands the ontological blind spot that weakens it: it protects us from our own demons, but it does not protect us from external aggression. This objective was never truly political, nor even part of its identity, and the protection provided by the American umbrella after the Second World War long distanced us from any ambition of strategic autonomy. By politically and institutionally delegating its defense to NATO, and therefore to the United States, Europe contributed to the formation of the American empire: a protective empire that now seems, in some respects, to be joining the club of predators. China, Russia, and the United States now speak about Europe in remarkably similar terms, marked by strategic contempt. For Donald Trump, Europe belongs to the past: it is a civilization in decline. For Vladimir Putin, we are a soft planet made up of weak and “woke” societies. For Xi Jinping, we are democracies in irreversible decline. Paradoxically, this convergence among predatory powers could open the door for Europe’s affirmation. By neglecting the transatlantic alliance, the United States is giving Europe the opportunity to seize its strategic autonomy. By invading Ukraine, Russia is forcing the Old Continent to urgently rethink its rearmament and security. Finally, through its commercial predation, China is compelling Europe to rebuild its weakened competitiveness and relearn the logic of power. Europe must understand that power relations are not negotiated solely through law or trade. Greenland recently provided a demonstration of this reality, illustrating the brutality of a world in which great powers no longer hesitate to impose their interests. For Europe is far less weak than it believes itself to be. The demographic decline that causes so much concern is in fact a global phenomenon. In the same way, Europe’s dependence on Asia should not be mistaken for inevitability. Europe remains wealthy, possesses a powerful market, and retains significant productive capacity. Its weaknesses are known and widely described. The real difficulty lies less in identifying them than in acting upon them. Facing these three predatory empires, the technocratic and regulatory empire that Europe has become will have to reinvent itself. It must regain speed of execution, agility in the fields of security, technology, and energy. It must also relearn how to engage with the countries of the Global South, without remaining trapped by a colonial guilt linked to a history that is centuries old, sometimes dating back several hundred years. Ultimately, Europe must stop internalizing its supposed weakness and servility. To achieve this, it must learn the brutality of the world without renouncing its principles. Clearly asserting its interests, making them understood, and ensuring they are respected with determination has now become essential. Ph Alezard

Reading the book will be particularly useful for future candidates in the 2027 elections, as thedrift in French public debt has reached such a level that its merestabilisation requires increasingly technical and radical reforms. The authors clearly show that the slippages in public spending and compulsory levies result from political compromises or non-decisions on the part of both right- and left-wing governments. The retrospective covers the period from 1958 to 2025, marked by four sequences: from 1958 to 1980 (balance, the key to the Fifth Republic); from 1981 to 1997 (imbalance, the new norm); from 1997 to 2007 (European collective balance, a fragile safeguard); and since 2007 (balance, crises, imbalance). Each sequence has three phases, which reveal little-known aspects of the historyof the French budget, such as the budgetary slippage following the oilshock, the “turning point of austerity” in 1983, which was austerity in name only; thereasons for the failure of the “Juppé plan” of 1995; the errors in macroeconomicforecasts, particularly in 2025…    The study clearly shows that successive governments, regardless of their political leanings, have made – or failed to make – certain decisions that have had long-term detrimental effects on public finances. The drift in expenditure is  due in particular to the increase in public expenditure, with the number of employees (estimatedat 5.9 million at the beginning of 2026) in State, local and hospital functionshaving increased by more than 20% over thelast 20 years,  compared to 15% for the French population as a whole.  The multiplication of social benefits through various channels (in particular that of tax niches), the decentralization of certain State functions to local authorities and France’s contribution to the Community and then European budget have been increasingly difficult to control. France has thus reached the highest rate of compulsory levies (with increasingly declining returns) in the OECD. The authors conclude by stating that the debt has reached a “limit point” and that any recovery will be all the more difficult due to the country’s political instability.  Jean Dubertret was an adviser to the Prime Minister, a senior official at the Inspectorate of Finance and an expert at the IMF. Nicolas Ragache is Chief Economist of the AFEPafter having been a ministerial adviser. Jean-Jacques Pluchart

In the 21st century, religion is thriving worldwide, despite its apparent decline in certain parts of Europe and America. Throughout history, various religious movements have engaged in fierce competition for wealth and power. In this book, the author argues that religious movements are a particular form of enterprise and, as such, are something quite different: they are communities, sources of inspiration or concern for outside observers, crucibles of ambition and frustration for recruits, or the stage for the fulfilled or dashed hopes of those who invest their lives or fortunes in them. It is the diversity of services offered that has enabled religions to consolidate their power and exercise it. If one were to take the title’s “promise”—which suggests presenting religions as a political economy—at face value, one would be disappointed. But that would be a mistake. While the book is brief on this subject, it is exhaustive in sociological terms, and it serves as an academic review of the history of the development of religions. The aim is not to confirm the concept of “natural religion” dear to René Guénon, but to explain why—apart from any spiritual need, which is not denied but not addressed here—and how religions emerged, developed, and became established; from spiritualist religions to historical and contemporary monotheisms. This book attempts to address certain difficult questions in three categories: What individual needs do these religious movements fulfill? Is religiosity a collection of diverse traits with no common ground? Why has it been said that, on average, women are more religious than men? Why does religion seem to be in decline in some parts of the world and flourishing in others? Next come questions related to their organization. Finally, there are political questions concerning power, its uses, and its abuses. “Religions owe their current form to the competition among these service platforms to attract new members and new resources—a competition that will determine the scope of action for religious movements and their political supporters in the coming century.” The book is structured like an academic text: at the beginning of each section and chapter, there is a summary of what follows. This makes the book easy to read, understand, and remember. Anyone interested in this timely topic—in our uncertain world shaped by the influence of religions—should read this outstanding sociological work! Dominique Chesneau

This short booklet, written by a university professor from Senegal, is worth reading for all African students. It provides useful advice to future social science researchers who are going to write a dissertation or a doctoral thesis. As in all textbooks, it defines what scientific research is, how to construct a research question, how to compile a precise literature review, how to choose a suitable field of observation, how to select and apply a robust research methodology, how to present the results – preferably valid and rigorous – of the observations clearly, and then how to discuss them, identifying their theoretical and practical contributions. The author accompanies his lessons with concrete examples and life stories drawn from African issues. Strangely, he makes no reference to the many works devoted to the epistemology of the social sciences. It is written in a precise and concise style, as befits any teaching manual. But this book is more than a methodological guide; it is a message to the young people of Africa who are eager to contribute to the prosperity of their village, their region and their country; it is a warning against facile discourse and improbable ideologies; it is an incentive to acquire useful assets, to exercise critical thinking, to feed the public debate, and to propose solutions rooted in social reality. “The budding researcher, through their rigour, humility and passion, becomes a guardian of freedom”, “a key player in the transformation of their country”. These are lessons that should also be taught on the Old Continent. Mistoihi Abdillahy is a university professor in social sciences and the founding president of ADP Consulting. Jean-Jacques Pluchart

The object of our desires, the driving force behind our ingenuity… What if money were also humanity’s greatest invention? Did you know that the piastre was the predecessor of the dollar? That Hitler and Lenin used currency to manipulate the masses? That *The Wizard of Oz* is actually about the deflation associated with the gold standard? That our financial future lies not in Bitcoin but in phone credit? From the Sumerians’ barley grains to cryptocurrencies, via the revolutionary assignats and the invention of the dollar, David McWilliams traces, with a lively and accessible pen, the history of this invention which—just like the wheel or fire—has shaped human relationships. Far from the dry economic treatises, David McWilliams shows us that money is not merely an instrument of power. It can also lead to cooperation and collective progress. This is not the first book on money in literature or in the Cercle Turgot’s list of reviews. The renewed interest in this type of work lies in the author’s background and his own perception of money. This informs his choice of historical timeline and examples. Admittedly, we begin with Part 1, which is devoted to antiquity and the famous “fortune,” and continue with: money in the Middle Ages, revolutionary money, modern money, and finally, liberated money (who controls money, the psychology of money, the evolution of money, modern monetary theory, and M-Pesa). The book also explores numerous cultures that have contributed to the development of money and the innovations each has brought. The mastery of money coincided with other major advances such as writing, mathematics, law, democracy, and philosophy. This evolution raises a question: was money the cause of these other developments, or did these developments lead to the evolution of money? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This is the originality of this book, which was named Book of the Year by the Financial Times: it provides food for thought in an attempt to answer that question. David McWilliams is a social commentator, so he has drawn on a wide range of advice and contributions, and expresses opinions—and… errors—that are his own and those of the people cited in the book. The reader’s task is not to identify any potential blunders, but to understand the intellectual journey of the contributors that may have led to “deviations from the consensus of economists specializing in monetary matters.” A book that should be read by anyone curious about ideas and their interpretation: money and currency are personal concepts. It is a common good and an…individual good as well! Dominique Chesneau

The former deputy chief of staff to Pierre Mauroy, from 1981 to 1983, paints a polemical portrait of the economic, social, political and trade-union situation of our country. Democracy is weakened, society is fractured, the economy is in decline, public finances are heavily in deficit, and the political and trade-union world continues to demonstrate its inability to meet these challenges. The vertical concentration of power at every level, the refusal of dualism, the denial of reality, economic illiteracy, compounded by the intellectual fraud of a few, have pushed France into such disorder that democracy itself is threatened with disappearance. France is not capable, on its own, of forming a cohesive society. Post-revolutionary historical facts remind us of this: from the Terror to the Third Republic, which established itself after militarily defeating the Commune, France has reformed itself through riots and bloodshed. The various social forces and numerous political parties seek only to gain access to this supreme vertical power. Each therefore defends its own positions in its own interest, without concern for the common good. For the author, the current situation is not without resemblance to that of the July Monarchy. The crisis threatening us is at once economic, financial and political. Both the deficit and the debt are out of control, and our productive apparatus suffers from a lack of competitiveness. Employers’ organisations and trade unions remain entrenched in their positions, while, on the political side, the left, still profoundly anti-capitalist, remains trapped in the myth of the ultra-rich who should be taxed ever more heavily, and the right indulges in illusions, believing that it would be enough to reduce public spending without touching social expenditure. Meanwhile, extremists on both the left and the right, whose programmes have not the slightest capacity to restore the country’s economy, hold out promises of change and social upheaval in order to attract those at the bottom of the social ladder. And yet solutions do exist to address each of these problems. They are known and documented. But who, on the left or on the right, is prepared to state and explain what should be implemented? Solutions are born of drama: this is a very French habit. So must we first plunge into chaos — this being the most likely scenario according to the author — in order to see, once again, the emergence of a providential man or woman capable of solving the fundamental problems and finally changing our methods of governance ? Ph Alezard