This paper argues that love - as opposed to arranged marriage - promotes growth. Men pay for marriage, but who receives and pays the bride-price differs between the two marriage institutions. Typically, under love marriage the groom pays his bride, while under arranged marriage the groom (or his father) pays the bride's father. Clearly, love marriage directs resources from the father of the bride to the bride. Moreover, we argue that love marriage may redistribute resources from father to son. If young (v. old) and women (v. men) are more prone to save or invest in the human capital of children, then love marriage promotes physical or human capital accumulation. If so, the adoption and adherence to love marriage in Europe, starting in the 8th century at the instigation of the Catholic Church, may have been a factor in Europe's economic ascent.

The U.S.-led reconstruction effort has so far failed to establish democratic institutions in Iraq. But as troubled as that effort has been, it provides valuable lessons for future nation-building endeavors.

Events in Ukraine have inspired most people living in the free world. Ukrainian democrats stood together in the freezing cold to demand from their government what we citizens of democracies take for granted: the right to elect their leaders in free and fair elections. But not all observers of Ukraine's "Orange Revolution" are so elated. Instead of democracy's advance, some see a U.S.-funded, White House-orchestrated conspiracy to undermine Ukrainian sovereignty, weaken Russia's sphere of influence, and expand Washington's imperial reach. These skeptics range from Presidents Vladimir Putin of Russia, Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus, and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela to Republican Representative Ron Paul of Texas, columnist Patrick Buchanan, and left-wingers at the Nation and the Guardian.

Since the September 11 attacks, President George W. Bush has rhetorically pledged to make the promotion of democracy abroad a primary objective of U.S. foreign policy, emphasizing the moral and strategic imperatives for advancing freedom around the world. At the same time, the United States has become both less liked and less admired by governments and societies around the world. Although its roots are deep, this latest spike in anti-Americanism comes largely as the result of Bushs most significant foreign policy initiative, the invasion of Iraq, which has been extremely unpopular both in democratic and nondemocratic states. In its history, the United States has probably never before suffered such a low international standing.

Several influential commentators have suggested recently that democratization in developing countries produces political instability, ethnic conflict, and poor economic outcomes. The authors of this paper show that the data do not support the view that democratization is bad for economic performance. Our analysis reveals that major democratic transitions have, if anything, a positive effect on economic growth in the short run. This is especially true for the poorest countries of the world and those that are marked by sharp ethnic divisions. Democratizations tend to follow periods of low growth rather than precede them. Moreover, democratic transitions are associated with a decline in growth volatility. Systematic analysis therefore uncovers a picture that is considerably more favorable to democratization.