Missing something

This is an excellent article disecting the historical reasons why english speaking countries lead the rest of the world during times of war. One quibble, though:

Anglo primacy will probably persist precisely because its roots lie in good government, which is deeply path dependent. It is hard for any country to become well governed that has not always been so. Somehow, the British formed an effective regime early, and it went from strength to strength. Each advance generated the confidence and the trust needed for the next. The British passed on that legacy to their Anglo heirs, and these countries, too, have had beneficent histories. In terms of political gifts, the richest countries have been English-speaking. Their wealth and power ultimately derive from this great fact.

[Emphasis mine]

The author never once refers to religion let alone the Judeo-Christian values that were spread alongside the english language. It was a package deal. I think that may well be the "somehow" that he neatly sidesteps. Not that I blame him, mind you. Had he included religious values into his essay, it'd be at least ten times as long! But I feel that means religion is important, ya know?

The successful spread of capitalism didn't inherrently carry with it "freedom of religion" but there's an argument to made that religous men with Judeo-Christian values codified and expanded both.

(Via: The Corner)

UPDATE: Related - "Must-Read Pieces From Steyn & Lileks"