From the outset of the book Easterly explains development in terms of pitted binaries: the two tragedies of foreign aid, the West versus the Rest, the international bureaucrats versus the locals, the Planners versus the Searchers, the rich versus the poor, and so forth. His critique includes no gray areas, allowing his position to be clearly defined. (This could also be a potential pitfall of his review.) It becomes evident where his fondness lies, and that he is against antipoverty establishments, suspicious of Western intervention, and disappointed in the lack of feedback and accountability systems in foreign aid.

The main premise of his argument lies in the concept of Planners versus Searchers, where he shows a disdain for the Planners and an affinity for the Searchers. One assumes to know the answers, the other seeks the answers through experiments; one believes outsiders have the solutions, the other depends on insider knowledge to come up with the solutions; one has a top-down approach led by institutions, the other has a bottom-up approach led by real individual concerns and feedback mechanisms. The “Snapshots” or anecdotes of Searchers’ effectiveness after each chapter, provides evidence to Easterly’s claims and advocates for Planners to change their approach to that of the Searchers.