Çöküş: Finansal Krizlerle Dolu Bir On Yıl Dünyayı Nasıl Değiştirdi?

The book covers a lot of ground, but I wonder why the author emphasized the years following the crash. Was there a specific reason this period was chosen to tell the story of global change?

I usually find finance books pretty dense, but this one made complex ideas clear. I'm curious if others without a background in economics felt the same or if there were parts that still felt challenging.

Adam Tooze's expertise shines through, but I wonder how his perspective shaped the framing of events. Do you think his background added depth or perhaps a particular bias to the narrative?