Guns, Germs, and Steel

[Alon]

I am curious to know what any Objectivist has to say of the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel" before investing the time. I understood that it has deterministic premises, that the acheivements and progress of European civilization were driven by its climate, geography, population size, etc. I am not certain that this is the case, so I'd to get an Objectivist perspective.

[the tortured one]

I've read it. He raised some provocative points, but he failed to take human philosophical thought process into play. Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, and Western Europe all developed highly advanced civilizations, but the first one to truly modernize was Europe, due to the influence of the Greek philosophers who championed reason over mysticism. Even that little booger in western development we know as the dark ages did not stop Europe from modernizing faster, with the thanks of rationalists like Thomas Aquinas. But according to his theory, China had just as much natural resources, so theres no reason why China should not have developed as highly as Europe. But China had a philosophy that revolved around the death worship of their emperor, while Europe slowly moved towards liberty and freedom.

It was very pragmatic, so take it as you will.

If you like economic history books, THE BIRTH OF PLENTY by William Bernstein was decent enough. He outlines the 4 necessary parts to modern human progress:

1. Property rights

2. Scientific rationalism

3. Capital markets

4. Transportation/communications

fairly good stuff, though he does admit to certain nuianses concerning government (for example, he argues that the government has been essential for transportation growth) but by large, this is a fairly good read.

[Alon]

Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, and Western Europe all developed highly advanced civilizations, but the first one to truly modernize was Europe, due to the influence of the Greek philosophers who championed reason over mysticism. Even that little booger in western development we know as the dark ages did not stop Europe from modernizing faster, with the thanks of rationalists like Thomas Aquinas.

Just to clarify, is the above your own statement or the opinion of the author? If it is of the author's opinion, it sounds like a promising book.

[Free Capitalist]

No, the opinion of the author is that the Greeks were highly advanced because they had many harbors, and a large number of city-states constantly warring with one another. So this fact that there were many different "political experiments" going on at the same time, all vying with one another for supremacy, is how the author explains that the Greeks had democracy.

It's a crap book.

By the way, would you like me to move this thread to the history section?

[Montesquieu]

I remember my first history teacher in college, a declared and devout Marxist, loved the book because it marginalized Western achievement and made good excuses for the savage state of many peoples around the world. Since that class I've had no interest in ever picking the book up and I have seen nothing since to make me think otherwise.

[the tortured one]

Just to clarify, is the above your own statement or the opinion of the author?  If it is of the author's opinion, it sounds like a promising book.

I should have clarified, my mistake. That was my refute of that book. He basically says the reason Europe developed over the rest of the world was because it had all 7 of the world's domesticated animals, good climate, and was relatively isolated.

the author writes like he is an anthropologist rather than an economist.

[erik]

Who is the Author? It sounds similar to "Conquests and Cultures" by Thomas Sowell. Although not an Objectivist he seems like one of the more objective historians I've come across. I'd recommend that book.

[the tortured one]

Who is the Author? It sounds similar to "Conquests and Cultures" by Thomas Sowell. Although not an Objectivist he seems like one of the more objective historians I've come across. I'd recommend that book.

Jared Diamond wrote GUNS, GERMS, AND STEEL

How was Conquests and Cultures? I do like economic history books, and I may look for it in my local library if it is that good.

my favorite economic historian is Thomas DiLorenzo.

[Ed from OC]

Here's a review from Victorhanson.com.

"UCLA professor Jared Diamond's journey into academic superstardom was jump-started when President Clinton held up Diamond's 1999 Guns Germs and Steel before the news cameras, after which bestseller status and numerous prizes, including the Pulitzer, followed. Clinton's and the academic establishment's endorsement of Diamond's book is not surprising, for it validates and justifies some cherished received wisdom of liberal intellectuals, ideas that, at a time when the West is under assault by an alternative vision, are woefully misguided."

I haven't read the book, but based on this review and others, will continue to avoid doing so, in favor of the great many books out there whose quality vastly outstrips this one.

[Tryptonique]

I should have clarified, my mistake. That was my refute of that book. He basically says the reason Europe developed over the rest of the world was because it had all 7 of the world's domesticated animals, good climate, and was relatively isolated.

the author writes like he is an anthropologist rather than an economist.

He IS an anthropologist. He had over 30 years of field experience with the New Guinea tribe that Yali (the guy in the preface that supposedly asks the question that motivates the book) belonged to.

[ex_banana-eater]

The Ultimate rebuttal to this book is Carnage and Culture: Landmark Battles in the Rise of Western Power by Victor Davis Hanson. I am loving this book (part way through). He sets out to prove that the culture of the West lead to technological and military superiority which was unrivalled in all other civilizations.

To think that constant competing in war is somehow better than a stable, but good culture seems ludicrous. Periods of peace are when civilization has been most prosperous--take Pax Britannica as an example.

Huge regions of Asia have great climates, domesticated farm animals, and mountain regions surrounding them (take India). That dosn't bode well for that author's thesis.

[Free Capitalist]

Victor Davis Hanson is an excellent historian, but his primary value lies in the fact that he's a classicist of the highest order; to paraphrase a wise lady's saying, he's the last of their kind... or the first of their return.

In addition to the book mentioned above, everyone here should read "Who Killed Homer", where he laments the rejection and ignorance of Classical culture by the modern world (including most members of this forum). He also outlines what ramifications this brings to the first generation of Americans who have no conception of their history (because American history begins in 753 BC, with the founding of a small village on the banks of the river Tiber, called Rome).

Edited February 5, 2005 by Free Capitalist

[Patrick N.]

I must also recommend Victor Davis Hanson's Carnage and Culture. I own the book myself, and found it very fascinating.

[the tortured one]

He IS an anthropologist. He had over 30 years of field experience with the New Guinea tribe that Yali (the guy in the preface that supposedly asks the question that motivates the book) belonged to.

isn't it funny how the pieces fall in place?

this seriously doesn't surprise me one bit. As I said before, he is an anthropologist writing a historical economics book.

what I did like about the book is that it presented a half-decent, researched arguement based on observation and study. I can respect that, even if his conclusions are flawed. It's worth a read if you like to explore and test other ideas.

as opposed to people who still believe that free markets cause monopolies and cartels, and that wages and prices have to be controlled for the good of the people

[softwareNerd]

PBS is going to show a series based on the book, starting this evening.

[scottkursk]

Actually, this thread is incredibly well timed. I just got through reading Freakanomics as a pleasure read. Well, pleasure in the sense it's not yet another regulatory document or manual for a new system for work, otherwise it wasn't entirely pleasurable.

I remember my anthropology professor in college insisting that the only reason Europe was so successful and the white man was the oppressor and not the evil oppressee was because it had four season and goats etc which sounds alot like what Diamond is saying. I'll have to check out The Birth of Plenty by Bernstein. It sounds more to my liking. I've been looking for a good econ history book for a fun read.

[softwareNerd]

...Freakanomics ...

A while ago, I posted a question about Freakonomics in another thread (link). Since then, I have acquired the book, and have read some but not all of it. Care to give us a brief summary of the good/bad in that thread?

[suedehead]

Did anyone last night catch the PBS special based on "Guns Germs and Steel?" Any thoughts?

I would have liked to get a better idea as to what resources are present in New Guinea. The show could have gone into more detail on a few other points, too. Though I still am pondering the validity of Diamond's thesis.