Rating: 
Summary: Plows, pox, and climate
Review: This book is the beginning of a long and necessary effort to answer the question: Why did Spaniards destroy and/or enslave people in South America --- and not the other way around? It makes sense to generalize and ask, Why did ANY particular group of people consistently dominate another in history?There has already been a lot of research into this topic that centered around intelligence: The Spaniards were smarter, that's why they dominated. But Jared Diamond rejects this conclusion immediately. Based on his experience, he doesn't think the colonizers have bigger or better brains, or higher IQs. So he goes looking for a materialist explanation, searching for the way that climate, crops, and animal domestication led to better immune systems and superior technology. This theoretical stuff isn't a large part of the book. Diamond makes his case briefly and then spends 90% of the book on facts to back it up. And the facts are impressive. Diamond knows a lot about agriculture and animal domestication. He writes about it clearly. The information is important and interesting, which makes the bulk of the book very easy to read. But does he prove his case? Well, obviously you'll have to decide for yourself. Personally, I think he came to his conclusions too quickly. The evidence is very good, but it's simply not enough. That leads me back to the beginning of this review --- this book is the START of a long research project, not the end. Reading this book is very easy, and it's likely to inspire you to read more on the topic. Jared Diamond might not convince you 100% that materialistic factors decided who dominated who, but you can't help but be impressed with the amount of information he's collected to back up his theory. My guess is that the IQ approach will wither away as this book begins to dominate the debate.
Rating: 
Summary: Racial egalitarianism masquerading as science
Review: The timing of this book (1997), the authors obvious commitment to "racial egalitarianism" and the convenient awarding of a coveted Pullitzer Prize - thus guaranteeing huge publicity and sales - lends suspicion that GGS may have been deliberately "commissioned" by the "anti-racist" academic intelligentsia to neutralise the surprising success of the much-loathed "Bell Curve" (1994), a book which could never have been awarded a Pullitzer, given the left-wing bias of that committee. As my title suggests, GGS heavily promotes a left-wing political agenda although this may not have been noticed by the bevy of gushing 5-star reviewers below. Which emphasizes the insidiousness of the PeeCee demand that, in order to appease "turd world" sensitivities, "eurocentric" history and achievements must always be slandered and denigrated - hence the title "Guns, Germs, and Steel", all 3 destructive elements supposedly symbolic of "exploitative" white colonialists. JD establishes his true agenda as early as the 3rd page where he regurgitates the "blame it all on whitey" justification for the spectacular failure of virtually every black African state - "much of Africa is still struggling with its legacies from recent colonialism" - he dutifully proclaims. Then, on page 19 he uses the word "loathsome" to describe those who would dare to consider that the human races are not exactly equal in intellect. And yet, in almost the same breath he contradicts himself by saying "New Guineans impressed me as being more intelligent than Europeans or Americans". Reverse that last statement and, hey presto, Pullitzer disappears in a puff of peecee. The objective of this book is to answer "Yali's Question". Yali was a New Guinean who, whilst strolling on a tropical beach, wondered aloud to JD - "why is it that you whites have so much 'cargo' when us blacks have so little?" JD's 400 page answer is an ingenious and (to the white liberal conscience) convincing attempt to explain away white success whilst avoiding the real reason (superior intellect) and thus remaining faithful to the gospel of innate racial equality. JD labours at great length how Eurasia (as opposed to America and Africa, but especially the latter for obvious reasons) was divinely favoured by the larger size of their grass-seeds, the horizontal shape of their continent(!!!), the number and usefullness of domesticable animals and, (inevitably) how unspeakable white people have raped, pillaged, enslaved, decimated, subjugated, colonised, and exploited dark-skinned races as they unfairly clawed their way to the summit of the human heap. JD is also too fond of silly PeeCee statements such as "the oldest Java 'man' fossils may actually have belonged to a Java woman!" or "Rhino-mounted Bantu shock troops could have overthrown the Roman Empire". All in all he presents an ingenious but ultimately highly contrived case, whilst propping up the intellectual left's fantasy world of absolute and innate racial egalitarianism. The book is certainly a good read and makes interesting points some of which may even be valid, but ultimately his conclusion seems to be "well if whites are smarter than blacks its not because they are genetically superior - its because they were lucky..! If blacks had originated in Europe and whites in Africa, the tables would have been turned..!" A conclusion that could only have been made by a committed racial egalitarian.
Rating: 
Summary: Fabulous!
Review: What an amazing book!
When I started this, someone from a mail list I'm on said that it should be required reading for anyone interested in creating a world. I heartily agree. In a short 425 pages, Mr. Diamond shows us how mankind stopped being nothing more than roving bands of "primative" hunter-gatherers and grew into complicated societies. He also shows us how some cultures advanced more quickly than others. Along the way, he explains how history works. What drives massive migration? What allows someone to invent? Why would we need to develop writing and what advantage does it give over people who can't?
All those questions, and more, are answered in a very logical, easy-to-understand way that was a pleasure to read. In fact, it was a challenge to read during the holidays because each page is so densely packed with relavent information that I felt I needed to devote my entire attention to the page. I'm sure there were important ideas that I missed, so I'll eventually re-read this one, and I say that about very few books. As a writer, I found numerous ideas for how a culture might develop in this book. And, along with those ideas, I found a lot of motivations for created people, as well. At many times in history, life has been an adventure, no matter who you were or what you wanted life to be. Mr. Diamond highlights several of those times in Guns, Germs and Steel. For instance, imagine what it must have been like to be some of the first people to colonize New Guinea or Australia using only primative stone and bone tools. Now, imagine what it might have been like with a few differences, like steel. Start writing about those imaginings and, viola, you're off and running. No matter how you slice it, Guns, Germs and Steel is a great book that I'd reccomend to almost anyone with an interest in ancient history.
Rating:
Summary: Important thesis -- Read It FAST
Review: Here's a synopsis of what the other 600+ review of this book say: 1) The book is revolutionary, important, compelling. Mr. Diamond really makes you think about why the countries of Europe dominated the contest when continents came into contact rather than the other way around. READ IT. 2) His point of view is not the only one that exists. The sweep of his thesis is huge, and other commentators have taken different approaches. For example, Mr. Diamond disclaims any racial or cultural explanations for the broad sweep of history. 3) The book could have been shorter. This is a book that you can "gut" fast if you want to. Speed read. Skip paragraphs or whole pages. Mr. Diamond seems to anticipate that students will be assigned chapters of his book, so he repeats himself in order to make each chapter stand alone reasonably well. Each chapter makes new points, but it also restates old ones. ("Too long" is the complaint of most reviewers who gave this book less than five stars)
Rating:
Summary: A Rationale for World History
Review: I would like to praise Guns Germs and Steel on several aspects. First, as everybody quite agrees on, GGS lays a logical framework for the history of the human species. (second) Diamond wrests this enormous task with seeming ease, although it is obvious that he thoroughly criticised his ideas before writing them down. But we don't read the mind bendings and difficult times he had while doing this self-criticism: we just read the end product, the points he makes, what he accepts, what he refuses. It is as if he wrote a volume that was several times larger than GGS and then he took only the notconfusing crystallized ideas and put into GGS.
His writing style is excellent. He is not self indulgent in using excessive grammar and handsome vocabulary. Even at the most colorful instances in human history he narrates, he doesn't get carried away in the language he uses.
At all chapters, I felt the presence of an author who really thought on the issues he tells, never conceals the facts, never tries to find ways around.
The main idea of the book is awesome, and this is much glorofied anyway (for good reason). I am more struck by the fact that a content this complex and this overwhelming is given in such a good structure. What I observe in myself is while reading a science book, even if I admire the book, when it's finished all I have is an impression of the book and a few examples that I remember. On the contrary, after I finished GGS I found myself talking about the main idea of the book to people for hours. GGS achieves this by the amazing simplicity of its language, its unpretentious style and its repetitions. Yes, repetitions, which is normally regarded as drawbacks becomes a way to make the reader really understand the idea. Certainly, repetitions are not mere repetitions but the main ideas repeated in different contexts. In this aspect, the seemingly high volume of the book also doesn't become an issue because of the ease of reading it.
Rating:
Summary: Overacclaimed
Review: The question asked is: "Why did people from the Eurasian continent conquer the other continents, and not the other way around?" Most people would answer 'because they had guns'. Jared Diamond tries to answer why the Eurasians developed guns. What was the prime reason? Diamond has a couple of intriguingly good points related to geography, points completely new to me: that the size and major axis was decisive of a continent's destiny in the big battle for world supremacy. Because Eurasia was the biggest continent, it was most likely to accommodate the most domesticable plants and big mammals. Eurasia also had the longest east-west axis, meaning that the art of food production spread more easily than in the Americas or Africa, where the major axis were north-south. With food production the value of land increased. People became willing to pay for staying at the same place over a long period of time, and political centralization and professional specialization evolved. Particularly: people with food production developed means to protect their property by force. Political centralization also contributed largely to the development of writing, and a lot of other innovations like metallurgy, large ocean going vessels, compasses, armour, religion etc. The size of Eurasia also meant that if one civilization was in the backwater, another was probably innovative. Ideas spread, and ideas spread more easily between rather similar civilizations. The geographical points are well made. In addition to the geographic points, Diamond spends a lot of time elaborating a biological point: domestication of big mammals led to infectious diseases among the farmers, smallpox being the most important one. After a couple of thousands years the farmers develop resistance towards those diseases. Travelling overseas, the diseases became a lethal weapon in the service of the Europeans, killing far more Indians than guns did. This point is not new, and the importance of germs as a cause of successful European imperialism is large overrated in this book. Firstly, germs impossibly played any significant role in the battles between the 150 Spaniards led by Pizarro and the tens of thousands of Inkas. Guns, armour and horses did. Secondly, Africa was also conquered by Europeans, despite that Africans had as nasty germs as Europe. All this said, reading about the development of germs was interesting enough. Another objection towards his theory is the facts of the immense diversity inside the Eurasian continent. At 1500, Western Europe and China were at the technologically forefront. The areas now covered by Ukraine, Poland, Pakistan, Myanmar and a whole lot of other Eurasian areas were not, despite being at the Eurasian continent. A point he pulls far to often is that the wealth of US, Europe, Australia and Eastern Asia today does not originate from superior genes, but from different environments. A hundred years ago it would have been controversial, today it isn't. The main objection towards the book however, is its length. Diamond has a couple of really good points, and some really good stories to tell (example: the Japanese went from being the worlds finest gunsmiths at 1600 to abandoning guns altogether in 1800). The author didn't have to spend 450 pages getting his admittedly good points through, and he didn't spend that many pages either; the last half is mostly repetitions from the first. Chapter 18 (Hemispheres colliding) is a complete revisit to the earlier chapters. But the first part of the book is a winner, and I am will probably read Diamond's next one as well, about why civilizations fail.
Rating:
Summary: Simple yet profound thesis on how we got here
Review: There are hundreds of reviews on here of this monumental book covering the general thesis and finer details. Suffice to say that the book is extremely powerful and thought provoking. Whether or not one agrees with Diamond's conclusions, they are well-established and inspire critical thought. He has presented some of the simplest answers to questions of monumental historical significance, and the scientific presumption should always be that the simplest answer is most likely correct. While some reviewers slam Diamond as psuedo-Marxist and completely unbalanced, no competing theories of human development are as compelling as his nor as scientifically substantiated to this point.
Rating:
Summary: Breathtaking in its breadth
Review: I originally learned about Guns, Germs, and Steel on the RPG.net forums. It sounded like an excellent book to ground a Game Master or an author on world-building. So I put it on my wish list and last Christmas I received it as a gift. It took me this long to finish reading it, and I'm the better for it. But I put it down after reading one chapter into it. The author, Jared Diamond, explains on page 19 that racist explanations are "loathsome, but also...wrong. Sound evidence for the existence of human differences in intelligence that parallel human differences in technology is lacking." Then he turns around and states, "...modern "Stone Age" peoples are on the average probably more intelligent, not less intelligent, than industrialized peoples. Displaying his bias up front, Diamond states on page 21, "in mental ability New Guineans are probably genetically superior to Westerners, and they surely are superior in escaping the devastating developmental disadvantages under which most children in industrialized societies now grow up." There's a few problems with Diamond's arguments, not the least of which is that he spends two pages arguing a point that he has no means of scientifically proving. This is ironic, given his last chapter that talks about a scientific approach to history. It's also telling that Diamond has but one source mentioned in his notes for his argument that New Guineans are smarter than Westerners. On its surface, I don't object to Diamond's bias. It does however, taint his entire argument. It's difficult to take Diamond seriously when he devotes an entire book proving that one society's domination of another is not inherently racist but determined by a wide variety of other factors - but oh yeah, New Guineans are genetically superior. It's like listening to a priest and a die-hard atheist argue - the two are so diametrically polarized, it's difficult to consider either argument as objective. So I put the book down and it sat on my shelf for two months. Then I decided to give Diamond another chance, because some of what he said was intriguing. To whit, Diamond provides evidence that societies excel because of a combination of geographic and societal factors. For example, farming societies can produce more food per square foot than hunting societies. Hunters have to expend energy to carry their children, so too many hinders the tribe. Farmers can stay put and reproduce as well as feed more mouths. As time goes on, farming societies can support politicians. Politicians are better at waging war and organizing peoples than hunters, who will often leave the area and move on to a less dangerous location. Farmers also coexist with domesticated animals. Of particular relevant for world builders are the attributes that make an animal useful for domestication, including diet (food must be easily available), growth rate (they must grow quickly enough to be productive), breed in captivity, benign disposition, not prone to panic, and social structure (herd or pack mentalities allow humans to take roles in the domesticated animals' structure). Animals are important for another reason - by coexisting with them, humans are exposed to a wider variety of diseases earlier than hunters. This is how Europeans ended up plaguing North and South Americans. Geographically, he east-west axis of a continent allows cultures to travel easier across similar terrain as opposed to a north-south continent, which will have a wider variety of climates. This in turn makes it easier to carry foodstuffs and farming. On the opposite extreme, unified societies can be a hindrance. China fell behind modern societies even though it led the world in chemistry, clockworks, exploration, and warfare - all because the ruling classes passed laws to prohibit their development. Conversely, Europe's fragmentation was ripe enough in its diversity to allow good ideas to eventually flourish. Diamond's overview is breathtaking in its breadth and a critical part of our education system. It should be in every child's school texts. It helps dispel, once and for all, the racist notions that pervade common views of history - if only Diamond could keep his own biases out of the book.
Rating:
Summary: What's the fuss?
Review: Wow- it seems like all of the reviewers of this book have been completely polarized. I guess I would rather take the work for what it is worth. What is it worth...?
Well many of the chapters are truly fascinating reads! Almost on the same-page turning numbness as you will find in a good crime novel. However, other chapters are brutally slow, and you can't help but let you mind wander. Religon is virtually ignored for any of his analysis, except that certain religons helped to provide a social framework, which allowed for more structured societies. I guess from an anthroplogist perspective the views of religon are irrelevant in the rise and fall of societies. Don't get me wrong... this is a thought provoking book. And I feel important in having a basic understanding of why we are what we are. Does it mean everything is completely factually correct? No.... I'd be willing to bet there are some errors (although it is far beyond my ability to point individual flaws). My best guess at an "Error" is his analysis that geography as the main predictor of technological break throughs(as other reviewers have pointed out). However, I think that the Catholic Church proved to be pretty adept at bottling up technology (at least that was the case about 600 years ago!) And yes, it does seem like Mr. Diamond has a bit of an agenda. However, despite what agenda he made of had (what author writes without ANY agenda?) I feel that he tried to be sincere. Through his effort we have a very realistic analysis of how we may have gotten from the Garden of Eden (my words and not his) to New York City.
So there you have it! All tied up into four stars (not 5 because of the occassional dullness factor). Certainly not a read for everyone, but one that history buffs may enjoy!
Rating: 
Summary: Just plain wrong
Review: Mr. Diamonds thesis and knowledge of how different environments benefit certain populations is very intriguing. His book is easily the best radical cultural/environmental determinist book ever written. But this doesn't change the fact, that this book is just plain wrong in all respects. Mr. Diamonds marxist/egalitarian political agenda so obvious, its amazing that most cannot see right through his line of reasoning. His major point is to show that Western societies only dominated (the world) because of luck, the right environment and plants and the Nonwestern world is not advanced because of "bad luck" and the so ever "white racism". He basically playing the same old tirade that Gould, Montagu and other marxists have been spewing for years. His real intent is to basically dismantle white racialism (the main function of the race-denier crowd), and to take advantage of European's peoples universal morality( why don't race-denier theories show up in China, africa, India, Japan or the Non white world?). His hatred for whites is also abhorrent, its obvious he just wants whites to be more "tolerant", "accepting", "altrusitic" and open to the Nonwhite world. The the fact that Mr. Diamond is Jewish is no concidence, I urge all readers here to read "The Culture of Critique" chapter 2 where Kevin Macdonald discusses how and why so many of the leading race-deniers/radical environmentalists have been Jews. Starting with Boas in anthropoloy all the way up to Diamond,Gould and Montagu Jewish social scientists have primarily been concerned with trying to squash white ethnocentrism by supporting movements that support racial egalitarianism and enviromentalist theories (of course not all have been Jewish, likewise many Jews have helped sociobiology, this is just a generalization). BUT science is moving on, sociobiology has been vindicated, and the biological basis for human behavior and racial differences is becoming more and more accepted by specialists everyday. Even though the public may be ignorant of the real research for political reasons, that won't change the fact that sociobiology and Jensenism will be vindicated. I suspect that once these theories of human behavior become more and more accpeted by scientists, the popular media/leftists/radical envrionmentalists will lanuch a full scale attack to supress it. You know the sciencitific zietigiest is poor when a book gets the "pultizer prize" for basically spewing "feel good" scientific theories that have absolutely NO basis in fact or research( Mr. Daimond denies sixty years of research into mental and physical differences between the Races, and amazingly makes no attempt WHATSOEVER to refute anyone of them. The current theories are as vindicated, as the theory that earth goes around the sun) . In the end science, doesn't wait for anybody, for political extremism, bias or dogma when sociobiology and Jensenism get pubilcy vindicated, people and socieites will have to start over and build according to the CORRECT view of human nature. In fifty years, people will be wondering how such garbage, was ever considered serious science at once.
|
