“Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?” This was the question posed to Dr. Jared Diamond by Yali, a local politician in New Guinea. Answering Yali’s question became the focus of Diamond’s book, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. Diamond particularly focused on “why were Europeans, rather than Africans or Native Americans, the ones to end up with guns, the nastiest germs, and steel?” Guns, Germs, and Steel took a scientific approach in viewing how certain locations in the world are far more advanced than others. I believe that this book as a whole is a very strong argument and response to both Yali and Diamond’s question. Observing …show more content…
This phenomenon can be explained through Diamond’s arguments of guns, germs, and steel. The Westerners began their civilization in a geographical location that were much superior to the indigenous and the aboriginal people in areas such as New Guinea and Africa. As Diamond pointed out in his book, “[e]nvironment can affect economy, technology, political organization, and fighting skill within a short time.” Indeed, good environments enable a nation to create a formidable army and specialists to strengthen the nation, therefore resulting in a high quality of life. In consequence, with the advancement in technology, weaponry, infrastructure, and writing, these forceful nations today are able to exert major impact in modern global affairs. European nations such as Britain, Spain, and France are prime examples of this phenomenon, as their early advancements make them major players in the United Nations and holds significant weight in global politics. Diamond points out that the “imbalances of equipment were decisive in innumerable other confrontations of Europeans with Native American and other peoples.” It is due to this early deficit that the present day African nations and other indigenous groups struggle to voice their opinions. Guns, Germs, and Steel offers valuable insights on the huge effects of geographic location …show more content…
Though it is very convincing, I do not fully agree with this concept. I agree that being located in a good geographical location enables a civilization to gain the upper hand early on, but I disagree that without good geography, a civilization will not be able to reach prosperity. My argument parallels James A. Robinson and Daron Acemoğlu’s argument made in Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. They used the example of Nogales, a city that is divided into two, with the northern half in the United States that enjoys a flourishing and safe life, while the southern half in Mexico and struggles to maintain a good living standard. This city has the exact same geographical conditions, and yet, the welfare varies drastically. The authors explain since the northern part of the city is in the United States, it has the access to the economic institutions, technology, and the government of the United States. In contrast, the southern part of the city suffers due to the corruption, disorder, and poor government system that is of Mexico. The point Robinson and Acemoğlu try to make with the example of Nogales, which I am in concurrence with, is that since it was technological development that gave North America the step up in the modern era, it doesn’t fully explain why Latin America, who
Jared Diamond, author of the Pulitzer Prize Winning, National Best Selling book Guns, Germs and Steel, summarizes his book by saying the following: "History followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples' environments, not because of biological differences among peoples themselves." Guns, Germs and Steel is historical literature that documents Jared Diamond's views on how the world as we know it developed. However, is his thesis that environmental factors contribute so greatly to the development of society and culture valid? Traditions & Encounters: A Brief Global History is the textbook used for this class and it poses several different accounts of how society and culture developed that differ from Diamond's claims. However, neither Diamond nor Traditions are incorrect. Each poses varying, yet true, accounts of the same historical events. Each text chose to analyze history in a different manner. Not without flaws, Jared Diamond makes many claims throughout his work, and provides numerous examples and evidence to support his theories. In this essay, I will summarize Jared Diamond's accounts of world history and evolution of culture, and compare and contrast it with what I have learned using the textbook for this class.
“History followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples ' environments, not because of biological differences among peoples themselves” (Jared Diamond). In the book Guns Germs and Steel he accounted a conversation with Yali, a New Guinean politician that had asked “Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?”. Diamond tries to answer this by describing the difference in use of government throughout history by bands, tribes, chiefdoms, and states.
The reason Jared Diamond wrote this book was to answer the question of his political friend Yali, why did some societies like Eurasia were able to develop Guns, Germs, and Steel that were able to dominate major parts of the world, and why New Guinea was not capable of doing this? This question is certainly not a small picture kind of question because it covers a broad realm. Diamond is a book that has tried his best to cover a whole pattern of history, starting from before the Ice Age to the modern period. But Diamond's all-time famous and award-winning book was really successful in explaining the broad question. Such a type of question is critical to gain a stronger understanding of Diamond’s argument and its effect on the field of history.
Diamond wrote this book to answer the question of a New Guinean politician, Yali. He asked “Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own.” Diamond set out to find the answer to this question, to find out why history unfolded like it did. Diamond credits the inequalities in history to differences in environments not biological differences as so many people like to say. Most of the advantages the Europeans had were a direct result of geography. The main points that Diamond attributes to European dominance are early plant and animal domestication and as a result of close contact to animals the deadliest germs were given to the Europeans. As result of its East-West axis the diffusion of food production, technologies, humans and ideas were easily spread throughout Europe. The axis mean that there were similar climatic, geographic, and disease conditions to migrants and no barriers. So anything that could be grown in one area was sure to quickly spread and thrive in the neighboring locations. Moreover, political administration, economic exchanges, incentive for exploration and conquest, and making information available to every individual were facilitated after the development of writing.
...conomically beneficial trade and technology development. In this regard the Epilogue uses sound logic to plausibly answer the wealth question. On the other hand, Mr. Diamond uses the same "national competition" thesis to purport that Asia's large, centralized governments were conspicuously growth-inhibitive. This argument would not seem to pass muster given what we have learned about the role of governments. Professor Wright's slides state that "Centralization may limit predation and even allow for growth" as "centralized predation = incentives to maximize the haul " This clearly refutes Mr. Diamond's argument that centralized, monopolistic Asian governments impaired societal advances. Thus, Guns, Germs, and Steel can scantly explain why China and the Middle East remain emerging markets while Western and Northern Europe enjoy significantly larger national wealth.
...l developments taking place in the Eurasian land mass. The encounter was far from equal;” (Inoa pg. 1). It began as an unequal interaction, and has remained to this day a relationship of aggressor versus defender.
Over time concepts of ‘Race’, defined as a distinct group with a common linage, and ‘Primitive’ which pertains to the beginning or origin, , have been inextricably linked with the perception of Africa. The confusion of the two in the minds of people at the end of the 19th centaury, and some of the 20th, caused a sense of superiority amongst the ‘White Races’ that affected every aspect of their interaction with ‘the Black’. The ‘Civilisation’ of Africa by conquest and force was justified by these views.
During the 18th and 19th centuries, Europe went through two industrial revolutions. These revolutions were, in part, dependent on raw material coming from both Europe itself and its colonies. Before the Second Industrial Revolution, Europe was unable to conquer Africa, but with new military technology and medicinal discoveries, it became possible for these countries to gain territory in Africa. This time also brought with it new ideas like social darwinism and the idea of “survival of the fittest”. European countries obtained colonies in Africa to strengthen themselves, to provide for themselves, and because they believed it was their right or duty as “superior races”.
The answer, he says, is partially environmental. Societies in robust and fertile environments, he claims, are more likely to prosper than those in dry, cold, or otherwise difficult surroundings. But a good environment does not guarantee success, nor does a poor one dictate failure. He contends that the other half of the answer has to do with how a society responds to problems. Societies in Germany, Japan, and New Guinea, for instance, combatted deforestation through systematic efforts to restore the natural environment while the Mayans, made no such effort, and, consequently,
In the first segment of his film series, Different but Equal, Basil Davidson sets out to disprove the fictitious and degrading assumptions about African civilization made by various Western scholars and explorers. Whether it is the notion that Africans are “savage and crude in nature” or the presumed inability of Africans to advance technologically, these stereotypes are damaging to the image and history of Africa. Although European Renaissance art depicts the races of white and black in equal dignity, there was a drastic shift of European attitudes toward Africa that placed Africans in a much lower standing than people of any other culture. The continent of Africa quickly became ravished by the inhuman slave trade and any traditional civilization
Advances in technology and the expansion of trade have, without a doubt, improved the standard of living dramatically for peoples around the world. Globalization brings respect for law and human rights and the democratization of politics, education, and finance to developing societies, but is usually slow in doing so. It is no easy transition or permanent solution to conflict, as some overly zealous proponents would argue. In The Great Illusion, Norman Angell sees globalization as a force which results from and feeds back into the progressive change of human behavior from using physical force toward using rational, peaceful methods in order to achieve economic security and prosperity. He believes that nations will no longer wage war against one another because trade, not force, yields profit in the new global economy, and he argues that “military power is socially and economically futile” because “political and military power can in reality do nothing for trade.” While the economic interdependence of nations should prove to be a deterrent from warfare, globalization is not now, and was not a century ago, a prescription for world peace. At the turn of the twentieth century, formal colonialism was still profitable in some regions, universal free trade was not a reality, nationalism was not completely defunct, military force was necessary to protect economic investments in developing locations, and the arms race of the previous century had created the potential for an explosive war if any small spark should set the major powers off against one another. The major flaw in Angell’s argument is his refusal to acknowledge the economic advantages that colonizing powers, even after globalization has started to take shape, can actuall...
Why do nations fail? This is a topic of popular debate with many economists and a question many scholars have struggled to find an answer to. Global poverty is an issue that economists Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson investigate and provide an alternative insight for in their book: ‘Why Nations Fail’. Acemoglu and Robinson investigate inequalities that exist across countries and why nations are an epitome of success and others, failure. They come up with an alternative explanation for why standards of living differ across countries, and why a gap exists between the rich and poor. The book introduces an example of two cities that are separated by a border: Nogales, Arizona and Nogales, Sonora. On the American side of the border, the income of the average household is $30,000, the population is relatively healthy, and the citizens live prosperously (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2012). On the opposite side of the border in Mexico, majority of the population do not own a high school degree, poor health conditions exist, poor infrastructure and unfortunately, high infant mortality rates (Acemoglu & Robinson 2012). How can situations on opposite borders be so different? The basis for Acemoglu and Robison’ s thesis for this phenomenon is that of institutions. They propose that that there is a strong correlation between economic and political institutions. That is, inclusive political institutions support inclusive economic institutions, and extractive political institutions support extractive economic institutions (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2012). Democratic institutions generally allow opportunities for the majority, leading to positive economic growth. Political institutions that look after a narrow elite is reinforced with stag...
Adas, Michael. 1989. “Africa: Primitive Tools and the Savage Mind” In Machines as the Measure of Men: Science, Technology and Ideologies of Western Dominance, from Historical Problems of Imperial Africa. Edited by Robert O. Collins and James M. Burns, 30-39. Princeton: Markus Wiener Publishers.
Africa’s struggle to maintain their sovereignty amidst the encroaching Europeans is as much a psychological battle as it is an economic and political one. The spillover effects the system of racial superiority had on the African continent fractured ...
Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson. Why nations fail: the origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. New York: Crown Publishers, 2012. Print.