More handpicked essays just for you.
Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond explanation
Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond explanation
Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond explanation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond explanation
Why do some countries become wealthy and dominant, while others remain stagnant and poor? Jared Diamond exclaimed the secret to countries that prosper are guns, germs and steel. Countries have conquered other countries with the same approach. This approach is the use of military power and advanced technology. All great civilizations have had the following in common: Geographic luck, advanced technology, food production, immunity to germs, domestication of crops, domestication of animals, the use of steel, and a well organized workforce It all starts with geographic luck. Geographic luck refers to regions of a country or nations and where they are located. The luck of the geography helps a region be rich and prosperous or poor and deprived.
...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.
...nd expansion. History has proven this time and time again. One of the reasons that the European empire was so successful was due to its great advanced in the realm of technology. But, what one must keep in mind is that with this technology comes the factor of time. As time ticks, technology may advance but also, people find ways around this technology or the technology fails you. For example, in Vietnam air power failed due to adaptation. Much like in Kosovo, technological use of air power failed due to other circumstances. While Serbians were driven out of Kosovo, murders went up and fighting increased due to people’s frustrations and will power ti fight for what they believe in. Therefore, while technology can gain a great edge over your opponents, it can never replace the will and desire for one nation to achieve its goals and in time, that technology can fail.
The era that marked the end of civil war and the beginning of the twentieth century in the united states of America was coupled with enormous economic and industrial developments that attracted diverse views and different arguments on what exactly acquisition of wealth implied on the social classes in the society. It was during this time that the Marxist and those who embraced his ideologies came out strongly to argue their position on what industrial revolution should imply in an economic world like America. In fact, there was a rapid rise in the gross national product of the United States between 1874 and 1883. This actually sparked remarkable consequences on the political, social and economic impacts. In fact, the social rejoinder to industrialization had extensive consequences on the American society. This led to the emergence of social reform movements to discourse on the needs of the industrialized society. Various theories were developed to rationalize the widening gap between the rich and the poor. Various reformers like Andrew Carnegie, Henry George and William Graham Sumner perceived the view on the obligation of the wealthy differently. This paper seeks to address on the different views held by these prominent people during this time of historical transformations.
...hose a region where it would be easy to settle down, an area with plenty of food and water not to mention an easy life. Their choices not only had an effect on themselves but also had a long term affect on the region that they chose to settle in. An example is the North China Plain and how its economic opportunities broadened when more and more people moved to it. The people of ancient civilizations whether ancient China or ancient Greece chose to move from one place to another frequently to find a location that was most suitable for their settlement. How they chose the region was based on its economic and geographic factors which were determined by the experiences of others there. The ancient nomadic people wanted what was best for them and used push and pull factors to do this. They analyzed to area with various methods and in return got what was the best for them.
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
Have you ever taken a look at a South American map? Well if you have, you probably have seen how large Brazil is compared to all the the other countries associated on the map. Brazil is a Portuguese speaking country with a population of more that 200 million people and an area nearly equal to the United States! Knowing that Brazil has that big of a population probably makes you assume that Brazil is a wealthy country. Although Brazil may seem pretty wealthy at first, looking at a regional or a local scale might change your mind on how wealthy Brazil really is. A scale is used by geographers to understand situations such as the wealth of a nation. How can scale help us understand whether Brazil is a wealthy country? Well, Brazil may seem wealthy on a national scale, but examining Brazil at regional and local scales show a different picture.
The geography of Europe contributed to its dominance over the other civilizations. The Chinese appeared to have it all. They had a rise of food production, the largest human population in the world, and developed writing and most of all they were unified country (Diamond, p.411). The European coastline was highly indented with five large peninsulas which all evolved independent languages, ethnic groups, and government. China has a much smoother coastline with land that is less scattered compared to Europe (Diamond, p.414). “Europe’s geographic balkanization” and discord among the states developed hundreds of competing, and ambitious states (Diamond, p.416). States were kept on their toes to try to out due what another state had previously accomplished because they knew “if one state did not pursue some particular innovation, another did, forcing neighboring states to do likewise or else be conquered or left economically behind” (Diamond, p.416). China’s unification based on geography led to their demise. Their government isolated them from the outside world and rejected all imports including technologies leaving them dramatically underdeveloped in a world of technologies (Diamond, p.416).
Smith was a rather extraordinary man. Born in Kircaldy, County Fife, Scotland in 1723, Smith is characterized by Robert Heilbroner as being an “apt student” (1999). Heilbroner then goes on to recount a story about Smith being kidnapped by gypsies when he was 4. At the age of seventeen, Smith left to study at Oxford. Heilbroner is quick to point out that Oxford at that time was hardly the venerable bastion of learning that it is today and that Smith spent his time there “largely untutored and untaught, reading as he saw fit” (1999). Smith describes Oxford as a “sanctuary in which exploded systems and obsolete prejudices find shelter and protection, after they have been hunted out of every other corner of the world” (Herman, 2001). In 1751, Smith became the Chair of Logic at the University of Glasgow, later he would become the Chair of Moral Philosophy at the same institution.
Landes, D., 1999. The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 38-59
The report of Robert Reich: “Why the Rich are getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer,” is an eye opener and a warning for society regarding unemployment that it will be facing and is currently facing due to a lack of technology and education. It clearly articulates that the jobs of routine producers and in-person servers have vanished totally as modern techniques have replaced them. The author has stated that the only people whose jobs are on the rise are symbol analysts. As stated in the report, symbol analysts are the real problem solvers. Their skills are highly in demand worldwide because they are the ones who first analyze the problem and then solve it. The Hart Report, on the other hand, also states the same problem of unemployment and the global recession which has left employers focusing on employees not only with specialists’ skills but also a “broader range of skills and knowledge” (page 6-7). The Hart Report clearly reflects what the needs of contemporary employers are, but the question is whether it is the universities or the students themselves who fail to cope with the requirements of the contemporary world which is filled with technological advancement and critical thinking. The Texas Work Source has also played an important role in examining what is actually missing in today’s generation and the reasons behind such a great decline in employment. The central
...iority in military strength (it had the largest military, succeeded in the most seizures such as that of Constantinople, and the monopoly of trade), and superiority in stability and unity (a successful establishment and administration discouraged uprising and conflict). Every power must, at some point fall; that is history’s most repeated lesson. There is no evidence yet of a nation that did not fall victim to changing times; even North American capitalism is experiencing such alteration because of the rise of Chinese potential. The true measure of success, however, is what comes out of this downfall: what is learnt from it, and what is done to re-unit the power once again.
Jared diamond reiterated, time and time again, that global inequity coincided with geography. Egypt, in comparison to France, had the natural disadvantage of being dealt with a desert climate, as opposed to France’s favorable cultivating climate. This allowed for France to naturally be more skilled in areas such as planting crops; having the adverse effect for Egypt. The lack of water also contributed to the inequality, as animals were able to thrive in environments that offered a surplus of water. Lastly, a more favorable geography in developed countries plays a major role as to why developing countries are not quite developed. Jared Diamond’s thesis thoroughly explains this as geography is reason for the unequal distribution of wealth in the world today.
Why nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, is a captivating read for all college economic courses. Coauthored by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, they optimistically attempt to answer the tough question of why some nations are rich and others are poor through political economic theories. They lay it all out in the preface and first chapter. According to Acemoglu and Robinson, the everyday United States citizen obtains more wealth than the every day Mexican, sub-Saharan African, Ethiopian, Mali, Sierra Leonne and Peruvian citizen as well as some Asian countries. The authors strategically arranged each chapter in a way that the reader, whomever he or she is, could easily grasp the following concept. Extractive nations that have political leadership and financial inconsistencies within their institutions are the largest contributor to poverty and despair within most countries. It also states that countries with socioeconomic institutions that work ‘for the people and by the people’, or in other words, focus on the internal agenda of that
All great empires start with a strong leader, but first there has to be a civilization to
Geographic factors influenced early ancient civilization’s developments of their nations and regions. These factors also stimulated the dissemination of culture. To name a few, Egypt and Mesopotamia both highly relied on its river. Greece being surrounded by mountains that divided the land led to the development of city states. These factors played a major part of how these civilizations came to be who they are. An early river valley civilization didn’t have much of a chance surviving a bad environment and a bad geographical location. Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Indus Valley were some of the fortunate locations where their surrounding’s condition were beneficial for them. These civilizations wouldn’t have had survived if it weren’t for each location’s earthly gift.