Five Stars for a Flawed Book?
Although much of Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs, and Steel seems
speculative or even flawed, his writing is ground-braking and
inspiring. Through the author's experiences, the book receives
depth and color. It is a pleasure to read this beautifully flowing
text. It may help in addressing the most pressing issues of
modernity, such as poverty, violence, and problems that may be
induced by climate change.
His case is that modern civilization is essentially branded by the
food production capabilities of early civilizations, prompting not
only innovation but also the evolution of germs that had enabled
them to overtake other people's lands.
Firstly, even though the author attempts a holistic approach, the
work is too narrow, missing a bigger evolutionary picture.
Secondly, by merely drawing analogies to the invasions of European
germs into the American continents, Diamond does not make an
evolutionary case for the participation of germs to Eurasian
supremacy. Also, the idea of microbes as an aid to conquest can
only have played a role for isolated civilizations conquered in the
last few hundred years, not for the development of Eurasian peoples
that acquired enhanced immune systems. Diamond delivers his own
counter argument where the Antonine Plague in the second century
did not lead to the conquest of Rome by Middle Eastern forces
despite millions of victims at home. Thirdly, the argument may be
upside down. Instead, localized abundance of food and human
crowding, induced by climate change and geographical bottlenecks,
may have led to a rapid rise of civilization (see the experiment
below). Lastly, the quality of the book drops significantly from
the middle onwards, from Chapter 10, when the author leaves his
home turf. His ideas of the different continental axis add an
unnecessary complexity with no goal in sight. Meanwhile, the author
is out of his league and engages in selective informing when it
comes to historic analogies. His chapter about writing is lengthy
and deviates into unnecessary details. It does not seem to fit into
the narrative in any important way. In short, I do not appreciate
it when authors start off with a hypothesis only to throw anything
in that may support it, regardless of its relevance or accuracy.
My own research laid out in the book The Great Leap-Fraud, Social
Economics of Religious Terrorism shows that the development of
humanity can be compared to a large wheel that very slowly drives
an interdependent mechanism. Actions lead to symptomatic reactions
in rather logical and simple ways. For the ancients, if something
was not simple, relative to their level of development, it was not
adopted. Diamond must know, as a whole, that the human species is
lazy and conservative. If it does not have to change, it will not.
If it can overfeed, it will. If it does not need to innovate, it
will not. Without external forces, hunter-gatherers simply roam
deeper into their territory rather than changing their old ways.
Modern Fair Trade experiments speak volumes in this respect. Yet,
they were able to identify and improve upon the most suitable
crops. As Diamond observed, the hunter-gatherers of New Guinea
possess knowledge that dwarfs most, if not all, modern biologists.
In other words, 50,000 years ago, the species may have emerged just
as intelligent as modern humans, but its intelligence evolved in a
different, more specialized way (see Jewelry and cave paintings).
On the other hand, the dumbest cow can distinguish delicious
clovers from bitter weeds. Hence, the selection process may be less
impressive than portrayed by Diamond.
In my work, it seems rather that two factors played a major role in
conquests: scarcity induced aggression in ancient times and
religious conflicts during the last 2,500 years. The one with an
edge was not blessed with food production but with stronger
alliances. It is true, of course, that economic advantages
re-enforce not only stronger allies but also a more innovative food
production (irrigation). After all, it is (human) nature to favor
the strong over the weak.
However, the major implications of the text remain unanswered: how
can the have-nots be converted into haves? The question is not how
to bring the remaining hunter-gatherers into the civilized world or
how to turn farmers into city dwellers but how to evolve slumified
cities around the globe, even in the West, into a world of human
dignity without creating an expectation of a free lunch and
dependency by transferring wealth to the poor. Hence, I reject the
Diamond's notion of moral justification for redistributive state
control. Nevertheless, the quality of the book cannot depend on my
agreement but merely on its originality and substance. This is
where it deserves a hearty five stars.
A.J. Deus
Author of The Great Leap-Fraud - Social Economics of Religious
Terrorism
Ajdeus.org