After reading the book
and doing some research, I found this argumentative article that Jared Diamond
wrote to Mitt Romney, Romney Hasn’t Done
His Homework. Romney latest controversial remark explains that the role of
culture makes some countries rich and powerful while others are poor and fragile.
Jared Diamond explained how Mitt Romney misrepresented his views and that “basically
says the physical characteristics of the land account for the differences in
the success of the people that live there. There is iron ore on the land and so
forth.” On the other hand, Jared Diamond states,
“That is so different from what my
book actually says that I have to doubt whether Mr. Romney read it. My focus
was mostly on biological features, like plant and animal species, and among
physical characteristics, the ones I mentioned were continents’ sizes and
shapes and relative isolation. I said nothing about iron ore, which is so
widespread that its distribution has had little effect on the different
successes of different peoples.” (Diamond, 2012).
As Professor Diamond explains that there are many
different factors that make a country wealthy and powerful. “That is not to
deny culture’s significance. Some countries have political institutions and
cultural practices — honest government, rule of law, opportunities to
accumulate money — that reward hard work. Others don’t. (Diamond, 2012) For
instance, North Korea and South Korea share the same culture, language, and
religion. However, South Korea is rich, and North Korea is poor. In addition to
East Germany and West Germany, also Hong Kong and the old Communist China, that
shared the same culture, language and religion, despite how small Hong Kong
was, it had wealth, while communist China was poor. As a result, Diamond
explained that part of the answer has to do with human institutions. Some
countries are wealthy because they encourage capitalism, free enterprise and trade.
Also good institutions lack in corruption, the rule of law, control of
inflation, protection of private property rights, and financial capital. However,
“institutions and culture aren’t the whole answer, because some countries
notorious for bad institutions (like Italy and Argentina) are rich, while some
virtuous countries (like Tanzania and Bhutan) are poor.” (Diamond, 2012).
The three biggest factors that Jared Diamond explains why
some countries have accumulated great riches over time while other remained
historically poor are geography, access to the sea, and history of agriculture.
“One such geographic factor is latitude, which has big
effects on wealth and power today: tropical countries tend to be poorer than
temperate-zone countries. Reasons include the debilitating effects of tropical
diseases on life span and work, and the average lower productivity of
agriculture and soils in the tropics than in the temperate zones.” (Diamond,
2012). There are more parasitic diseases in the tropical areas and this can inflict
a huge trouble on economies tropical countries. At a certain time, we might
find that much of the population is ill and unable to work efficiently. However as Jared Diamond explained temperature
climates with cold winters are helpful to human health, because they kill
viruses and diseases. In addition, some countries are expanding significant
investments in public health, as Diamond cited Taiwan, Malaysia and Singapore. However,
disease vectors, such as ticks and mosquitoes, are far more diverse in the
tropical areas than in temperature areas.
“A second factor is access to the sea. Countries without
a seacoast or big navigable rivers tend to be poor, because transport costs
overland or by air are much higher than transport costs by sea.” (Diamond,
2012). As Jared Diamond wrote a letter to Daron Acemoglu the author of Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, “It costs roughly seven times
more to ship a ton of cargo by land than by sea. That puts landlocked countries
at an economic disadvantage, and helps explain why landlocked Bolivia and semi
landlocked Paraguay are the poorest countries of South America.”
Third, the history of agriculture, as Diamond claimed, “13,000
years ago, all peoples everywhere were hunter-gatherers living in sparse
populations without centralized government, armies, writing or metal tools.
These four roots of power arose as consequences of the development of
agriculture, which generated human population explosions and accumulations of
food surpluses capable of feeding full-time leaders, soldiers, scribes and
inventors.” At the time of Columbus, European cultures had an advantage over other
cultures, because they previously had complex state governments and market
economies. As Diamond suggested, “regions with long experiences with
agricultural production or state-societies were wealthier than their
counterparts.”
Now, let’s talk which plants and animals made people
geographically lucky. In Ch.7 Apples and Indians, Diamond explained
that “perhaps almost any well-watered temperate or tropical area of the globe
offers enough species of wild plants suitable for domestication.” (Diamond,
1997). Furthermore, Diamond disputed that around 3400 BC, productive
agriculture was found in different parts of the ancient world, including the
Fertile Crescent, China, Egypt, the Indus Valley, the Valley of Mexico, the
Andes, and Polynesian Hawaii. In addition, “the most intensively studied and
best understood part of the globe as regards the rise of agriculture,” was in
the Fertile Crescent. The rise of food production was possible in the Fertile
Crescent because of the Mediterranean climate that included rainy mild winters
and hot dry summers. As a result, a large number of larger-seeded annuals, a
high percentage of plants suitable for domestication, and a high number of
prized large grass seeds. “Of the 200,000 wild plants species, only a few
thousand are eaten by humans. Even of these several hundred crops, most provide
minor supplements to our diet and would not by themselves have sufficed to support
the rise of civilizations.” (Diamond, 1997). This included wheat, rice, corn, sorghum,
soybean, potato, and sugar cane, which is the world’s leading crop.
According to Diamond, “The Anna Karenina principle explains a feature of animal domestication
that had heavy consequences in the human history.” (Diamond, 1997). In
addition, large animals could be domesticated, were domesticated by 2500 BC.
The animals that were domesticated were llama in South America, North Africa, and
Asia. Europe had others like goats, pigs, sheep, cows, donkeys, horses, camels,
water buffalo, reindeer and cattle. In addition to the llama/alpaca, is a New
World domesticate and other New World domesticates include the guinea pig,
turkey, dog and Muscovy duck. As a result, domesticated animals led to bigger productivity,
and most of these domesticated animals were native to the temperate climates of
the world, where we find the most powerful societies developed.
“Technology, in the form of weapons and transport,
provides the direct means by which certain peoples have expanded their realms
and conquered other peoples.” (Diamond, 1997). In the book, Jared Diamond
explained why the Spanish had advanced steel swords while the Inca’s were still
making tools. His argument is that Europe was geographically close to the
Fertile Crescent, and they are the ones who inhered the 7,000 years of metal
technology. I agree with Diamond, geography is a big factor why the Spaniards
became more powerful with the development of technology. Spaniards had a
diversified society and they dedicated their time and effort to produce the strongest,
longest and sharpest swords possible. On the other hand, Incas were isolated.
They viewed the Spaniards as Gods because they rode horses, had guns and
swords, things that the Incas never saw before. If the Incas knew more about
the style of fighting, they could have been victorious. We know Europeans were
the first to acquire Guns, Germs, and
Steel, for that reason they could conquer other lesser developed
civilizations, and ultimately, conquer the world.
Other countries rejected the new innovation of
inventions. For example, Japan, the samurai restricted the adoption of guns
until Commodore Perry arrived in 1853. “Tasmanian continued to use stone tools
superseded tens of thousands of years earlier in Europe… and Islamic societies
in the Middle East are relatively conservative and not at the forefront of
technology.” (Diamonds, 1997) However, the main factors leading to the differences
in technological development between the Europeans and the New World inhabitants
were: “level of food production, barriers to diffusion, and differences in
human population.”
Angelica Romero
Angelica Romero
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment