Guns, Germs, and Steel

Diamond's thesis is that geography - not race - is the leading factor in the rise of advanced civilizations. Geographically, Eurasia covers the most latitude on the globe. This latitude allows Eurasia to have environmental advantages over Africa, Australia, and the Americas. Wide geographic latitude allows for more consistently fertile land; more consistently fertile land allows for agriculture, involving the growth of crops, and the domestication of animals.

The people in this geography, thus, shifted from being nomadic hunter-gathers to being agricultural communities quicker than people in other geographies.

In such communities, crop growth and animal domestication propser. Under these conditions, people develop immunities from various diseases, since such people encounter diseases in the animals they domesticate. Also, people use metal tools to help them work within the community. The metal in the tools leads to the development of steel used for their weapons. Also, some people in agricultural communities don't have to worry about growing their own food; only some of the people grow the crops, and the rest can focus on other things, like thinking, inventing, art, literature, etc . . . Nomads can't focus on such things because their primary focus is on raising their family and finding food.
Eurasia beat out Africa, Australia, and the Americas, and so Europe conquered them, rather than the other way around. Europe had guns and so better weapons; Europe had diseases, which wiped out a huge portion of the conquered. And all this was because Eurasia has a priviledged geography that helped them develop agriculture societies quicker than everyone else.

What's wrong with this scenario given to us by Diamond? Diamond is trying to refute the thesis that Europeans are inherently smarter than other peoples, since Europe conquered everyone, and they seem to have the best collection of inventors, poets, philosophers, literature, technology, scientists, military, and mathematicians.

1. Diamond says that we can't say that one race is smarter than another. But then says that people from New Guinea are smarter than your average white person. Huh?

2. Geography provides opportunities for trade, agriculture, etc . . . But Geography doesn't determine their coming about. Individual people have to have industry, imagination, and intiative too.

3. In Latin America, you'll find mountains; you can't have good agriculture, crop-growth, or animal domistication on mountains. And yet Indians (who lived there) domesticated the lama, figured out how to grow corn and potatoes, were literate, had architecture, etc . . . But how can this be? The Indians in Latin America weren't in an environment or geography that naturally grow lots of crops and had lots of animals that could be domesticated.

4. Africans can't tame the Zebra. So Diamond thinks Zebra aren't able to be domesticated. But Erasians had the same problem with the Horse, and the Horse has now been trained. It's the same story with Reindeer, Elephants, and Lama. But Diamond doesn't mention these.

5. Europe wasn't a Garden of Eden, full of abundant crop, seeds, and ready-made farm land. 10,000 years ago, Europe was coming out of an Ice-Age! There were thick forests everywhere, not to mention The Alps, the Urals, the Caucasus, the Russian Steppes, the Taiga, the Anatolian plateau, and long brutal winters. Europe finally grew corn and wheat after a long time of struggle. The Thar desert, the Himalayas, the Gobi desert, and Tian Shan mountains divide East and Centra Asia. All these regions DID NOT exchange culture until the 15th century. But it doesn't matter. Eurasia soared in culture/technology, compared to Africa and America. So, why isn't Africa on par with Eurasia by this point? Africa is just as close to the Fertile Cresent as West Europe, and closer to it than Asia!

6. Why didn't sub-Saharan African's have wheels or literacy or carts drawn by oxes?

7. Why did Carthage (AFRICA) invade Rome on elephants? Well, the elephants were domisticated. So Africans could domisticate animals if they wanted to. They just need initiative, imagination, and industry.

8. Why did Diamond tell a story about how he stayed at a farm, saying all the whites were idiotic drunks, and that the only decent person was a Native American?

9. Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan were in Nomadic Tribes. Khan had the biggest empire in history: all of Asia, and half of Europe. And Attila was a major threat to the Roman Empire (re. Europe). Also, the barbarian hordes brought down the Roman Empire. So, civilized peoples don't necessarily conquer nomadic peoples. So, you don't need urban civilization to conquer.

10. Why does Diamond think that the only reason why an animal CAN'T be domesticated is because they just happen not be now? That's dumb. We haven't domesticated bison, but it just doesn't follow that we can't! And there's no need anyway: cattle do just fine. Diamond says the Africans have been trying to tame Eland, but they haven't, so they can't be domesticated? How in the world does that follow? It doesn't mean it's impossible to domisticate them, period.

11. Do you need land with lots of potential for crops in order to have agricultural communities? No. The Incas has potatos and maize. And the Cahokia also exploited maize. West Europe had wheat; China had rice.

12. Does Europe have more animals that can be domesticated compared to Sub-Sarahan Africa? No. From the Sudan to the Cape, we find sheep, goats, and cattle by 200 AD. As was said above, S. America had llama. In N. America and Australia, there mammals were hunted until nigh extinction. But Europeans didn't . . . hmmmm.

13. Deseases weren't a factor in conquest, because diseases only became a factor after conquest. Also, nations conquered had their share of diseases that Europeans weren't immune from.