So, I haven’t totally finished the book yet. I still have a couple chapters to go. It’s divided into 4 sections, outlining the “problem” the author intends to address in the first, in the second and third, he outlines the development of agriculture, both plant and animal, and in the fourth section, he traces through the history of the development of various geographical regions, as case histories illustrating various principles.
He claims that his primary question is why different racial groups fared so differently throughout history. For example, why did the native americans get invaded by the europeans instead of vice versa. The first blush answer is obvious: Because the europeans had more advanced technology, a number of virulent diseases to which the native americans had no exposure, and thus no resistance. But then how did that come to be?
The rest of the book is support for his theory that environmental and not genetic or racial differences were the source of the distinctions.
It’s remarkably convincing, but that’s not why I find this book so interesting.
What fascinates me about this book is how it paints in broad strokes the process of social evolution. How the groups that have better tools, nastier germs, etc, come to prevail over those not so ‘blessed’. And, more significantly, how some groups come to have the better tools, nastier germs, etc.
I have more to say, that will endear this book to Josh, particularly in terms of the great hunter/gatherer debate, but I have a party to get to. 😉
