Should i read this

what do u guys think of this book?

according to wikipedia, (((mr. author))) here, a jew, writes an elaborated book explaining that eurasians are in no way genetically or morally superior to africans. according to the author you goys just got lucky

was this book written objectively or is it just another case of schlomo mind fucking europeans

Don't read. Waste of time.

Basically realife is civilization the game and euros got an OP starting location.

It's a book. Read it.

Europeans just got LUCKY.

He gets a lot of points right (e.g. industrialization and modernization coming from long-rooted economic factors at least in part), but leaves some questions unanswered or only partially answered. Also, the book was written roughly 20 years ago and at least a few of his points on human evolution need updating.

Picked it up completely ignorant.

Made it about a quarter before dropping it.

Total bullshit.

(((Jared Diamond)))
I stopped reading 1/4 the way through . Couldn't take the tricks anymore

isnt it kinda fishy that he absolutely disregards genetic differences having an impact at all, and that hes a jew

schlomo puts his high verbal IQ to good use. i wonder if he'd like to see his daughter marrying an african

its based on a false premise, (denial of human biodiversity) but its still a decent read.

they did though.

>long growing season to support urbanization and industrialization
>well positioned to inherit civilization from its neighbors
>harsh enough winters to kill off the stupidest people

pretty OP starting location desu

Its not perfect, but its the best of it's kind.

Tldr European cities made crazy diseases that forced Europeans to adapt or die.

Later the disease immune Europeans ROFL stomped everyone with their op passive traits.

Same thing would have happened if somehow Africans brought malaria with them everywhere. They had the immunity while everyone else would have gotten rekt.

Bonus for describing ancient Europe having practices that are exactly the same as modern day India for hygiene.

Designated shifting streets is a sign of civilization.

schlomo doesn't deny human biodiversity, he just wants goys to deny it

It's pretty okay.

Diamond does a good job of explaining some of the forces which shaped early civilization. There are absolutely several objective evolutionary selectors which influenced mankind and changed our genome and our behavior forever. One of these is the heterogenous geographic distribution of plants, animals, and microbes.

Now, you have to take Diamond with a grain of salt because he is basically an environmental determinist. He paints a world of Newtonian billiard balls where the only explanation for change is the sum of the acting forces. This world is empty of the human mind, innovation in the human metaorganism can only be explained by physical and biological imperatives.

It's been refuted by scholars and anthropologists in its entirety.

However, I do encourage you to read the first 1/4 or so to get the jist, then go read why it's all wrong. It's a good intellectual exercise.

so u think its objective and his disregard of race differences in intelligence is not jewish trickery

k ill do that at least to be able to argue against the people who bring it up all the time

So you mean to say THE ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD is based on pure LUCK?

Good Luck teaching that to your yet un-degenerate kids.

I don't understand why people even bother with this practically mammoth task. Coming from physics, I wouldn't even dare doing something like without a model that features a certain level of minimal complexity. Humanities is all conjecture - a big load of 'hard science rigor' would be very advantageous to the humanities in general. Especially with a topic like this.

At the end of the day, you probably can't convincingly argue without have a proper simulation tool that lets you play out scenarios like that.

Literally White People and Technology are Evil: the book

Good man. Know your enemy. Don't be afraid to read stuff that doesn't immediately jive with your worldview.

i find it hard to believe that it's not a coincidence that a jew writes a book bringing white people down. if it really isn't a coincidence then you have to marvel at their ability

The basic premise that location matters is true. Everything immediately adjacent to the fertile crescent was primed for huge population growth. The crops and livestock gleaned from there are primo material.

What the book fails to adequately explain is why China just stagnated, why Egypt didn't really do much before/after Roman control. Once you get into the nitty gritty it rather shows that Europe, particularly North Western Europe was a hellhole. Too much variation of seasons.

It entirely ignores culture's impact on civilization. For example Roman infatuation with promulgating and adhering to laws. Rome itself is an anomaly for his thesis. It's in a geographically shit spot. It's in the fucking middle of Italy, not in the boot or near the Alps. Every fucker coming North or South with an army would be stopping in to loot it. Geographic determination isn't foolproof.

That's just the Geography portion of it. The germs and steel portions are just as full of holes. It's a good start to get a rough picture but don't end your reading here.

He doesn't deny genetic differences in populations, but I think he glosses over the influence of some recorded factors in historical development.

Interesting details but the overall concept is bullshit.

Im pretty sure the author also knows that what he writes is not true but it sells so who cares ...

Of course geographical luck is important in the early development of societies. If horses, wheat, barley, cows, pigs, etc. hadn't been domesticated in Eurasia, it's highly unlikely European societies would have developed in the way they did.

Diamond's theory neglects culture (read Landes for this), IQ (see Lynn) and institutions of a country (see Acemoglu and Robinson). I reckon all these factors play a significant role in development. The question is to what extent each one does.

Diamond keeps trying to push his liberal agenda and we are all equal throughout his books. This is simply irritating and unscholarly. However GGS has some valid points if you're willing to get over your prejudice of the Jews.

I think intelligence differences are not significant enought especially this early on to make a difference.

IQ differences among soldiers and laborers dont really matter. Only now with the average job being based on writing and math skills does it matter. Innovative people at the very top of the curve are the only people who make a difference on a historical scale.

Asians have more genius level iq then white, but their culture isn't supportive until recently.

Blacks have less genius level iq then whites but they might as well have 0 because they didn't have formal education.

Focusing on supposed biological superiority is brainlet as fuck. Other factors are much more relevant.

Continental placement is racist