As an agronomist, you cannot convince me that this isn't the authoritative source on human history.
it's a pretty good book m8.
>>870984
It's actually a pretty decent book. It ain't perfect but it ain't bad either
>authority
Top kek m8
I see a lot of people here trying to dispute this book. Is it /pol/ or is Jared Diamond's theory full of shit?
>>870991
>>870993
I believe you, John Green.
>>870984
An okay book but doesn't take cultural uniformity into account
>>871005
so let's make this thread interesting. let's apply cultural uniformity to the information and statements put forward by the book.
>>871003
The most common criticism I hear about this book is that it's secretly racist. Thst doesn't seem like a /pol/ criticism.
>>871004
>Unironically comparing an actual historian to John Green
>>871014
The book can be interpreted in racist ways actually. This naturally goes way over /pol/ heads though.
>>871014
Lefties think it's racist and /pol/cucks don't think it's racist enough.
>>871003
It focuses on a lot of important broad scale environmental and geographic factors, but it leaves out other important influences (and it was never intended to, but people get mad that it doesn't). His writing style is a bit dramatic too.
>>871009
>cultural uniformity
(contributes to a rapid spread of ideas and technologies; maintains a common law across nations; allows the control of a central authority)
Plus
>environmental determinism
(contributes to a large population; resources and domestication can contribute to trade and labor diversity; makes possible the establishment and expansion of a dense population singularity such as a city)
Would probably be a good combination to explain most of European dominance
>>870984
As a dildonist, you cannot convince me that this isn't the authoritative source on human history.
>>871014
How is it racist? It seems pretty fair towards the less successful societies.
>>871033
if only the other could do a second edition with these ideas. I'm personally a fan of the books. but these ideas, especially environmental determinism, while touched up lightly. aren't fully fleshed out.
>>871003
Both. There are plenty of problems with it, but /pol/ and its shills usually dumb it down to some shit about zebras.
Later in this thread somebody will probably post a screencap where a /pol/lack tries to refute all of Jared's arguments. The book is problems and a lot of critics, but that screencap is basically the single dumbest thing I have ever seen. The first time I saw it I had a kind of miniature existential crisis.
>>871071
You talkin about this? Got second hand cringe trying to read it kek
>>871038
Everything is racist when you talk about lack of succes of people of african descent.
>>871092
That isn't from /pol/ though.
>>871092
>Europe is isolated from Central Asia by the Alps
>Why didn't Europeans hunt horses, cows and sheep to extinction?
>Attila the Hun was the second greatest conqueror in history
>there could be no serious question of a non-European army successfully resisting an attack by a European army
It's not just the idiocy of this that horrifies me, it's the fact that it's posted so often by so many people who actually think any of the arguments it makes make any sense.
It hurts.
>>871092
>no significant cultural exchanges took place between these regions until the 15th century
WEW
>>871104
Where was it from? Please don't tell me it was from /his/
I just impulse bought the book to read. what am I actually in for from a /his/ perspective. not /pol/ memeing. I wonder what /k/ thinks about it.
>>870984
>As an agronomist
I doubt anyone can convince you of anything.
