New to /lit/
Is this a good book? I am thinking of ordering it on Amazon.
>>7895331
>>>catalog
>>7895331
Absolutely not
It's alright.
It's a bit too sweeping for it's own good, a style which has fallen out of favor, and towards the end it repeats itself quite a bit, but it's still a somewhat entertaining read.
>>7895331
Whites are only superior because of luck, goy.
Watch the tv documentary and save your reading time for something better. It might have some gems of insight but it's too narrative driven and the historical evidence is cherry-picked to support it.
Literally R-eddit: The Book
"look how smrt I am because I know that European Civ just happened by accident"
That book has been ripped to shreds
>>7895331
Academically it's so widely discredited that nobody even bothers ragging on it anymore, so if you're actually trying to learn something from it I wouldn't bother.
These kind of grand history narratives rarely work simply because the scale of what they're trying to do is beyond the reach of any single theory or viewpoint. The few grand narrative books like that are worth reading are usually syntheses and overviews of other theories.
>>7895736
what do you mean has fallen out of favor? if anything, global/world/big history is on the rise. unless you're referring to the change away from such history which happened literally over a 100 years ago...
>>7895331
Yeah it's not that good for a couple of different reasons. I recommend you pick up The Human Web (McNeill/McNeilll) instead. It has similar shortcomings inherent to these sweeping, theoretic, almost teleological works, but at least it's well researched and not shit :D
>>7895868
this is me
you could also read any work/essay on the great divergence (Mokyr/Pomeranz/even huntington)
>>7895921
lol
