/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22889084]

>geography is the most important factor in determining civilizational outcomes
Why is this book controversial? Have you even read it? The thesis could not be any more clear-eyed. What I don’t understand is how it is attacked from the left (under claims of “Eurocentricity”) and from the right (who feel it isn’t Eurocentric enough?”. I really can’t fucking understand it.

Europe conquered the world. This is a fact. Diamond takes this fact and works backwards to explain it. He is literally providing the thesis for WHY white Europeans are superior and yet some people read it to conclude “he’s saying white Europeans are nothing special”. NO: he is explaining WHY white Europeans are so special. Fuck me how can this book be so misunderstood?

[Anonymous No.22889103]

>>22889084

[Anonymous No.22889155]

>>22889103
He is right that geography is important. Europe would not be where it is if it didn't benefit from the cultural exchange happening in the Mediterranean after the bronze age collapse saw the end of the egyptians and assyrians as the dominant powers and gave rise to the greeks, phoenicians and romans as the new prominent players. Everything else can be derived from this principle. despite his claims about the superiority of hunter gatherers which can be ignored without loss of generality.

[Anonymous No.22889164]

>genetics has absolutely no effect whatsoever on humans despite the fact that different human populations have been separated by 80,000 years of divergent evolution and evolution has accelerated since then

[Anonymous No.22889168]

>>22889084
>doesn't blame whitey enough to appease race reductionists
>doesn't credit whitey enough to appease race realists
>gets lambasted by both sides
fence-sitters get what they deserve

[Anonymous No.22889171]

>>22889164
It all starts with GEOGRAPHY. You evolve to adapt to your ENVIRONMENT.

[Anonymous No.22889232]

>>22889084
Anon the problem is that Europe hardly has the best geography outside of maybe France, not only India and North America have much better geography in comparison but countries like Germany managed to become a world power with probably the worst geography possible

[Anonymous No.22889243]

>>22889232
Did you read the book?

[Anonymous No.22889257]

>>22889084
>Europe conquered the world
Spain and England*. The rest just watched or settled irrelevante shit

[Anonymous No.22889262]

>>22889243
Yes and it was shit, he believe in the fairy tales about an handful of Spanish knights defeating the Aztecs because of their armor despite in reality Cortez took over Mexico with a mix of diplomatic brilliance and tactical genius

[Anonymous No.22889284]

>>22889232
Geography means what this anon is arguing about >>22889155. Europe was not a political entity till after they started interacting with the mediterraneans at which geography had done all the heavy lifting for getting europeans ahead of everyone else.

[Anonymous No.22889315]

>>22889284
This theory would not explain why Sparta and Thebes which were isolationists land powers defeated Athens which was a naval power which monopolized commerce in the region

[Anonymous No.22889333]

>>22889315
Its not about small regional conflicts lmao, its about entire continental landmasses, all those you mentioned are essentially the same people with the same cultures. It explains why countries far away from the cradles of civilization never benefited from any prior cultural exchange.

[Anonymous No.22889336]

>>22889262
Disease was the Spaniards' greatest weapon (see: title, "Germs") and Diamond explains very clearly why Eurasians, with their developed cities and biodiversity, had a 'nuclear arsenal' of disease that the New World simply did not have access to.

[Anonymous No.22889358]

>>22889171
If herod diamondberg went to any length to explain how geography could influence differences in intelligence between ethnic groups this book would not be so popular among liberal arts students, so no I'm not reading this piece of shit, I know exactly what to expect because I've been tipped off.
>muh pygmies could actually be the most intelligent maybe probably!

[Anonymous No.22889364]

>>22889336
You underestimate the fact that Cortez literally convinced half of Mexico to switch to his side >>22889333
Anon when a Theory is proved wrong one time it means it is wrong.
History is complex and can not be summed up into a easy to digest narrative

[Anonymous No.22889368]

>>22889358
Thank you for admitting you haven’t read the book, now I need not consider your opinion.

[Anonymous No.22889374]

>>22889364
The goings-on of neighbouring city-states is completely irrelevant to the scale that Diamond is discussing. It is mystifying that you think Thebes beating Athens has absolutely anything to do with this theory.

[Anonymous No.22889376]

>>22889368
I'm happy you found a book that confirms your world view. If I can ask one favor, if you could just post that part about the pygmies for me? I know it's funnier when he says it.

[Anonymous No.22889379]

>>22889376
He’s discussing people on Papau New Guinea and it a very well reasoned argument, it’s at the front of the book. Read the book or don’t, I don’t care and I don’t take you seriously.

[Anonymous No.22889402]

>>22889379
>Once they turn seven or nine, they are taken away from their mothers. This process allows for the detachment of the boys from their mothers who it is believed to have contaminated blood. Women are also said to possess powers (tingu) that make them easily manipulate men. The woman’s tingu is reinforced every time she undergoes her menstrual circle. As such, there is a need to deliver these boys via a blood-letting ceremony.

>The blood-letting ceremony involves beating the boys with long sticks on their nostrils until they bleed. That way, the woman’s tingu is completely got rid of.

>Once this is done, he is made to perform fellatio on the older ones which they do not stop until they take in the semen because of the belief that “without this ‘male milk’ they will fail to mature properly.” it is believed that the semen contains “jurungdu” a substance that will make them stronger. More so, they are kept aside for three years and maintain a strict diet to make them stronger. Defiance against this from the boys usually involves death.

>Once they pass this stage, his father and kinsmen look for a wife for him. He has to wait until she has her first menstruation. While he awaits this, he is trained to disassociate himself from satisfying the woman fully because she might make him fall ill and die. When they marry, she must fellate him before sexual intercourse.

I'm sure it's a very compelling argument.

[Anonymous No.22889414]

>>22889379
No is required to take anyone seriously. NTA but that includes you as a subject.

[Anonymous No.22889420]

Libshittism capitalist bias.
[...] of the importance given by some scholars to geographical location. I will not repeat my arguments against this doctrine. I will not repeat that, if the locations of Alexandria, of Constantinople, were inevitably suitable to become major population centers, they would have stayed so and would remain so in all times, an allegation belied by the facts. Nor will I recall that, judging by this, nor Paris, neither London, nor Vienna, nor Berlin, nor Madrid, would have any title to be the famous leaders that these cities have all become, and that, in their place, we would have seen, from the birth of the first merchants, Cadiz or perhaps better Gibraltar, Alexandria much earlier than Tyre or Sidon, Constantinople to the eternal exclusion of Odessa, Venice, without hope for Trieste, to monopolize a natural supremacy, incommunicable, inalienable, indomitable, if I may use that word, and human history to revolve eternally around these pre-destined points. Indeed, the places of the Occident are the most favourably placed to serve traffic. But, and this is very happy, the world has other and greater interests than those of the commodity. It's affairs do not go at the whim of the economist sect. [...]

[Anonymous No.22889428]

>>22889420
I could also, after these questions, raise the question of fertility: nothing more useless. Holland tells us enough that the genius of a people overcomes everything, creates great cities in the water, makes a homeland on stilts, attracts gold and tributes from the universe on unproductive swamps. Venice proves even more: it says that, without any territory, not even a ma-recage, not even a moor, a state can be founded, which struggles for splendor with the largest and lives beyond the years granted to the most important.

[Anonymous No.22889559]

>>22889084
This book always struck me as an americanized, dumbed down version of Braudel.

[Anonymous No.22890188]

>>22889232
>India and North America have much better geography

You have no idea what you are talking about.

[Anonymous No.22890239]

>>22890188
Why didn't India conquer Britain if they were so greatly placed to fall in contact with Britain? India is older as a state than Britain.
Why didn't North America become a great nation of the world before it was discovered by English people?
Geographism is arbitrary bullshit.

[Anonymous No.22890245]

>>22889084
>>geography is the most important factor in determining civilizational outcomes
>Why is this book controversial?
Because predicating your entire argument on this one fact doesn't explain why Europe claimed world dominance. Because judging on geography alone, East Asia should have been the one to attain dominance. By every measure East Asia has more fertile land, the most calorie dense crops that supported massive populations, and amazing rivers like the Yangtze and Yellow rivers that facilitate trade and cultural exchange. Any by all measures, East Asia WAS superior to Europe for most of history. It was only until the Renaissance that Europe really kicked off, and it definitely was not due to their geography because otherwise they would have been benefiting from it from the very start.

Geography certainly helps a civilization, and bad geography most certainly handicaps others(like African elevation changing so drastically as you go inland, meaning rivers become waterfalls every so many miles, which makes it impossible to use them for trade), but you can't use this one factor to explain everything.

[Anonymous No.22890291]

>>22889171
Geography isn't the only factor that can lead to genetic differences. In India, Brahmins and Dalits have a large amount of genetic difference between them, despite physically living in the same area. Gypsies and Ashkenazi Jews are two other examples of populations that lived in the same area as other populations but remained genetically distinct. In Europe, bans on cousin marriage had a significant impact on reducing clannishness and contributing to the evolution of WEIRD psychology.

[Anonymous No.22890319]

>>22890291
>contributing to the evolution of WEIRD psychology

What do you mean by this? Banning cousin marriage should reduce the number of malformed freaks, not increase them.

[Anonymous No.22890674]

>>22890245
>geography is the most important factor i
>this one factor to explain everything.

You literally quoted one thing and then tried to claim that it said another thing. Nobody, not even Diamond, ever said geography explained everything.

[Anonymous No.22890701]

>>22889084
This book is so bad actual mainstream woke academics don't even take it seriously anymore

[Anonymous No.22891947]

>>22889084
historians are allergic to grand narratives for some reason

[Anonymous No.22892201]

>>22889374
>geography matters only at a scale that supports my retarded theory

[Anonymous No.22892244]

>>22889155
HIs point was that societies that got to high-density living largely selected for disease resistance while societies that didn't transition to high-density living kept selecting for hunting skills.

[Anonymous No.22892657]

>>22890319
it's an acronym that stands for western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic.

[Anonymous No.22892673]

>>22889084
diamond is a seething leftist faggot, get the geography argument from sowell he is based

[Anonymous No.22892675]

>>22890701
Remember when jared diamond said the greenland vikings died out because white people think they are too good to eat fish?

[Anonymous No.22892716]

afaik it's pretty well known that early civilizations developed exclusively around rivers, like the Nile and in mesopotamia. it wouldn't exclusively and necessarily explain everything though, why positivism like this is a brainturd.

[Anonymous No.22892760]

>>22890245
Slaves aren't freed so they don't vote, the slave owners represent the majority and it goes red as usual. But sure sediments and fertile soil is the reason of the election results. This is so dumb is not even fun.

[Anonymous No.22892801]

>>22892760
It's pretty clear anon lmao. The cretacious coastline had richer soil, all the big name plantations set up camp there, the slaves were brought in to work them, slaves get freed at the end of the civil war and remain mostly in place, and their descendants form the democratic-voting strip of Georgia in the modern day.

[Anonymous No.22892809]

>>22890245
Everyone was pretty much the same level until europe took off, except for africa and amerindians and inuits. Also medieval south east asia was arguably better off than east asia

[Anonymous No.22892815]

>>22892801
Read my message again instead of using "lmao" in your answer, keep the soil change the freeing of slaves what happen?

[Anonymous No.22892821]

>>22890245
It does and several comment itt have already this for you newfags who don't bother reading and just react like a hand retracting from a flame. Europe benefited from being next to two of the cradles of civilization around the mediterranean as opposed to places like india and china which were separated by the himalayas and didn't interact as easily as the civilizations around the med which only needed sea navigation.

[Anonymous No.22892872]

>>22892821
>Europe benefited from being next to two of the cradles of civilization around the mediterranean as opposed to places like india and china
But get this: what if Europe was one of those cradles of civilization that had a multi-thousand year head start and a much greater population to draw on? It wasn't, making the other more pathetic. China and India had such a massive population advantage they should have in if themselves been considered multiple cradles of civilization. And they had that because they had superior fertile rivers and crops and animals due to geography.

[Anonymous No.22893045]

>>22892872
They were cradles of civ on their own right but they were not as well connected as the lands around the med. That's the fucking point. Everything started in egypt and mesopotamia, then developed from there. The indus civ in india died off before they could transmit culture to china or any other neighbouring civ. The chinese civ was cut off to everything else by the himalayas and jungles of south asia.

[Anonymous No.22893051]

>>22889084
He bends over backwards to explain European exceptionalism without mentioning genes. It's stupid.

[Anonymous No.22893165]

>>22889084
Read a real history book

[Anonymous No.22893195]

>Intellectual shitting on Europeans and their achievement
>Celebrates the minor achievements of minorities
>Hmmm, i wonder
>Early life
>Every. Single. Fucking. Time.

[Anonymous No.22893200]

>>22892815
>>22892821
Can you learn how to speak english before trying to engage in arguments, you fucking troglodyte?

[Anonymous No.22893209]

Europe isn't that great. Yayy, they conquered two decaying empires in the Americas, yayy, they held meager power over the Africans, the Indians and the Chinese without changing their cultures or customs. Not like any of the latter two have never been in a dominant position towards their neighbours. Europe hasn't achieved much more in comparison. I hate it.

[Anonymous No.22893214]

>He is literally providing the thesis for WHY white Europeans are superior

He believes white Europeans ("Westerners") are intellectually inferior to New Guineans. It's right there in the book it's not hidden. Maybe I'm missing something, or he's joking, but it's always confused me how an unambiguous statement of racial superiority gets ignored by everyone who discusses this book.

[Anonymous No.22893226]

>>22893209
Europe surged ahead of everyone else just before the colonial era. It was probably due to the more decentralized power structures of europe, the renaissance came out of italy when it was just a bunch of city states, all great germans came before germany was a country, etc

[Anonymous No.22893227]

>>22893214
New Guineans are arguably the most inferior race of people on the planet. If the African niggers were fit for slavery, the New Guineans were fit for nothing. Literal useless savages.

[Anonymous No.22893229]

>>22893226
> uch a contest was taking place, because the Phoenicians offered occupation to everyone. The work of its ports, its factories, its caravans, required a lot of arms. Tyre and Sidon, besides being large maritime and commercial cities in the manner of London and Hamburg, were at the same time major industrial centres such as Liverpool and Birmingham; they became the evenings of the populations of earlier Asia, they occupied them all and they were transferring the overflow to the vast circle of their colonies.
Every. Single. Time.

[Anonymous No.22893239]

>>22893229
What

[Anonymous No.22893257]

>>22893239
You are pretending that colonialism is a European invention, wich it definetly is not, neither is trade.

[Anonymous No.22893275]

>>22893226
Decentralized power is only possible in a high (subjective) trust society with a good amount of able competent, local leadership. These people are only found in ethnic groups with a good base level intelligence. People keep putting the cart before the horse, all the reasons people claim for minority inferiority flow down from the source that is sub-standard intelligence.

[Anonymous No.22893318]

>>22893226
>Decentralized power never appeared in Europe until the late 17th Century

Come on, think before you type. I would not normally care but you explicitly singled out Germany, a nation that resisted unified rule longer than any other group in Europe. It had the longest tradition of decentralized rule that can be attested to from the Romans. It obviously had unified rule and was still powerful, more so than any nation in Europe.

Well done, your thesis of decentralized power causing greatness is wrong in theory and practice.

[Anonymous No.22893366]

>>22893257
No I am not, I don’t think anything about colonialism at all, I think it is an utterly irrelevant concept
>>22893275
idk, the soviets caused a lot of problems for africa during their revolutions. decentralization obviously does well for asians in the case of hong kong and in china and indias massive growth as they removed market controls.
>>22893318
I don’t understand what you are saying, are you saying decentralized germany was great and therefore disproves the thesis that decentralization causes greatness?

[Anonymous No.22893416]

>>22893366
>the soviets caused a lot of problems for africa during their revolutions
The Soviets had problems conducting an orchestra without a conductor on the basis of Marxist theory. This is not an argument against or for localized leadership but one against Communist style leadership wherein the world must conform to an ideology

>decentralization obviously does well for asians in the case of hong kong
The local holdover from British rule which has, as far as I am aware, never arose naturally in China or Asia to date? Yes, it has and now as China is erasing it to conform with Chinese style Communist rule, it will collapse.

>In china and indias massive growth as they removed market controls.
Market controls have only slight overlap with this topic.

[Anonymous No.22893875]

>>22889084
>Why is this book controversial?
Because it's so laughably bad. Diamond writes like an 11th grader. His "arguments" hold no weight.

>Have you even read it?
I couldn't get through it. I think I made it about 100 pages in and had to give up. Diamond's prose is juvenile at best and idiotic at worst. I remember one phrase of his where he compared horses racing across the steppes of Russia to tanks crushing their opposition. It was just plain silly. So silly that I laughed out loud. I put the book down after that.

[Anonymous No.22893905]

>>22893875
terrible post lol.

[γρηγορεύω No.22894038]

>>22889084
There is no such thing as pathogenic germs.

[Anonymous No.22894464]

>>22893875
>I couldn't get through it.

You probably got filtered

[Anonymous No.22894487]

>>22893227
they're at least pretty chill compared to the abos who ruined their own continent and ruin themselves worse than niggers

[Anonymous No.22894499]

>>22892821
Ah yes they benefitted so much that for a large part of history Europe was worse off than other places.

[Anonymous No.22896002]

>>22889084
>what is Rhodesia

[Anonymous No.22896007]

>>22890245
Europe also had a literal plague lol

[Anonymous No.22896019]

>>22893195
Europeans are the minority, that’s what frightens them. One drunk British bong has more genetic potential and worth than 6 billion + people on the planet. Virtually 99.9% of all political ideologies are meaningless when we bring in cold hard truths about genetics and their reason for why Europeans succeeded where others fail.

[Anonymous No.22896132]

>>22894499
No it wasn't. The knowledge revolution never left europe after the roman empire.

[Anonymous No.22896281]

>>22889084
I remember hearing about this in a vsauce video and seeing people bitch about it just makes me want to read it more.

[Anonymous No.22896329]

Kike bullshit.

[Anonymous No.22896404]

Geography probably did play a role, but trade and control of resources was more important. Did geography factor into that? Absolutely, but I think in terms of geography leading to the creation of civilization? Not really. After all the Norte Chico were a cradle of civilisation that sprang up in the desert and built their civilisation by fishing and bringing food inland. That's very different to Egypt where the nile provided massive amounts of resources. The utilization of resources seems to be more important.

[Anonymous No.22896406]

>>22896404
>control of resources
This doesn’t matter at all, there is nothing scarce enough to be both controlled and useful

[Anonymous No.22896407]

>>22896406
...except spices, obsidian, bronze, stone, pottery, grain and the dozens of other resources that were central to ancient trade, politics and civilisation.

[Anonymous No.22896410]

>>22896406
>>22896407
Lebanese timber for instant

[Anonymous No.22896413]

>>22896407
>control of grain, stone, and pottery
Do you even hear yourself, this notion of control of resources is a story you tell yourself to make the failures of history into victims. Control of resources is really meaningless, but trade isn’t, and the americas lacked trade due to killing all the horses in 10000 bc.

[Anonymous No.22896421]

>>22896413
>this notion of control of resources is a story you tell yourself to make the failures of history into victims.
But it also explains how certain civilisations succeeded. Civilisations that were able to leverage this advantage were the ones that were powerful.
>Control of resources is really meaningless, but trade isn’t, and the americas lacked trade due to killing all the horses in 10000 bc.
There was lots of trade in the Americas, really a lot.

[Anonymous No.22896492]

>>22896421
Nonsense, the sumerians didn’t control anything, and by your logic cornwall should have been the center of european civilization. And trade was definitely never very developed in the americas.

[Anonymous No.22896501]

>>22896404
Yes but geography started it all, why the fuck is such a simple conceptsso difficult for you retards to understand? Geography decided where the first civilizations started and how much cultural exchange happened. Case in point is the fertile crescent vs the indus and yellow river civs. If you go back to the most fundamental, most basic cause, you will always find geography, any attempt to go around it by focusing on some regional tribal conflict and trying to show that conflict does not depend on geography is typical midwit pedantry that misses the point of the argument. Geography comes first then culture follows.

[Anonymous No.22896615]

[Anonymous No.22896620]

>>22896501
Because leaving it up to geography is too rigid to explain why civilisations with bad geography still thrived
>fertile crescent vs the indus and yellow river civs
By this logic civilisation should never have sprung up anywhere else

[Anonymous No.22896761]

>>22896620
It didn't not as successfully as it did in these four. And it does explain everything, you are just asking the wrong questions. Like i keep repeating in this thread. Europeans are a direct consequence of the success of the fertile crescent as opposed to the less connected indus and china.

[Anonymous No.22896764]

>>22889103
How is a man from PNG dumber than the average industrial basedman that forms part of Western Civilization? I never understood why intelligence is correlated with "contributions to science" as that text explains. Also, it talks about Nobel shit as if it was a real measurement of science advancement when it is just a bunch of dudes voting for recognized academicians and sometimes politicians.

Overall a retarded text. Diamond is still wrong thoughverbeit.

[Anonymous No.22896778]

>>22896620
It didn't, least not as successfully as it did in these four. And it does explain everything, you are just asking the wrong questions. Like i keep repeating in this thread. Europeans are a direct consequence of the success of the fertile crescent as opposed to the less connected indus and china.

[Anonymous No.22896782]

>>22889084
It is just Braudel but repackaged with more "scientific" evidence. The fact that no one ever talks about Braudel in GG&S threads is evidence that nobody on /his/ or /pol/ actually read history.

[Anonymous No.22896817]

>>22896782
Why should I care about some commie

[Anonymous No.22896831]

>>22896817
I know this is a joke because everyone who has read a little bit of actual history, not just blog posts, wikipedia or pop history crap (like Diamond, Yuval Noah, etc) knows who Braudel is. No wonder why this board is a shithole.

[Anonymous No.22896832]

>>22890239
> India is older as a state than Britain.
No its not. The British created the state of India.

[Anonymous No.22896944]

>>22889084
>He is literally providing the thesis for WHY white Europeans are superior
If that was your takeaway you’re very stupid. If European dominance was historically contingent on natural factors outside human control (which it was) rather than based on some sort of European cultural or genetic superiority, then Europeans are simply lucky, not special. This correct reading of history offends the mediocre man, whose only pride is the cheapest sort he can get. It is deeply ideologically offensive to him, and therefore he asserts that it must be wrong, and develops elaborate copes about genetics and IQ so that he might once again comfort himself in his baby blanket of supposed European superiority.

[Anonymous No.22896952]

>>22896831
I am doing the best I can despite not going to school or having social media or ever talking to anybody at all

[Anonymous No.22896988]

>>22896944
>rather than based on some sort of European cultural or genetic superiority, then Europeans are simply lucky
Huh? HUH??? The relevant and very real genetic differences are in large part due to geography-dependent selection or random genetic drift. I swear you /lit/cels make proclamations of the most stunning stupidity.

[Anonymous No.22897005]

Europeans weren't the only ones who founded gigantic empires. China, India, Persia, the Mongols have all done it too. I don't debate that Europeans didn't achieve a lot during the 18th and 19th Century, I highly doubt that it's consequences have been more than mediocre. Most nations of the world have already copied their technologies. Every retard nowadays owns a smartphone and a car.

[Anonymous No.22897023]

>>22896988
>>22896988
>relevant and very real genetic differences
There are none. Maybe the ability to digest lactase? That’s not unique to Europeans though, nor is it why they came to take over the world. European dominance is largely the accidental result of Europe both
a) reaching the Americas
and
b) being able to conquer the Americas
Geography, economy, and the struggle for continental power pushed European states to accidentally accomplish A (while trying to establish new trade routes to Asia). B was made possible by the titular Guns, Germs, and Steel, which to clarify does involve some genetics (resistance to disease) but not genetics unique to Europe (other old world populations outside Europe also domesticated animals, lived through the Black Death, etc). Non-genetic factors were much more important.

[Anonymous No.22897034]

>>22897023
Whites are more energetic than non-whites.

[Anonymous No.22897113]

>>22897023
>There are none
>uhm ackshually evolution stops at the neck up
Mate, a few minutes ago you thought there was a relevant distinction between genetics, luck, and geography, which betrays a complete lack of a mental model of how genetics works. Consider that you are talking out of your ass, and read a paper and a book. If you are underage and are still salvageable, that is. If not, I am sorry you have to be a halfwit.

[Anonymous No.22897299]

>>22897113
A decent number of people aren't aware that a number of lefty talking points have been proven completely wrong in recent decades, and still labor under delusions of malleable minds. It's only recently percolated into the zeitgeist that contrary to misanthropic memes humans are not the only species that engages in war out of some unusual malice, for example, and that's been known for decades. The man isn't up to date on the literature and still believes post-war lefty cope that developed in response to 19th century white supremacy and the holocaust.

[Anonymous No.22897316]

>>22897299

[Anonymous No.22897406]

>>22893905
No. I'm spot on. Diamond's book sucks.
>>22894464
I filtered myself. Diamond's book is terrible and he's a horrible writer. The only reason his book was popular was because he's Jewish so had an inside publishing track and he bashes White people.

[Anonymous No.22897524]

>>22897023
>digest lactase
Lactase is the enzyme that helps you digest lactose, you idiot.

[Anonymous No.22897826]

>>22896944
>Europeans are lucky/special for thousands upon thousands of years
>This does not impact the people themselves in any tangible way
xddd

[Anonymous No.22897837]

>>22889084
> Europe conquered the world. This is a fact
Kys.

[Anonymous No.22897845]

It got deboonked by alt-hype
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFECyeihuZY

[Anonymous No.22897967]

>>22894487
Or it's simply harder to burn a jungle down and keep it there in that climate. Same as the still forested areas of Australia.

[Anonymous No.22897988]

>>22896944
>Geography informs every trait humans have, height, size, skin color, strength, stamina and more
>Except intelligence
>This is not a closed cycle at all
>Geography does not influence intelligence which in turn does not influence geography which does not in turn influence intelligence again

I would no more take seriously Schopenhauer's opinions on nationalism than I would a feminist of masculinity for the same reason.

[Anonymous No.22898217]

>>22893227

You don't even know what you're talking. Did you read the book? Diamond clearly explained that they are extremely intelligent, more intelligent than even him (and he's a Jew with a Harvard degree).

[Anonymous No.22898447]

>>22891947
It’s difficult to do. The approaches and framework fall apart easier when a timeframe of study is wide.

[Anonymous No.22898465]

>>22896764
>I never understood why intelligence is correlated with "contributions to science"
What is there not to understand? (Actual) Research and "science" always serve to create more effective solutions to existing problems. It's problem-solving on an advanced level. Just as a guy who figures out that it's easier to kill an animal with a pointy stick is smarter than somebody who keeps using his bare hands, a person who figures out it's easier to use steam engines than an Ox is smarter than the latter. Invention indicates advanced problem-solving abilities and, thus, intelligence. Therefore, a society that encourages and has more of this advanced problem-solving is superior to one that doesn't, intellectually speaking.

[Anonymous No.22898613]

Are there any actual good books on the origins of man and civilization? Every book I see like this or Sapiens gets torn to shreds. What books do the people who actually study this stuff read?

[Anonymous No.22898639]

>>22889084
europeans are just as special no matter where they set up though. Colonialism proves this. Rhodesia, South Africa, etc. etc. What are you even claiming about geography? On what scale does it supposedly determine how special people are. If it's on an evolutionary scale then the conclusions are literal Nazi master race tier. If it means on a minute scale then it's obviously false.

[Anonymous No.22898645]

>>22898613
they aren't books so much as papers/studies. Look up "the multi-regional hypothesis of human origin" but really it's just not that complex of a subject. Think about it - these people are smart, these people aren't, the smart ones came from here the dumb ones came from here.
There ain't that much to say.

[Anonymous No.22898657]

The Magic Dirt Theory needs to be put to the test. Okay, let's take the Somalis and the Swiss and teleport them to the others' homelands. Surely in a thousand years we'll see that they have traded places.

[Anonymous No.22898673]

>>22898613
>Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West.
Despite it's poorly translated/selected name, it outlines a theory that has played out several times in our global history on the mechanisms that create, form and maintain a Culture and Civilization. Both of these have capital letters and refer to very specific things in Spengler's writing. Would recommend it.

>Francis Parker Yockey, Imperium: The Philosophy of History and Politics
A gifted author who combines Spengler, Schmitt and Carlyle (and a few others) into a easily understandable whole. Discusses why we ought to prevent the oncoming decline in the West and what may be done to address it. Strongly recommend it.

[Anonymous No.22898974]

>>22898657

It doesn't work like that. If you go BACK ten thousand years and have them switch places then you would see that the Swiss will have done no better in Somalia than the Somalis did.

[Anonymous No.22899039]

>>22890291
>Brahmins and Dalits have a large amount of genetic difference between them
Brahmins always tell me that, but they all look and act Indian to me.

[Anonymous No.22899086]

>>22892675
He isn't that retarded, is he?

[Anonymous No.22899089]

>>22893165
Is this actually good and relevant? Asking for a friend.

[Anonymous No.22899091]

>Wisely entendre book is controversial
oy gevalt

[Anonymous No.22899896]

>>22898613
>books on the origins of man
>What books do the people who actually study this stuff read?
I feel like you didn't ask the question you wanted to ask. So, to answer the question you wanted to ask: David Reich, "Who We Are and How We Got Here"—note though, parts of it were already out-of-date at the time of publication through no fault of Reich's; the field moves quickly.
>and civilization
"Blueprint" by Robert Plomin, "The Science of Human Intelligence" by Richard Haier.

To answer the question you did ask:

• Texts on large-data, Bayesian statistics such as "Statistical Rethinking" by Richard McElreath and "Computer-Age Statistical Inference" by Efron & Hastie. Incidentally, here is a lecture by McElreath on studying human phylogenies with statistics: https://youtu.be/Wu0hAjlMqUQ..
• Any conventional 20th-century genetics text such as "Principles of Population Genetics" by Hartl & Clark. Additionally, something on the theory of the coalescent used in 21st-century genetics, such as the introduction by Wakeley. Combinatorics is something of a prerequisite for coalescent theory.
• Domain-specific statistics, such as the chapters on phylogenetic inference in the "Handbook of Statistical Genetics," "Computational Genome Analysis" &c.
• Tons of papers and preprints to get to the cutting edge, "detecting archaic admixture," "phylogenetic inference methods" &c.
• Be employed by David Reich's lab if you are American, or Eske Willerslev's lab if you are European.

[Anonymous No.22899932]

>>22899086
There is a legitimately rabid hatred of whites in academia