2 ms·
Yeah my recommendation isn't because I think it's a fair and balanced viewpoint, but that it provides a much-needed perspective. It shouldn't be the ONLY book
by chubot 4y ago
Yeah my recommendation isn't because I think it's a fair and balanced viewpoint, but that it provides a much-needed perspective. It shouldn't be the ONLY book you read about such issues. I also like Guns, Germs, and Steel, which the authors have criticized (mostly respectfully).
There are many things about human history that we simply don't know, and triangulating between experts with very different viewpoints is a good way to get closer to the truth, or at least make you think.
A key point is that human history is hundreds of thousands of years long, and for many periods of hundreds/thousands of years, we only have 1 or 2 artifacts. And the world is very big. Entire civilizations with complex social structures have come and gone with little trace, and many of them lasted longer than the United States or the modern governments of Russia or China. (Obviously 20th century growth rates make that comparison hard, but it's still worth thinking about)
Also, I would say that DoE is better at criticism than at making claims, or providing a concrete path toward more egalitarian societies. It's responding somewhat to "big history" books, so it's probably better to read those first.
- carapace 4y agoI'm sympathetic to the arguments presented in the book, my complaint is that it's "preaching to the choir" too much. I think it would be a stronger book if it was less polemical. I think it's fascinating and important that Native lifestyles were preferable to European/American lifestyles. That extended quote from Franklin raises some very salient questions, IMO.