Rich countries are the Predators and Poor countries are the Prey, Do you agree?

[Ecurb]

Maybe greater minds have but the three you cited by name, Wade Davis professor at U of British Columbia for 8 years, David Graeber an assistant professor at Yale for 7 years but wasn't able to obtain tenure and was dismissed, later obtained a post at the London School of Economics and David Wengrow professor at University College London for 10 years are, at best contemporaries, not superiors to Professor Diamond who has been a professor at UCLA for over 50 years.

As to the concepts in Guns, Germs and Steel, your Wade quote is from a review of a different publication of Diamond's (The World Until Yesterday).

I have no problem with Jared Diamond's credentials -- although doubtless some of the enmity toward him eminating from anthropological circles is based on jealousy for his fame and wealth and objections to his poaching in anthropological hunting grounds (Diamond is not trained in anthropology). It's his theories of which I disaprove.

Diamond is one of the leading celebrity intellectuals around today. His facile approach to history appeals to the public because it appears to be anti-racist, and offers a supposedly "scientific" approach to human cultural development. But anthropologists object because he culls his data carefully. I read "Guns, Germs and Steel" when it came out a couple of decades ago, and I'm not prepared to dig back into it to unearth mistakes and over-simplifications. The book I'm reading now (by Graeber and Wengrow) offers some critiques,and as I get to them (it's slow going) perhaps I'll comment. One critique I remember is that he down-plays the assistance to Cortez and Pizarro lent by Native Americans, trying to shed the shackles of their oppressors (only, of course, to be oppressed by others). Politics was as important as guns, germs and steel in Conquistador victories.

Wade Davis is, like Diamond, a public intellectual who has written several best-selling books (although not massive hits like "Guns"). He's also controversial, but I think he's an excellent writer. I'm into mountaineering, so I read his book about Mallory and Everest. Diamond is also a good writer, although he's a bit too sure of himself for my taste. Graeber and Wengrow (and I) think ideas are important, as are the cultural practices that disseminate them. For Neo-Marxists (and Diamond) trade of goods leads to travel and the sharing of ideas, and conquest is the inevitable product of guns and steel. Graeber points out that in indigenous America, "long-distance interactions spheres" were often the result not of trade, nor warfare, but of dream and vision quests, of travelling healers and entertainers, and of gambling (they show how shells from the East Coast made their way to the West Coast through gambling games). Similarly (as I pointed out earlier) contact was made for religious and cultural reasons, and the French Priests who travelled to spread the Word and wrote books about the people they met probably influenced Native ideas, and certainly (acc. Graeber) influenced European ideas about individual rights and freedoms.

Philosophy is important, they suggest! I agree.

Here's a link to an article outlining some of the criticisms of Diamond's work:

https://www.livinganthropologically.com ... d-diamond/

[Slavedevice]

It would take a new Religion or Morality to change this (Christianity certainly has a poor record resolving this). I don’t feel that humans will ever be completely equal. But exploitation and wage slavery must be reduced.

[Sculptor1]

It would take a new Religion or Morality to change this (Christianity certainly has a poor record resolving this). I don’t feel that humans will ever be completely equal. But exploitation and wage slavery must be reduced.

Christianity is the cause of it. As the dominant ideology between 340AD to at least 1900AD, oit formed the basis of all slave morality and justification of exploitation.
The wealthy are seen as blessed by god, and so the poor are deserving of their fate and are lucky enough to recieve such largesse as the rich as willing to bestow upon them.
Socialism did make some in roads into this process of expliotation in the 20thC but has been dengrated by the elites and the minions have been only too willing to toe the line and accept the analysis.
I fear that all the progress made by unions, fair wage law, public schooling, public health, minimum wage law, workers rights, health and safety is all being washed away in a frenzied rush to the bottom.

[Belindi]

It would take a new Religion or Morality to change this (Christianity certainly has a poor record resolving this). I don’t feel that humans will ever be completely equal. But exploitation and wage slavery must be reduced.

Christianity is the cause of it. As the dominant ideology between 340AD to at least 1900AD, oit formed the basis of all slave morality and justification of exploitation.
The wealthy are seen as blessed by god, and so the poor are deserving of their fate and are lucky enough to recieve such largesse as the rich as willing to bestow upon them.
Socialism did make some in roads into this process of expliotation in the 20thC but has been dengrated by the elites and the minions have been only too willing to toe the line and accept the analysis.
I fear that all the progress made by unions, fair wage law, public schooling, public health, minimum wage law, workers rights, health and safety is all being washed away in a frenzied rush to the bottom.

Christianity has been politicised since it went public. Naturally the ever- present powerful elite would put their own spin on what God decreed.

The Gospels show without any reasonable doubt that Christianity is a religion for the poor, the down- trodden and the obscure.

You are wise to fear what you say you fear. Jesus brought a sword.

[Greatest I am]

Belindi

That is to be the two edged sword of debate and discussion. Right?

Regards
DL

[Slavedevice]

Capitalism is the Male force and Socialism is the Female force. They work when they are in BALANCE! When one force is outta control things get chaotic. When you see the world through pagan eyes, the problem becomes a bit more clear. It’s really simple - we need far fewer humans on earth (devouring resources and polluting) AND the humans on earth need to work TOGETHER instead of taking advantage of each other.

[Pattern-chaser]

It would take a new Religion or Morality to change this (Christianity certainly has a poor record resolving this). I don’t feel that humans will ever be completely equal. But exploitation and wage slavery must be reduced.

Christianity is the cause of it. As the dominant ideology between 340AD to at least 1900AD...

...only in those countries and areas where it caught on. There were and are other religions beside Christianity.

[Greatest I am]

All religions recognize Jesus to some degree.

All preach for compassion and the Golden Rule.

Sure, Jesus and Christianity preached nothing new and just mimicked Sumerian and Egyptian themes, accepted theologies.

That is why it took off and was good until the supernatural spoiled the soup.

I have some comparative religion links showing most religions venerating Jesus.

I do the same for the Gnostic Jesus, while showing the evils in the Roman Jesus.

I like the Jewish Jesus. I hate the immoral Roman Jesus.

Armageddon makes Jesus genocidal like his vile father.

Regards
DL

[GE Morton]

Here's a link to an article outlining some of the criticisms of Diamond's work:

https://www.livinganthropologically.com ... d-diamond/

Great link, squarely on topic and well worth perusing, as are some of the additional links within that one. Methinks, however, that Antrosio's complaint that Diamond neglects human agency in favor of environmental determinism is idle. Neither environmental differences nor differences in agency (which were not all that different between Europeans and New World natives) suffice to answer "Yali's Question."

More thoughts later.

[Sculptor1]

It would take a new Religion or Morality to change this (Christianity certainly has a poor record resolving this). I don’t feel that humans will ever be completely equal. But exploitation and wage slavery must be reduced.

Christianity is the cause of it. As the dominant ideology between 340AD to at least 1900AD...

...only in those countries and areas where it caught on. There were and are other religions beside Christianity.

Obviously!
But you and I and everyone on the Forum is from some part of that Sphere of power; mostly ex-British empire, and with the exception of the middle east which has its own version of the Messianic ideology, and China, Christianity had the say up to the end of that timeline.
In each case the notion behind the Thread is asserted wordlwide except China which is, it itself and example of it too but with a more ancient provenance.
So did you have a point to make here?

[Ecurb]

Here's a link to an article outlining some of the criticisms of Diamond's work:

https://www.livinganthropologically.com ... d-diamond/

Great link, squarely on topic and well worth perusing, as are some of the additional links within that one. Methinks, however, that Antrosio's complaint that Diamond neglects human agency in favor of environmental determinism is idle. Neither environmental differences nor differences in agency (which were not all that different between Europeans and New World natives) suffice to answer "Yali's Question."

More thoughts later.

Yali's question:
“Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?”

The Native Americans featured in popular "dialogues" written by Europeans (French, mainly) in the 15th and 16th centuries would have answered: "Europeans are obsessed with wealth and money. We don't know why. It seems ridiculous." Whether the Indians were right about the reason for all that cargo is, of course, another question.

Max Weber addressed the issue in The Protestent Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

There can be little doubt that capitalism, enlightenment liberalism, Protestantism, a scientific world-view, and human wealth and material well-being all arose together. in the last several hundred years. Whether we can credit one of these "isms" over the others is problematic. In addition, we must wonder whether better health, wealth, and security has increased human joy and happiness. Perhaps the Walls religion built to control such happiness in the Middle Ages suggest joyful people, and the "self help" books of today, trying to teach people how to be happy, may suggest a lack of joy.

[GE Morton]

Yali's question:
“Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?”

The Native Americans featured in popular "dialogues" written by Europeans (French, mainly) in the 15th and 16th centuries would have answered: "Europeans are obsessed with wealth and money. We don't know why. It seems ridiculous." Whether the Indians were right about the reason for all that cargo is, of course, another question.

Those alleged Native sentiments are more likely the products of Dominican and Franciscan priests, interpreting their informants' questions and comments through their own mendicant doctrines (if not inventing them de novo). In any case, they were hardly universal among New World natives; the Aztecs and Incas coveted wealth and power as greedily and brutally as any European potentates. In N. America the Comanches were no angels either.

There can be little doubt that capitalism, enlightenment liberalism, Protestantism, a scientific world-view, and human wealth and material well-being all arose together. in the last several hundred years. Whether we can credit one of these "isms" over the others is problematic.

"Capitalism" (i.e., a free economy) is entailed by liberalism. Protestantism contributed by fragmenting Christianity, thereby weakening the authority of the Catholic Church and in some cases embracing liberalism, which in turn allowed the development of empirical science by freeing it from suppression as "heresy."

In addition, we must wonder whether better health, wealth, and security has increased human joy and happiness. Perhaps the Walls religion built to control such happiness in the Middle Ages suggest joyful people, and the "self help" books of today, trying to teach people how to be happy, may suggest a lack of joy.

Since joy and happiness are unquantifiable, that question is meaningless.

The thrust of Yali's question is broader than "cargo" (which we may assume means "wealth"). It is, "Why are Europeans building ships, exploring the world, inventing machines, guns, writing, etc., and not us New Guineans" (or Africans or aboriginals or Tlingit)?

[Sy Borg]

In addition, we must wonder whether better health, wealth, and security has increased human joy and happiness. Perhaps the Walls religion built to control such happiness in the Middle Ages suggest joyful people, and the "self help" books of today, trying to teach people how to be happy, may suggest a lack of joy.

Since joy and happiness are unquantifiable, that question is meaningless.

The thrust of Yali's question is broader than "cargo" (which we may assume means "wealth"). It is, "Why are Europeans building ships, exploring the world, inventing machines, guns, writing, etc., and not us New Guineans" (or Africans or aboriginals or Tlingit)?

I think Ecurb's question has meaning. Consider Dan Gilbert's findings on relative happiness when one has choices and when one doesn't: https://youtu.be/4q1dgn_C0AU?t=827

Simply, when we have no choice, we tend to accept the situation and move on. When we have choices, we have doubts and may fear judgement for our choices.

[Pattern-chaser]

It would take a new Religion or Morality to change this (Christianity certainly has a poor record resolving this). I don’t feel that humans will ever be completely equal. But exploitation and wage slavery must be reduced.

Christianity is the cause of it. As the dominant ideology between 340AD to at least 1900AD...

...only in those countries and areas where it caught on. There were and are other religions beside Christianity.

Obviously!
But you and I and everyone on the Forum is from some part of that Sphere of power; mostly ex-British empire, and with the exception of the middle east which has its own version of the Messianic ideology, and China, Christianity had the say up to the end of that timeline.
In each case the notion behind the Thread is asserted wordlwide except China which is, it itself and example of it too but with a more ancient provenance.
So did you have a point to make here?

Yes - the common assumption in that "Sphere of power" that religion = Christianity. There are many religions, with many and varied traditions. Christianity is just one of many. Would you always say "Ford" when you meant "car"?

[Sculptor1]

It would take a new Religion or Morality to change this (Christianity certainly has a poor record resolving this). I don’t feel that humans will ever be completely equal. But exploitation and wage slavery must be reduced.

Christianity is the cause of it. As the dominant ideology between 340AD to at least 1900AD...

...only in those countries and areas where it caught on. There were and are other religions beside Christianity.

Obviously!
But you and I and everyone on the Forum is from some part of that Sphere of power; mostly ex-British empire, and with the exception of the middle east which has its own version of the Messianic ideology, and China, Christianity had the say up to the end of that timeline.
In each case the notion behind the Thread is asserted wordlwide except China which is, it itself and example of it too but with a more ancient provenance.
So did you have a point to make here?

Yes - the common assumption in that "Sphere of power" that religion = Christianity. There are many religions, with many and varied traditions. Christianity is just one of many. Would you always say "Ford" when you meant "car"?

How many people say "hoover" when they mean vacuum cleaner.
In the case of say, India, the fact that it was primarily Hindu was not inportant in the fact that the British Empire was exactly the rich country predating the poor one.
You can pretty much add all African "possessions" by Britian, Portugal and France in tot the Christian countries dominating there too. All the Americas are Christian dominations. There really only remains China, in the world, not dominated by the Abrahamic religions, but Christianity is the main deal here.