http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/30/books/review/30EASTERB.html?oref=log
in&oref=login


http://tinyurl.com/47hvq


EIGHT years ago Jared Diamond realized what is, for authors,
increasingly a fantasy -- he published a serious, challenging and
complex book that became a huge commercial success. ''Guns, Germs, and
Steel'' won a Pulitzer Prize, then sold a million copies, astonishing
for a 480-page volume of archeological speculation on how the world
reached its present ordering of nations. Now he has written a sequel,
''Collapse,'' which asks whether present nations can last. Taken
together, ''Guns, Germs, and Steel'' and ''Collapse'' represent one of
the most significant projects embarked upon by any intellectual of our
generation. They are magnificent books: extraordinary in erudition and
originality, compelling in their ability to relate the digitized
pandemonium of the present to the hushed agrarian sunrises of the far
past. I read both thinking what literature might be like if every
author knew so much, wrote so clearly and formed arguments with such
care. All of which makes the two books exasperating, because both come
to conclusions that are probably wrong.
''Guns'' asked why the West is atop the food chain of nations. Its
conclusion, that Western success was a coincidence driven by good
luck, has proven extremely influential in academia, as the view is
quintessentially postmodern. Now ''Collapse'' posits that the Western
way of life is flirting with the sudden ruin that caused past
societies like the Anasazi and the Mayans to vanish. Because this
view, too, is exactly what postmodernism longs to hear, ''Collapse''
may prove influential as well.

Born in Boston in 1937, Diamond is a professor of geography at the
University of California, Los Angeles. Initially he specialized in
conservation biology, studying bird diversity in New Guinea; in 1985
he won one of the early MacArthur ''genius grants.'' Gradually he
began to wonder why societies of the western Pacific islands never
developed the metallurgy, farming techniques or industrial production
of Eurasia. Diamond also studied the application of natural-selection
theory to physiology, and in 1999 received a National Medal of Science
for that work, which is partly reflected in his book ''Why Is Sex
Fun?'' (Sex is fun; the book is serious.) Today Diamond often returns
to the Pacific rim, especially Australia, where in the outback one may
still hear the rustle of distant animal cries just as our forebears
heard them in the far past.

''Collapse'' may be read alone, but begins where ''Guns, Germs, and
Steel'' ended: essentially the two form a single 1,000-page book. The
thesis of the first part is that environmental coincidences are the
principal factor in human history. Diamond contends it was chance, not
culture or brainpower, that brought industrial power first to Europe;
Western civilization has nothing to boast about.

Many arguments in ''Guns'' were dazzling. Diamond showed, for example,
that as the last ice age ended, by chance Eurasia held many plants
that could be bred for controlled farming. The Americas had few edible
plants suitable for cross-breeding, while Africa had poor soil owing
to the millions of years since it had been glaciated. Thus large-scale
food production began first in the Fertile Crescent, China and Europe.
Population in those places rose, and that meant lots of people living
close together, which accelerated invention; in other locations the
low-population hunter-gatherer lifestyle of antiquity remained in
place. ''Guns'' contends the fundamental reason Europe of the middle
period could send sailing ships to explore the Americas and Africa,
rather than these areas sending sailing ships to explore Europe, is
that ancient happenstance involving plants gave Europe a food edge
that translated into a head start on technology. Then, the moment
European societies forged steel and fashioned guns, they acquired a
runaway advantage no hunter-gatherer society could possibly counter.

Also, as the ice age ended, Eurasia was home to large mammals that
could be domesticated, while most parts of the globe were not. In
early history, animals were power: huge advantages were granted by
having cattle for meat and milk, horses and elephants for war.
Horses -- snarling devil-monsters to the Inca -- were a reason 169
Spaniards could kill thousands of Incas at the battle of Cajamarca in
1532, for example. ''Rhino-mounted Bantu shock troops could have
overthrown the Roman Empire,'' Diamond speculates, but the rhino and
other large mammals of Africa defied domestication, leaving that
continent at a competitive disadvantage.

Large populations and the fact that Eurasians lived among domesticated
animals meant Europe was rife with sicknesses to which the survivors
acquired immunity. When Europeans began to explore other lands, their
microbes wiped out indigenous populations, easing conquest. Almost all
variations in societies, Diamond concludes, are caused not by
societies themselves but by ''differences in their environments''; the
last 500 years of rising power for the West ''has its ultimate roots
in developments between about 11,000 B.C. and A.D. 1,'' the deck
always stacked in Europe's favor.

In this respect, ''Guns, Germs, and Steel'' is pure political
correctness, and its P.C. quotient was a reason the book won praise.
But the book must not be dismissed because it is P.C.: sometimes
politically correct is, after all, correct. The flaws of the work are
more subtle, and they set the stage for ''Collapse.'' One flaw was
that Diamond argued mainly from the archaeological record -- a record
that is a haphazard artifact of items that just happened to survive.
We know precious little about what was going on in 11,000 B.C., and
much of what we think we know is inferential. It may be decades or
centuries until we understand human prehistory, if we ever do.

Diamond's analysis discounts culture and human thought as forces in
history; culture, especially, is seen as a side effect of environment.
The big problem with this view is explaining why China -- which around
the year 1000 was significantly ahead of Europe in development, and
possessed similar advantages in animals and plants -- fell behind.
This happened, Diamond says, because China adopted a single-ruler
society that banned change. True, but how did environment or animal
husbandry dictate this? China's embrace of a change-resistant society
was a cultural phenomenon. During the same period China was adopting
centrally regimented life, Europe was roiled by the idea of
individualism. Individualism proved a potent force, a source of power,
invention and motivation. Yet Diamond considers ideas to be nearly
irrelevant, compared with microbes and prevailing winds. Supply the
right environmental conditions, and inevitably there will be a factory
manufacturing jet engines.

Many thinkers have attempted single-explanation theories for history.
Such attempts hold innate appeal -- wouldn't it be great if there were
a single explanation! -- but have a poor track record. My guess is
that despite its conspicuous brilliance, ''Guns, Germs, and Steel''
will eventually be viewed as a drastic oversimplification. Its
arguments come perilously close to determinism, and it is hard to
believe that the world is as it is because it had to be that way.

Diamond ended his 1997 book by supposing, ''The challenge now is to
develop human history as a science.'' That is what ''Collapse''
attempts -- to use history as a science to forecast whether the
current world order will fail. To research his new book, Diamond
traveled to the scenes of vanished societies like Easter Island, Norse
Greenland, the Anasazi, the Mayans. He must have put enormous effort
into ''Collapse,'' and his willingness to do so after achieving wealth
and literary celebrity -- surely publishers would have taken anything
he dashed off -- speaks well of his dedication.

''Collapse'' spends considerable pages contemplating past life on
Easter Island, as well as on Pitcairn and Henderson islands, and on
Greenland, an island. Deforestation, the book shows, was a greater
factor in the breakdown of societies in these places than commonly
understood. Because trees take so long to regrow, deforestation has
more severe consequences than crop failure, and can trigger disastrous
erosion. Centuries ago, the deforestation of Easter Island allowed
wind to blow off the island's thin topsoil: ''starvation, a population
crash and a descent into cannibalism'' followed, leaving those
haunting statues for Europeans to find. Climate change and
deforestation that set off soil loss, Diamond shows, were leading
causes of the Anasazi and Mayan declines. ''Collapse'' reminds us that
like fossil fuels, soil is a resource that took millions of years to
accumulate and that humanity now races through: Diamond estimates
current global soil loss at 10 to 40 times the rate of soil formation.
Deforestation ''was a or the major factor'' in all the collapsed
societies he describes, while climate change was a recurring menace.

How much do Diamond's case studies bear on current events? He writes
mainly about isolated islands and pretechnology populations. Imagine
the conditions when Erik the Red founded his colony on frigid
Greenland in 984 -- if something went wrong, the jig was up. As
isolated systems, islands are more vulnerable than continents. Most
dire warnings about species extinction, for example, are estimates
drawn from studies of island ecologies, where a stressed species may
have no place to retreat to. ''Collapse'' declares that ''a large
fraction'' of the world's species may fall extinct in the next 50
years, which is the kind of conclusion favored by biologists who base
their research on islands. But most species don't live on islands. The
International Union for the Conservation of Nature, the leading
authority on biodiversity, estimates that about 9 percent of the
world's vertebrate species are imperiled. That's plenty bad enough,
but does not support the idea that a ''large fraction'' of species are
poised to vanish. Like most species, most people do not live on
islands, yet ''Collapse'' tries to generalize from environmental
failures on isolated islands to environmental threats to society as a
whole.

Diamond rightly warns of alarming trends in biodiversity, soil loss,
freshwater limits (China is depleting its aquifers at a breakneck
rate), overfishing (much of the developing world relies on the oceans
for protein) and climate change (there is a strong scientific
consensus that future warming could be dangerous). These and other
trends may lead to a global crash: ''Our world society is presently on
a nonsustainable course.'' The West, especially, is in peril: ''The
prosperity that the First World enjoys at present is based on spending
down its environmental capital.'' Calamity could come quickly: ''A
society's steep decline may begin only a decade or two after the
society reaches its peak numbers, wealth and power.''

Because population pressure played a prominent role in the collapses
of some past societies, Diamond especially fears population growth.
Owing to sheer numbers it is an ''impossibility'' that the developing
world will ever reach Western living standards. Some projections
suggest the globe's population, now about 6 billion, may peak at about
8.5 billion. To Diamond, this is a nightmare scenario: defenders of
population growth ''nonchalantly'' mention ''adding 'only' 2.5 billion
more people . . . as if that were acceptable.'' Population growth has
made Los Angeles ''less appealing,'' especially owing to traffic: ''I
have never met an Angeleno (and very few people anywhere in the world)
who personally expressed a desire for increased population.'' About
the only nonaboriginal society Diamond has kind words for is pre-Meiji
Japan, where population control was strictly enforced. But wait --
pre-Meiji Japan collapsed!

If 2.5 billion more people are not ''acceptable,'' how, exactly, would
Diamond prevent their births? He does not say. Nuclear war, plague, a
comet strike or coerced mass sterilizations seem the only forces that
might stop the human population from rising to its predicted peak.
Everyone dislikes traffic jams and other aspects of population
density, but people are here and cannot be wished away; the challenge
is to manage social pressure and create enough jobs until the
population peak arrives. And is it really an ''impossibility'' for
developing-world living standards to reach the Western level? A
century ago, rationalists would have called global consumption of 78
million barrels per day of petroleum an impossibility, and that's the
latest figure.

If trends remain unchanged, the global economy is unsustainable. But
the Fallacy of Uninterrupted Trends tells us patterns won't remain
unchanged. For instance, deforestation of the United States, rampant
in the 19th century, has stopped: forested acreage of the country
began rising during the 20th century, and is still rising. Why? Wood
is no longer a primary fuel, while high-yield agriculture allowed
millions of acres to be retired from farming and returned to trees.
Today wood is a primary fuel in the developing world, so deforestation
is acute; but if developing nations move on to other energy sources,
forest cover will regrow. If the West changes from fossil fuel to
green power, its worst resource trend will not continue uninterrupted.

Though Diamond endorses ''cautious optimism,'' ''Collapse'' comes to a
wary view of the human prospect. Diamond fears our fate was set in
motion in antiquity -- we're living off the soil and petroleum
bequeathed by the far past, and unless there are profound changes in
behavior, all may crash when legacy commodities run out. Oddly, for
someone with a background in evolutionary theory, he seems not to
consider society's evolutionary arc. He thinks backward 13,000 years,
forward only a decade or two. What might human society be like 13,000
years from now? Above us in the Milky Way are essentially infinite
resources and living space. If the phase of fossil-driven technology
leads to discoveries that allow Homo sapiens to move into the galaxy,
then resources, population pressure and other issues that worry
Diamond will be forgotten. Most of the earth may even be returned to
primordial stillness, and the whole thing would have happened in the
blink of an eye by nature's standards.



xponent

Collapsar Maru

rob


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to