Popular meme books that you fell for

>popular meme books that you fell for
The lack of historical knowledge in this is appaling, i cant believe it got all this credit and popularity.

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com
twitter.com/AnonBabble

What was its thesis?

He makes a good point in saying: Democracy, respect of private property, consolidated economical and political instituions and a centralized but pluralized goverment paves the way to economic prosperity.
Where it fails: Historical comparisons, overall historical knowledge, overgeneralization of the extractive and inclusive institutions.

It's not a revolutionary book, it doesnt deserve all that credit.

That strong institutions are the key to prosperity, since weak institutions are easily subverted by demagogues and easily corrupted by vested interests. This difference, the authors claim, explains the relative prosperity and stability of British former colonies over those of other European powers.

So you agree with it, you just don't think the authors are as knowledgeable about history as you are? Fuck me you're an autistic retard. Go read Jared Diamond, he's more on your level.

le autism xD! le insult because im a badass!
This book is on Diamond's level, this author cites the Spanish Armada as a turning point in colonial history, its laughable, it was far from a turning point, the counterarmada made it a stalemate.
If you want to know where this book fails, compare 1700 Mexico to 1700 british colonies, the decadence of México started after the independence, he just wanted his "Extractive institutions vs inclusive instituions" narrative fit into world history.

>t.moron

Opinion disregarded :^)

I think you are lost, let me help you -> reddit.com

>HURR

Whatever you say, dimwit.

Selecting on the dependant variable: the book.

China and the Arab states didn't become radically more extractive before the Mongols came, they declined because Steppe Chad's blew them the fuck out.

Rome became far less inclusive starting after the fall of Carthage and it expanded and thrived for centuries under a note versus less extractive system.

The book does make good points about the benefits of inclusion and institutions but the relationship between state faliure and less inclusive societies is weak once you start selecting examples at random instead of selecting to prove the hypothesis. Aztecs were doing good and had a giant urban population. Small pox not institutions is what led to the total rapid collapse.

Everything this book does Francis Fukayama does better, and with more nuance in Origins of Political Order, although that one is much longer.

You put it into words better than I did, after the first chapter it all felt like he was cherrypicking historical events so his whole thesis would fit

I liked it. It makes some good points. But this book is way better.

guns germs and steel, the penultimate meme book

>Francis Fukayama
while we're on the subject of popular meme history...

It's liberal, anti-socialist propaganda

Read "How Asia Works" for a much more up-to-date and empirical study on development

> Fukuyama
Kill yourself.

>China and the Arab states didn't become radically more extractive before the Mongols came, they declined because Steppe Chad's blew them the fuck out.

>Arab states like what the fuck
>Chinese just decline after the Mongols.
Meme history sure is strong in this post.

Wow. Took you three posts for such a comprehensive rebutalls samefag. Great points made.

Fukuyama is retarded. How can anyone take him seriously after his 1992 book?

>Someone's first book defines their entire career.

>This viewpoint is less retarded than How Nations Fail, which apes the the same exact conclusions on liberal democracy but published it over a decade later.

I don't even think the book adds nothing of value, but it isn't a particularly strong work.

Fukayama also is mostly repeating others' work but does it better.

Pinker's Angles of Our Better Nature is actually better on political development except he uses the better part of 1,000 pages to make a point he mostly made in the Blank Slate in 2 chapters.

Guns, Germs, and Memes was more original and better constructed than How Polisci Authors Fail.

You think this is cherry picking and autism. You are like a little baby. Watch this... OFFENSIVE REALISM

That institutions, not culture, are the root of prosperity, which is the most retarded idea I have ever heard.

Don't try me. I have the high ground. In going to explain political choices across dozens of US and UK governments by regressing policy choices against exports as a share of GDP.


And no... I will not look at ANY primary sources. Checkmate historians.

"Perhaps it is the influence of English culture that is important and explains why countries such as the United States, Canada, and Australia are so prosperous? Though this idea sounds initially appealing, it doesn’t work, either. Yes, Canada and the United States were English colonies, but so were Sierra Leone and Nigeria."

Is this a fucking joke?

>the decadence of México started after the independence

So mexico was still an extraction place spot independence.

You need institutions to have a functioning state you dweeb

Those anglo colonies had modern institutions set up to benefit it's citizenry in general and is built to last. Nigeria and Sierra Leone institutions were made to help accelerate and promote extraction of labor and resources for empire needs an desires and wasn't built for stability (or to work in the long run).

>Chinese just decline after the Mongols.

You can kind of argue this. On a GDP/capita basis, Ming didn't surpass Song until the 1550's, and that was only because of the Colombian exchange increasing farm yields. Steel and Iron production per capita never reached Song levels, and advanced labor-saving mechanisms were never reintroduced to the same scale.

The Ming were also more reactionary than the Song as a result of the Mongol invasion, and their shift in worldview would be extremely detrimental to the further development of Chinese science and Industry.

>tfw actually agree with Fukuyama

He wasn't saying that there will never be another form of government represented globally. Just that, the wealthy, dominant nations will always trend towards Liberal Democracy and it will remain that way for centuries. You have to remember, before this was written, before the fall of the wall, there was still this possibility, that the whole world would become communist.

Personally, I think China will turn democratic in this century.

>Just that, the wealthy, dominant nations will always trend towards Liberal Democracy and it will remain that way for centuries
That's just as retarded. The wealthy, dominant nations in the west today are trending away from Liberal Democracy (slowly, yeah, but the trend is obvious).

In twenty years I'll respond to this thread in case you were right

>The wealthy, dominant nations in the west today are trending away from Liberal Democracy
Where? Are you an Amerimutt that thinks "liberal" in this context means leftist?

Trump is a liberal

I'm sure you can provide examples.

No.
No shit. Trump can't do anything anyway.
But the imbalance of power between the classes of society in parts of the western world is growing wider and wider, with no reason to think it'll stop. Just a natural evolution in the direct of oligarchy (but might get deflected in some other direction, who knows). Of course, no one's gonna wake up one day and say, "well, guess we're not a liberal democracy anymore". The trappings and pageantry remain behind while the actual system is gradually gutted.

>No.
Try answering the first question as well

US and much of eastern/"central" Europe, mostly, though for different reasons in the two places.

>much of eastern/"central" Europe
Only Russia really. Hungary is a perfectly normal liberal democracy that's only labeled authoritarian because they had the guts to stand up against Brussels.

Was thinking more the Balkans, where things tend to be corrupt as shit, government jobs are handed out by favoritism to supporters, opportunist oligarchs and politicians from the 90s still hold inordinate power, etc. Although I guess that situation isn't getting too much worse, if not any better either.

Poland also had its unrelated mess with the court system, which certainly seems a step away from liberal democracy, although it hasn't gotten anywhere near leaving yet.

But yeah, Hungary less so.