So this book allegedly sucks. What should I read instead?

So this book allegedly sucks. What should I read instead?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penile_subincision
youtube.com/watch?v=bBIubgsfK8E
youtube.com/watch?v=9EjcA6tlFmE
youtube.com/watch?v=ZEMiUEtpWd4
youtube.com/watch?v=xGNYeZzXSec
youtube.com/watch?v=3h_8X7yuilQ
youtube.com/watch?v=wQYob6dpTTk
youtube.com/watch?v=Nt0NcaxmGHo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Yeah, currently reading this on and off. Reads like a long essay, except charged with political correctness. Doesn't account for the fact that the inherent superiority of western culture is directly tied to its longevity. A culture that is 15,000 years old is guaranteed to be more intellectually stimulating and nurturing than a 5,000 year old culture.

But no culture is even 5000 years old

Why the West Rules--for Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future

I just bought this book. Should be coming in the mail soon. I hear mixed things about it, but it's very popular.

I was referencing the book. It says Eurasian agriculture began approx. 15,000 years ago, my assumption being that this surely must be, if not cultural evolution, cultural birth.

Read an actual history book. I just read 'The Making of the Atomic Bomb' by Richard Rhodes. Really good book, I was surprised how deep into the science the book went and how early in time the book started to fully trace the development of ideas that led to the bomb.

But why did some cultures develop earlier and at a faster rate?

That's a solid book. Don't listen to this /history/autists thinking of their field as science like astronomy, where you can measure, prove or disprove things. History is exclusively matter of a narration, and having this in mind, Diamond's book constitutes a good read.

Read the book.

Australian aborigines are the oldest culture and one of the least developed.

I'm not going to waste my time on someone as intellectually dishonest as Diamond. It's pretty gross that he came up with a whole book to get around having to admit that some races are more intelligent.

When communities come together and develop something beyond what a single person can achieve it becomes civilization.

This is why celts, niggers, arabs, mongols, etc never developed. They are splinted societies which are more likely to kill each other than work together for a common goal. God damn animals.

>tfw bipartisan divide

I will read the book one day but I am not in any rush.

but thats different, they are an inferior race

Maps of Meaning by Jordan "Synthesis" B. Peterson

>Board that, along with Veeky Forums, claims to represent intellectual elite
>Seriously believes in flawed taxonomy such as division by races

Back to

Only thing I even found interesting about this book was him going into detail on how certain crops came to be cultivated by man.

Everything else is a long and painful drawing out of "IT'S ENVIROMENT!"

Awful.

"Why The West Rules-For Now" by Ian Morris

Well then how do you think you can refute his arguments without even knowing what he said? Read the book, any argument you can make against it without having done so is inherently fallacious.

you've never interacted with a full blooded Aboriginal

The book explains this convincingly, if somewhat drily.

Neither have you. You don't live in Australia.

Actual Australian here. Check this shit out.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penile_subincision
youtube.com/watch?v=bBIubgsfK8E
youtube.com/watch?v=9EjcA6tlFmE
youtube.com/watch?v=ZEMiUEtpWd4
youtube.com/watch?v=xGNYeZzXSec

These cultures have not passed through process of rationalization(in Weber's sense). From this does not follow that it can be attributed to their "race".

Oh and btw cool videos.

racists get angry because he refuses to say "africa is a shithole because africans are subhuman".

But they genuinely are morally, ethically, spiritually, and existentially inferior to white men like me. They aren't equipped with the white man's rationality, logic, and adherence to science. Their simply inferior and hence subhuman.

>that's raysis!
And I'm fucking proud to be. Have the courage and honor and dignitity to embrace whiteness. We are the ones who make the world a better place. Not inferiors and women

I love when a superior human like you can't even write properly on a literature board.

Does that discredit anything? Do you not realize that the blood and honor of the white race, the inventors, the geniuses, the artists, the conquerors, etc. runs through my veins? Their spirit is within me, whereas your are filled to the brim with the goat-fucking and shit-flinging barbarism of subhumans.

...

can confirm

you've got as much in common with white achievements as anyone but if you don't think goat fuckign and shit lfinging was a part of white society then I suggest you hit up Veeky Forums.

yes I do
they speak incredibly slowly, frequently make grammatical errors, pause at random, lose their train of thought, change their tone for no reason etc
it's not culture that does that, it's lower cognitive ability

>He doesn't know about race and IQ
>he doesn't know about the warrior gene

Wewwwwwwwwwwww

We're at least as different as various breeds of dogs.

this is a prime example
youtube.com/watch?v=3h_8X7yuilQ
like she's slipping in and out of consciousness

someone needs to read the bell curve

>He doesn't know how crime data is collated
>Nor IQ data
>Nor how race is defined
>He doesn't know how genes work
>Or selective breeding

I'm white.

>people defending Diamond in this thread
>no one mentioning Fukuyama
>no one mentioning Weber

Why Nations Fail, Political Power and Political Decay.

Veeky Forums split did a lot of damage to this board's non-fic crew.

I think Fukuyama's thesis on success based off of correct behavior by elites and the nature of cultural backdrop behind the the state (tribalism and a pay-to-play culture vs. individualism) is a much worse argument than just saying inclusive institutions lead to a state with a populace that is invested in said state's success, like Daron Acemoğlu.

that argument even explains the black/white success divide that /pol/ rants about

Surprise you god dam weeb, /pol/ here.

IQ levels are the only reason. You burn the coal you pay the toll.

Whites should all be murdered and the planet should be occupied only by the Chinese.

Why is argentina is such a shit show compared to costa rica?

Why is Botswana such a thriving country when it is surrounded by shitholes?

Why did China and SE Asia have to deal with almost 2 centuries of total fuckery while Japan became a world power?

IQ is a pretty terrible indicator of success. I'm sure you would label the degenerate populations of Central Mexico, the Yucatan, and Peru "low IQ shitskins" (and indeed, they do poorly on standardized tests) when in fact only 10-11 generations ago the SAME PEOPLE had created massive cities with the best global farming systems on the planet at the time, institutions so excellent that the spanish were astonished?

/pol/ intellectual reduction-ism is poisonous.

>selective breeding

Are you implying blacks are more violent because they were bred to be?

All of the data ever collected shows that race is a better predictor for crime than income, population density, or even environment (Minnesota trans racial adoption study).

This is from a guy who lives in a top 5 US city in terms of pop. I'm not some redneck from the boonies.

Also,

>genes

You're going to have to explain that more because that point is the equivalent of just saying "well, ur dumb".

>Botswana
>thriving

Compared to what, Mongolia?

>Are you implying blacks are more violent because they were bred to be?

DOG BREEDS YOU FUCKING IDIOT!

>All of the data ever collected shows that race is a better predictor for crime than income

INCARCERATION RATES AREN'T CRIME RATES, IDIOT

>(Minnesota trans racial adoption study).

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

GOOD FUCKING LORD THE REDDIT IS STRONG IN THIS ONE

>muh blacks only get arrested more because racism
>not because they commit more crimes overall, even at higher income brackets

Lol

Not an argument.

It has a stable government, low poverty, good foreign investment, and its transition from colony to country was peaceful. Compared to all its neighbors, it is thriving. If you wanted to go on Safari, it is by far the safest, best place for western tourists. So why has it had so many fewer problems then: Congo and its neighbors, Zimbabwe, Angola, South Africa, Mozambique? They are all "niggers". But since you dont seem to know anything about the country I guess you are just participating in reductionism again.

Absolutely nothing you you've posted has been an argument so far. Just a lot of LOLOLOLOL REDDIT

Blacks are more apt to get arrested by cops and also have steeper sentences by judges, though.

It's not necessarily racism, but just harsher discretionary judgments.

None of what you have posted has been an argument. You set the precedent, retard.

Post stats compared to any country in western europe, US, or East Asia. I don't fucking believe you.

youtube.com/watch?v=wQYob6dpTTk

>Literally one country out of dozens of 3rd world shitholes
>thinks this is significant

>IQ of Russia same as USA
>Russia has more murders per capita

Hmmm.

Not an argument.

>no u

Fucking lol you have nothing.

>Damage control

Not an argument.

>Not an argument.
>No u.
>No actually you haven't said an argument.
>HAHA YOU SAID NO U

Good one.

Not an argument.

>no u

Fucking lol you have nothing.

Not an argument.

>muh one country
>picks the worst european country to compare to the best African one

This is literally "b-b-but I have black friends and they're cool!", the argument.

Not an argument.

>Russia
>European

>me
>the same guy you were talking to

>IQ
>accurate measure of success

>you
>not retarded

I agree that it factors in but it doesn't fully explain why blacks commit 25x (FBI crime stats) more murders than whites.

Of course people are going to be more racist if this is the reality of things. One will beget the other.

>Picks one country out of the numerous examples listed
>'muh one country'

The brainlet at work.

Not an argument.

>Still conflating incarceration rates with crime rates

Not an argument.

You're insane if you think incarceration rates are inflated by that same factor.

We aren't talking about theft (more reasonable for impoverished people) or even assault here. It's fucking murder, dipshit.

False incarceration rates are by definition impossible to accurately determine. We can see how many murder convictions are handed down though and that number is astronomical compared for blacks compare to the rate for whites.

You're trying to imply that incarceration rates explain the massive disparity between those two numbers and that's absurd.

You're telling me there's a racial reason for why 5000 out of 40 million blacks committed murder?

The premise is to try to explian why eurasia and later europe countries evolved faster mainly with biology, but some people still try dismiss the his arguments with sociology, politics and other humanities

My main grudge againts his book is that he ignores India completely

It is significant. Looking at why out-liars are what they are is how you fix problems elsewhere.

"compared to western europe" is irrelevant, apples and oranges as they say. Comparing to its regional peers is much more important in figuring out how to fix the problems in those countries.

The wikipedia has tons of references, but you should read Fukuyama's book to understand better what he is speaking about. Also, you didnt touch on why argentina is such a shitshow, despite being much more white than costa rica.

It creates terror in society. Statistically the average person in Northeast Baltimore or Southside Chicago still isnt likely to be murdered but it's still an incredibly shitty place to live because the average person is afraid to interact with their community.

>it's still an incredibly shitty place to live because the average person is afraid to interact with their community

Its a shitty community because of white flight.

The reason Boston is so great is because its segregated by massive barriered roads. Mattapan shall never meet Brookline.

Compared to western Europe (I actually gave you a much wider range of countries to pick from that have their shit together) is irrelevant but comparing to Russia is? Christ, you're a rat.

>Compared to western Europe (I actually gave you a much wider range of countries to pick from that have their shit together) is irrelevant but comparing to Russia is? Christ, you're a rat.

What does Russia have to do with it? I think you are confusing anons. If you wanted to make an apt European comparison I would suggest the Baltic States and Belarus, where the inclusive/exclusive model works quite well in the post communist era.

So youre saying segregation works?

NYC is becoming livable again as the racial demographics of neighborhoods change.

Don't say this because of money either, that's already been covered. Poverty doesn't correlate with crime nearly as well as race does. The government also dumps shitloads of money into projects in those neighborhoods so that people can live for incredibly cheap in areas they would never be able to afford otherwise.

Even if you don't think it's purely racial you have to admit that certain populations of the US have a completely degenerate culture of violence and crime that keeps getting passed down. Whites are right to flee that.

On further thought, if you want to talk about why Russia has developed differently, I would suggest that the double whammy of the Mongol Yolk destroying the great princes, and elite plurality combined with the need for a massive central power as established by Ivan IV created the point of diversion, ie the beginnning of exclusive institutions vs. inclusive elite institutions to the west in Poland and Germany, and that only when Poland was place in Exclusive territory by partition did it begin to backslide into "other europe"

fuck, yoke. stupid autocorrect

Mongolia has yet to pay reparations for the damage it inflicted on the noble Russian KANGZ

I would say the societies that fostered the foundation of the original vedic religion is older than 5000 years and constitutes as a culture.

so gypsies?

Not really. Diamond was much like Marx to me. I mean that I agree with a lot of his points, but you can tell he is not seeing the bigger picture. Civilizations weren't built with just iron and horses.

Toynbee, arguably one of our greatest historian, does not believe Western and Hellenistic civilization were the same, and therefore one cannot say that Western civilization is 15,000 years old. It's more like 1,500 years old, and has the Gecko-Roman civilization as one of its parent.

I find that this is a correct interpretation. I also don't think that the "superiority / inferiority" relation is the proper one to talk about different civilization.

He also doesnt subscribe to great man theory.

Alexander, Caeser, Napoleon, Hitler, Muhammed, Jesus, Genghis Khan. The genius of these individuals was not the result of geographic determinism, but individual ambition and creativity. Alexander should have been stopped by the Hindu Kush and Gedrosian desert, as with the Mongols pushing outside the Steppe regions. But they did and that negates a great deal of Jared's arguments.

Though I don't subscribe to the great man theory, I agree with your assessment. With that being said, I'll admit that I'm a racialist. I think Indo-Europeans are working with an edge over most other groups.

Indo Europeans are basically all of Northern India, most of the steppe, all of the middle east, europe except for basques and finns, and even the slavs have some admixture. And non indo europeans like Han Chinese are equal or not superior, as were they Mayan/Incan/Mississipian cultures. The rise and fall of the civs, and their success among their peers is not explained by racialism alone. Only really the Africans are well and truly fucked it seems. Maybe also Aboriginals.

>We're at least as different as various breeds of dogs.
lol no. dogs are much more genetically isolated by the fact that they are selectively bred by humans

hence why I said edge. I believe the success of civs probably comes about from dozens of different factors.

You seem like a thinker. I am monitoring your reasonable arguments.

You forgot this masterpiece of traditional Australian Aboriginal culture.
youtube.com/watch?v=Nt0NcaxmGHo

>steeper sentences by judges

Well unfortunately that's not entirely true. They also get the least minimum sentencing. They get more harsher sentences for extreme crimes because that factor doesn't account from past crimes.

To ride the achievements of not even your own ancestors but just people of the same fucking color as you is pathetic, and I'm saying this as a straight white male. The people you're talking about, the intellectuals or empire builders, would have nothing but contempt for you if they read a post like yours on a quebecois cobbling forum from some fat autist.

You guys need to read some Joseph Campbell. Why do we assign values of 'advancement' to races who can't sustain themselves? Aboriginals live(d) in tune with their environment, unlike Westerners who over rely on agriculture and then their population grows to more than is manageable.

There's nothing advanced or clever about a civilisation that can't even realise the most basic facts about how to live in synch with the surounding ecosystem.

I read a lot of stuff about american colonialism. The funny thing was the Indians thought the colonists were mentally ill pricks, because they worked their ass off, and even with their advanced tech, they didn't do anywhere near as good as the injuns did at living. The indians had their land figured out, barely worked, and sat around enoying life while the colonists worked like crazy, got nowhere really, and were stressed out dickheads.

One fact that gets lost to history is indians were actually really fucking funny people, they kind of were /b/tards of their time, and had no problem making fun of and harassing the colonists. Kind of got a lot them killed too....but probably worth the lolz.