Guns, Germs and Steel: A Review by Danny Yee

Yee does a wonderful job outlining Diamond’s book and then turns his pen to his criticisms. Yee starts with the statement, Diamond “achieves [avoiding pitfalls] this by avoiding some areas rather than engaging with them.” Another criticism is that Guns, Germs and Steel “doesn’t even begin to be a general synthesis of historical causation.” An example used is the capture of Atahuallpa by Pizarro at Cajamarca by not explaining it. A final criticism is that Diamond though covers an amazing range of disciplines including those we is not well informed. Yee uses religion which Diamond describes as a “handmaiden of the state.”

I agree with Yee concerning Diamond’s use of Religion. By placing religion as an agency of the State limits the role religion has played in human history. Religion formed and out of this religion the State formed. The question I think of was Confucius or Buddha agents of the State or did the State use what already existed to its advantage. Yee brings out the strength of Diamond’s work. The book covers a range of topics from archaeology to zoonotics. As for the criticism of historical causation [causality – how event A leads to event B, etc] I think Diamond does a good job of building his case in those areas he understands.

I think by attempting to use environmental factors in the development of society Diamond downplays the power of culture [religion and beliefs]. In some societies envy prevents a person’s ability to move beyond others within a culture. Envy says if I can’t have it then neither can you. Diamond brings out some cultures are more conservative and other are more progressive toward new innovations. I think he fails to understand why some groups reject innovation while others embrace it.