Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed

published	December 27th 2005 by Penguin (Non-Classics)
first published	2006
binding	Paperback
isbn	0143036556 (isbn13: 9780143036555)
pages	592
description	Jared Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed is the glass-half-empty follow-up to his Pulitzer Prize-winning Guns, Germs, and Steel....more [close] Jared Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed is the glass-half-empty follow-up to his Pulitzer Prize-winning Guns, Germs, and Steel. While Guns, Germs, and Steel explained the geographic and environmental reasons why some human populations have flourished, Collapse uses the same factors to examine why ancient societies, including the Anasazi of the American Southwest and the Viking colonies of Greenland, as well as modern ones such as Rwanda, have fallen apart. Not every collapse has an environmental origin, but an eco-meltdown is often the main catalyst, he argues, particularly when combined with society's response to (or disregard for) the coming disaster. Still, right from the outset of Collapse, the author makes clear that this is not a mere environmentalist's diatribe. He begins by setting the book's main question in the small communities of present-day Montana as they face a decline in living standards and a depletion of natural resources. Once-vital mines now leak toxins into the soil, while prion diseases infect some deer and elk and older hydroelectric dams have become decrepit. On all these issues, and particularly with the hot-button topic of logging and wildfires, Diamond writes with equanimity. Because he's addressing such significant issues within a vast span of time, Diamond can occasionally speak too briefly and assume too much, and at times his shorthand remarks may cause careful readers to raise an eyebrow. But in general, Diamond provides fine and well-reasoned historical examples, making the case that many times, economic and environmental concerns are one and the same. With Collapse, Diamond hopes to jog our collective memory to keep us from falling for false analogies or forgetting prior experiences, and thereby save us from potential devastations to come. While it might seem a stretch to use medieval Greenland and the Maya to convince a skeptic about the seriousness of global warming, it's exactly this type of cross-referencing that makes Collapse so compelling. --Jennifer Buckendorff [close]
date added	08-30-06 edit book

find at: Amazon | Half.com | Barnes & Noble | Abebooks | more...

discuss this book

topics	replies	last activity
How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed	1	02/22/2008 07:33PM

new topic

groups with this book

friend reviews (0)

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

lists with this book

Best Non-Fiction (non biography)

90 books | 79 voters

More...

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 5636)

Andrew rated it:

07/16/08

Read in June, 2008

This was a very engaging read, and I can’t think of a better airplane book (which is where I read 3/4 of it) - not only b/c of the irony (airplane travel consumes more energy and thus unleashes more environmental destruction than any other individual activity ), but b/c it’s written in such a way as to keep you interested and turning the pages, but doesn’t tax the brain with genuine intellectual challenges the way quality literature (Michaux, Beckett, Musil, etc.) does.
By charting bot...more This was a very engaging read, and I can’t think of a better airplane book (which is where I read 3/4 of it) - not only b/c of the irony (airplane travel consumes more energy and thus unleashes more environmental destruction than any other individual activity ), but b/c it’s written in such a way as to keep you interested and turning the pages, but doesn’t tax the brain with genuine intellectual challenges the way quality literature (Michaux, Beckett, Musil, etc.) does.
By charting both ancient and modern societies, with successful and unsuccessful examples of each, he gets a chance to explore the many different factors that can combine to contribute to a society’s demise. Big lesson: stubbornness of values can kill you. What he says about the Norse Vikings who settles on Greenland:
The insistence on “We are Europeans” becomes more serious when it leads to stubbornly maintaining cows in Greenland’s climate, diverting manpower from the summer hay harvest to the nordrseta hunt, refusing to adopt useful features of Inuit technology, and starving to death as a result. To us in our secular modern society, the predicament in which the Greenlanders found themselves is difficult to fathom. To them, however, concerned with their social survival as much as with their biological survival, it was out of the question to invest less in churches, to imitate or intermarry with the Inuit, and thereby to face an eternity in hell just in order to survive another winter on earth.
This is a theme of the book: societies are often undone by their self-representations: christian, european, etc. These identities provide a social glue but eventually the insane taboos (like the greenlanders not eating fish on greenland) and stupid morals (don’t imitate the successful hunting practices of the Inuit – they’re pagan!) prevent the society from flourishing, and they die. [Contemporary American Christians unduly strain society by preventing abortions and euthanasia, unconcerned with how these lives tax the rest of society as they are born or continue to live.]
A bunch of colorful details about life all over the planet punctuate the book: some islands that house cohesive, functioning societies are so small that directions can be given based on which cheek is “seaward” – one cheek always being closer to the sea than the other. And how about the fact that we get the words egg, skirt, awkward and die from the scandinavians, or the mayan practice of tying captured enemies into balls and rollling then down steep stone steps? Lovely.
I think comb jellies, procreation chants and walrus bacon are the future.
I do take issue with one of Diamond’s central tenets, however. In trying to make an argument that the public is just as responsible for the pollution caused by mining as the mining companies, he says “only when the public pressures its politicians into passing laws demanding different behavior from mining companies will the companies behave differently…It is the public, either directly or through its politicians that has the power to make destructive environmental policies unprofitable and illegal, and to make sustainable environmental policies profitable. The public can do that by suing businesses for harming them, as happened after the exxon valdez, piper alpha, and bhopal diasters [can you list all the cases where the public’s suits were dropped b/c their pro bono lawyers were’t as skilled/ manipulative as the lawyers on permanent retainer by these companies, and what about the thousands of cases that don’t make front page news and don’t become movies? And while we’re at it, can we sue for moral harm and approbation too?]; by prefering to buy sustainably harvested products; [how can this practiceof voting with dollars be sustainable when not everyone has equal dollars, and these products usually cost more and are not availble in wal-mart or poorer areas, or even middle class areas?]; by making employees of companies with poor track records feel ashamed of their company and complain to their own mgmt [great advice – shame the people who aren’t close to the decision-making! – and maybe they can get fired while they complain to their bosses!]; by preferring their governments to award valuable contracts to businesses with a good environmental track record [wow – I didn’t know I could accomplish something just by preferring!!!]; and by pressing their gov’t to pass and enforce laws and regulations requiring good environmental practices, such as the US govt’s new regulations for the coal industry in the 70s and 80s.”

Hey Jared, the public doesn’t make money from the mines or from any other company that profits from environmental destruction, the mines do. They make money, and hire full-time lobbyists to pressure the politicians NOT to pass any new or stricter regulatory laws. These people have full-time jobs to protect the mines’ interests, and they are paid for by the mines’ profits. There is nothing wrong with that, but to assume and even denounce the public for not pressuring the politicans makes no sense: we don’t get paid to pressure the politicians; we are not full time lobbysits. We can’t make a career out of attempting to make the government responsible to the public as opposed to businesses. The governement is trying to make money; the businesses are trying to make money: they work together. The public is simply trying to live; there is is no incentive to pressure the politicians b/c we are outmatched – in time, research and funding. The public doesn’t even have the time to KNOW whether or not to pressure the politicians: only the lobbyists know and can create the research they need b/c they are the ones getting paid to do it. Regulatory agencies of the goverment are simply incompetent, but not b/c they are born that way, but b/c it MAKES SENSE for them to be: they flourish when business flourishes; they get jobs when the mining company stays in business. And it always sounds good to say that the mining company is “providing jobs” – that is the end-all be-all of this society: can your business provide jobs? If the answer is yes, then it can’t be stopped. Diamond’s logic has major problems, a telling example being the exhortation that people should vote with their dollar: when we all just “vote with our dollars” then only the people with lots of dollars have their voice heard.
Hey, we’re animals. We want what’s best for us to the detriment of those around us. As long as we can agree on that, why are we trying to save humanity? Is it misanthropic to simply acknowledge that we each put ourselves above our neighbor? (Soldiers jumping on grenades and the like are the exceptions that prove the rule: that’s why these events are seen as heroic, or, more accurately “bizarre”. Heroic anomalies are often people who have nothing else in their life anyway, so they opt for eternal silence and a pridefilled immortality.) I can’t picture any human population ever willing sacrifices on itself for the benefit of other populations or future generations. Sacrifice for others is not in our genes/ DNA/ evolutionary history.
I may disagree with Diamond’s conclusions, and especially his “cautious optimism” about the future, but at least his book invites the reader to think about these things.

...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Brooks rated it:

03/12/08

I read this book over six weeks from February through March 2006. It took a lot of effort but was excellent. It is filled with excellent observations on different societies and why they failed or excelled. Much of his observations were new to me but were well documented and reasonable. In addition, to information on various societies was an introduction to various field methods of study that were amazing. So, he shows what is the current research into archeology (and all its arcane spec...more I read this book over six weeks from February through March 2006. It took a lot of effort but was excellent. It is filled with excellent observations on different societies and why they failed or excelled. Much of his observations were new to me but were well documented and reasonable. In addition, to information on various societies was an introduction to various field methods of study that were amazing. So, he shows what is the current research into archeology (and all its arcane specialties) but how they provide information on former civilizations.

Easter Island – Why did the society collapse and why did they build those statues. Easter Island is somewhat unique. It is a temperate zone island as opposed to tropical for most Polynesian settle areas. Second, it was much farther away from other Polynesian islands. Diamond’s hypothesis on Easter Island’s demise is deforestation. He sites two interesting studies – pollen studies from soil samples and second checking charcoal ashes from garbage heaps. They both show a decline in large palm trees. Even more interesting is the loss of a species of Giant Palm and then the loses of other types of palm. The tree lose also meant they lost transportation as the Giant Palms were used to make the ocean going canoes. Also, the moia sites show increased activity as the resources were being depleted and then signs of warfare and the societies collapse.
Easter island more than other locations was more fragile because it was dry, temperate, and isolated.

Anasazi - This area of the southwest has been repeated settled and then collapse. Basically, this is very marginal area to live (it’s a desert). It gets wetter for 50-100 years and new people settle the area, deplete the resources (soil), population increases, and then it gets dry and everyone kills each other or moves on. Diamond’s point is that it is multiple factors that cause their collapse and not to focus on the last war or migration but the underlying environmental issues causing the crises. Chaco Canyon was probably the most advanced site. Again, the main cause of collapse was deforestation. Here, the biologist studied the crystallized urine pellets of packrats to see how the fauna had changed – Amazing. Packrats have been living in the area for 40K years. They found that this area used to be moderately forested with Pinyon pines. An example of impending collapse – remains of headless mice in the human preserved dry feces suggesting people were catching and eating mice whole. Also, the latest construction (based on tree ring studies) is defensive walls and gates. Finally, limited portable objects (pottery, knives) are left at the site, so the majority probably migrated.

Maya – Here is again an area where few modern people live, yet there were hundreds of thousands of people in an advanced Society at one point. Mayan were limited by several factors (from Guns, Germs, and Steel) – poor crops only corn, not wheat or barley and few domestic animals. The suspect cause of collapse here is soil fertility. This area has poor soils and Mayan’s had limited crop options. They first farmed the valleys and then the hills. Once they removed the trees from the hills, the hill sides eroded, leaving even less farmable land. Evidence is based on the decline of nutrition based on reviewing the skeletons by age. Second, by pollen studies that show loss of native trees and replacement by crop pollen. After a city collapse, increases in native tree pollen. The other factor was long term climate change in rain fall. From 5500 bc to 500B.C is relatively wet. Then it cycles every 100 or so years. This was determined by studying the isotopes of Oxygen in the lake bed sediment. In dry years, there is more evaporation and a different ratio of Isotopes (lighter isotopes evaporate faster).

Vikings – There were several Viking colonies of variable success. The most remote and quickest to fail was vineland (Canada). Basically, the native Americans were able to push the Vikings out. Since this was the farthest away, there was no way to send a large force of technologically superior Vikings (Vikings had iron). Greenland was the next farthest and Diamond spends two chapters on them. They lasted for about 400 years before Collapsing. He argues for multiple factors – first, loss of contact with the homeland and trade. In the late 1400s, Norway had a new king and internal issues that reduced shipping from 4 ships a year to one every decade. The other cause of reduced shipping was the crusades open up Africa Ivory trade which decrease need for Greenlands major export crop of Walrus Ivory. Archeologists found less and less iron in construction and iron tools. Knives are sharpened to the nub. Further, Greenland has no large trees for shipbuilding. All ships had to come from Europe. Second, climate change made it colder. This is marginal area for farming, so decreased growing season is critical. Third, was not adapting from home country ideals. They kept cows as a status item which required tremendous pasture and hay production. Goats would be better in this marginal land. Fourth, soil loss. Cattle and hay production reduce the fertility of the soil. The final stroke was the expansion of the Inuit into Greenland. Inuit were able to harvest whales and other fauna not used by the Norse. Inuit were probably able to overrun the few remain survivors as the survivors had no advantages in Iron.
In Iceland, the norse survived. They were closer to Norway to be able to be resupplied. However, it is not sustainable. Iceland has had complete forest removal and is not bare as the moon in many areas.
...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Gaff rated it:

(review of isbn 0140279512)

07/31/07

Read in July, 2007

I considered giving this book 4 instead of 5 stars simply because it can be over-dense in its detail and the style can be rather dry - but then I figured that says more about my stamina and laziness than about the quality of the book, so the book gets 5 and I get a 4 for effort. We're all winners.

So despite the headline-grabbing title, the author Jared Diamond - a cross between an Amish garden gnome and avuncular Glastonbury festival supremo if you go by his picture - tries its darndest to ...more I considered giving this book 4 instead of 5 stars simply because it can be over-dense in its detail and the style can be rather dry - but then I figured that says more about my stamina and laziness than about the quality of the book, so the book gets 5 and I get a 4 for effort. We're all winners.

So despite the headline-grabbing title, the author Jared Diamond - a cross between an Amish garden gnome and avuncular Glastonbury festival supremo if you go by his picture - tries its darndest to avoid sensationalism, and the author opts instead for what is sorely needed in the environmental debate: sober, empirical analysis. But don't let that put you off - once you put your brain into the right gear this book can be completely consuming and fascinating, and the message and lessons it gives are electrifying.

Diamond examines in turn a number of societies, ancient and modern, successful or unsuccessful, and forensically examines what were the factors in their collapse or survival before turning to our modern, global society to ask what lessons we can apply from those past cases to the predicament we face today. We learn about the Easter Islanders (about whom one of Diamond's pupils asked: "What was going through the mind of the man who chopped down the last tree on the island?"), the Anasazi, the Maya, the Greenland Norse and Greenland Inuit, modern day Australia and Montana, shogun-ruled Japan and others.

He identifies common environmental problems which collapsed societies have tended to share (deforestation and soil erosion as well as resource depletion cropping up again and again), as well as cultural factors such as systems of government and contact with other societies. He cites some incredible studies such as the examination of ancient middens, of crystallised rodents' piss and of pond sediments to show how we can unravel the mysteries of some of these collapses by using the study of, for example, pollen in sediment or animal bones in middens to paint a vivid picture of climates, deforestation and diets at precise times in these societies' stories. It was this quite academic precision that gave me a quiet thrill and which gives this book its calm authority.

Diamond ends by looking at our modern global society and assessing its chances of overcoming the sheer number, breadth, scale and interconnectedness of the ecological problems facing us, and although he insists he is an optimist - and argues that our globalised society gives us advantages in finding solutions as well as giving us zero escape routes if we fail - by the time you finish reading, you feel that as a planet we've got a sheer cliff face to climb, and his optimism sounds a little disingenuous. But educating yourself to understand these issues is a necessary step to doing your bit, and this book will certainly arm you with the sobering facts. If only the debate were always conducted in these civilised (in the best sense of the word) terms....less

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

add a comment

Alex rated it:

03/06/08

bookshelves: books-read-in-2007

Read in May, 2007

COLLAPSE BY JARED DIAMOND: Jared Diamond, renowned author of the Pulitzer-winning Gun, Germs, and Steel, returns with another piece of mind-blowing work that will simply astonish any reader. In his last book, Diamond took us on a journey into the history of humanity, with cogent and logical answers for why our ancestors did the things they did, tying it in with geological and biological processes; how location matters very much for why certain of our ancestors did much better than others. Guns...more COLLAPSE BY JARED DIAMOND: Jared Diamond, renowned author of the Pulitzer-winning Gun, Germs, and Steel, returns with another piece of mind-blowing work that will simply astonish any reader. In his last book, Diamond took us on a journey into the history of humanity, with cogent and logical answers for why our ancestors did the things they did, tying it in with geological and biological processes; how location matters very much for why certain of our ancestors did much better than others. Guns, Germs, and Steel serves as an excellent introduction to Collapse, though it is not required.

In his new book, Diamond tackles the overarching reason for why certain cities and civilizations decline and collapse, while others get through the hard times enough to get by and sometimes even thrive. What are amazing are the many case studies Diamond uses, ranging from early history with the Anasazi, Vikings, and civilization of Eastern Island; to the modern day cultures of Rwanda, Australia and the area of Montana where Diamond now lives for part of the year. In his introduction, Diamond clearly lays out his plan with the book – much like a scientist about to run a number of experiments – with a specific list of factors that determine a society's success or downfall, including: geographical location, amount of natural resources, amount of possible food, amount of trees. Some societies suffer from a lacking in just one of these factors and are still unable to survive, while others suffer from a lacking in a number of them. What's fascinating with these thoroughly researched and explained case studies is how two societies in close proximity to each other will have different outcomes: one may collapse, or barely survive, while the other thrives for many hundreds of years.

Diamond's reason for writing this book, he explains in the beginning and elaborates at the end, is to help the people of the present day realize the predicament we are in. With global warming, astronomically high carbon dioxide levels, overpopulation, and dwindling supply of nonrenewable energy resources; Diamond seeks to enlighten us in first world countries (those most likely to be reading this book) of collapses and failures of past civilizations – some in the distant past, some in the not too distant, some still ongoing today – as an educational lesson so that we may learn where others failed and why, perhaps then we can ensure our continued survival. With the factors mentioned above, like overpopulation and dwindling energy supplies, we are right on course with some other past civilizations that collapsed. The question is whether the governments of the world will realize this and react soon enough to halt us on this doomed path, and start us on a new and healthier one. Like many things in our lives: only time will tell.

For more reviews, and writings, or to buy yourself a copy, please visit www.alexctelander.com....less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Kman rated it:

07/25/07

Read in January, 2005

The Pulitzer-prize winning "Guns, Germs and Steel" by this dude forever changed the way I look at history. And believe me, I am a history buff of sorts so this means a lot. Unfortunately, "Collapse" fails to measure up to that classic.

The real problem with Collapse isn't the research that goes into the thesis, or even the soundness of the thesis itself (though there are some qualms I have about how politically unstable Mongolia is or basing his analysis of cod fisheries o...more The Pulitzer-prize winning "Guns, Germs and Steel" by this dude forever changed the way I look at history. And believe me, I am a history buff of sorts so this means a lot. Unfortunately, "Collapse" fails to measure up to that classic.

The real problem with Collapse isn't the research that goes into the thesis, or even the soundness of the thesis itself (though there are some qualms I have about how politically unstable Mongolia is or basing his analysis of cod fisheries on a single popular accunt). The central contention, that population explosion, interdependency, unsustainable harvest, adverse cultural values, and about 8 other factors contributed to a society's collapse, is innocuous enough, though admittedly somewhat vague. Rather, the problem is that Diamond is so intent upon clearly and explicitly detailing every freaking argument to paint a convincing picture of the ancient/medieval societies or the current polluting industries that he often loses sight of his larger arguments. For instance, his discussion of Viking Greenland v. Iceland is insightful but whether it warrants nearly 100 pages in a 500 page book I doubt. The same could be said of his discussion of modern Australia; China, in contrast, gets really short shrift. He goes at pain to explicate the archaeological evidence by which we understand the Anasazi collapse, but here too he gets a little repetitive and locquacious. For instance, the logic behind dendrochronolgy and salinization were explained more than once to elucidate yet another nuance. Indeed, here Diamond the scientist persistently gets in the way of Diamond the popular writer. Were it not for his stellar writing skills this would have been even more of a chore to read.

Apart from the lack of effective editing, Collapse suffers from Diamond's penchant to almost bend over backward to point out that he is not engaged in a crude form of "Environmental determinism" whereby the significance of cultural and political events are misleadingly downplayed. He certainly didn't do this in Guns Germs and Steel but many people, including the NY Times, accuse him of it. Nevertheless Diamond was sufficiently sensitive to this interpretation (as well as eager to show that we can prevent environmental catastrophe) that he repeats this ad nauseum and, IMHO, belabors this point to being beyond repetitive.

The cumulative effect of all these shortcomings is that the book ends up presenting really rather very little that is new, argues persistently against straw man hypotheses, and is informative but almost in a trivial sense. At 520 odd dense pages this is a lot to ask of a reader, and it is a pity that this simply does not measure up to Diamond's earlier works....less

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

Conrad rated it:

(review of isbn 0670033375)

07/15/07

bookshelves: anthropology, owned

Guns, Germs and Steel occasionally felt like monday morning quarterbacking, but Collapse is superb. In GG&S, Diamond tried to explain how technologies that evolved in some places did not in others, how some communities thrived due to excess food and more advanced agriculture, while others, perpetually on the verge of starvation, had to devote all of their time to dealing with that and thus didn't have time for building the Parthenon. The argument was not airtight - his notion of what ...more Guns, Germs and Steel occasionally felt like monday morning quarterbacking, but Collapse is superb. In GG&S, Diamond tried to explain how technologies that evolved in some places did not in others, how some communities thrived due to excess food and more advanced agriculture, while others, perpetually on the verge of starvation, had to devote all of their time to dealing with that and thus didn't have time for building the Parthenon. The argument was not airtight - his notion of what constitutes a reasonable amount of time to spend on gathering food could use a little sharpening, and he didn't approach work as part and parcel of culture, which it most certainly is. GG&S also overlooked a lot of crops available to people he strenuously argued had nothing to eat - for example, Acai in the Amazon Basin (a superfood which constitutes 45% of the diet of some locals) and others elsewhere.

In Collapse, Diamond examines how several ancient societies (Easter Island, Mangareva/Pitcairn Lapita, Maya, the Norse colonies in Iceland, Greenland, and Vinland) fell apart due to resource management issues, the environmental challenges faced by a few modern countries (Australia, Japan, China), and the best ways to avoid a tragedy of the commons-type situation that results in a drastically reduced standard of living for everyone. The author is breathtakingly impartial, sometimes to a fault; he laconically remarks, for example, that "George W. Bush remains unconvinced of the reality of global warming."

Overall, Diamond seems most worried about erosion, which he sees as a bigger problem than global warming because of the difficulty of replacing arable land, and the multitude of ways it can be destroyed. You can buy all the long-line-caught Chilean sea bass you want, and eat organic lettuce all day, and still have an awful impact on the environment because the soil in which the lettuce grows is a limited resource, as are the fisheries that produce the fish you buy, which also suffer from land degradation.

Diamond thinks that a lot of the resources we rely on have been made artificially cheap through subsidies and foolish government management of limited resources. He's right, but there is a conflict between egalitarianism and environmentalism lurking between the pages of this book: I don't think you can charge the right amount for energy or food or other essentials without further immiserating the poor. That's the unmet challenge of the environmental movement, the one this and most books on the subject dodge. Despite that, I'd wholeheartedly recommend Collapse for its details on everyday life in Norse Greenland and Easter Island alone, not just for the nuanced analysis....less

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

Ryan rated it:

04/08/08

bookshelves: history

Read in April, 2008

In his previous, fantastic book Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond explained to the world how different nations and cultures dominated other nations based on the domesticatable plant and animal species they had available to them. It wasn't about the color of their skin. For that book he won the Pulitzer Prize.

In this, his more recent book, it appears he is throwing all that ...more In his previous, fantastic book Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond explained to the world how different nations and cultures dominated other nations based on the domesticatable plant and animal species they had available to them. It wasn't about the color of their skin. For that book he won the Pulitzer Prize.

In this, his more recent book, it appears he is throwing all that away for the fly-by-night religion of global warming. With a few random examples of Pacific Islands and other collapsed nations or cultures Diamond now says that not being a good steward of the environment is the sole determining factor in whether a society will rise or fall. Now look, I am not an idiot, obviously if you burn your own farms and forests and you live on an island that would pretty much be the determining factor in the collapse of your island's society, but Diamond, an evolutionary biologist makes a lot of presumptions that even I as a non scientist have to question.

For the most insidious example he chose Rwanda as a recent societal collapse based on environmental factors. I guess he'd take the statement of Clinton's Secretary of State Madeline Albright who discounted Rwanda's violence as not real genocide, but "acts of genocide" a step further and call it simply an environmental protest gone awry. Reading the book though, you can tell that Diamond is not heartless about the genocide, he just dismisses the ethnic nature of the conflict substituting instead lack of food and farmland. His substitution is based on the isolated accounts of Hutu killing Hutu. I'm no evolutionary biologist, but I can think of a few other reasons why some Hutu might kill other Hutu.

The previous chapters before the Rwandan genocide are about environmental "success stories" in three Pacific Islands: Tikopia, New Guinea, and Japan. There he praises their efforts of holding back deforestation and get this, population control. How did these pre-modern cultures control their populations? Now keep in mind these are Diamond's "good" examples. Late term abortions and infanticide. They would "press hard on the woman's belly towards the end of her term" or "place hot stones on the mother's belly" or just go through labor only to smash the new life out of existence. Is this better than genocide? A lot of places have population growth like Rwanda and not very many of them turn to genocide, but Diamond's modest proposal for nipping the problem in the bud seems a whole lot worse.

Another praiseworthy is Rafael Trujillo the ruthless 30 year dictator of the Dominican Republic. He tortured and killed his political rivals but did such wonderful things for the environment (I guess in that way he's like Bill Clinton). ...less

Like this review? yes

1 comments

Carolyn rated it:

05/26/08

bookshelves: nonfiction

Read in May, 2008

(this book is bigger than I thought...)

I'm finally done! I know, nine weeks later...

For a specific rating, I would say the content is 4.5, readability is 3. This book is definitely worth reading, even if you don't plan on putting in the effort to thoroughly read each section. The section on ancient cultures if interesting, but his level of detail is not necessary to understanding the main points of his book. For example, I found myself slightly skimming the paragraphs describing prec...more (this book is bigger than I thought...)

I'm finally done! I know, nine weeks later...

For a specific rating, I would say the content is 4.5, readability is 3. This book is definitely worth reading, even if you don't plan on putting in the effort to thoroughly read each section. The section on ancient cultures if interesting, but his level of detail is not necessary to understanding the main points of his book. For example, I found myself slightly skimming the paragraphs describing precisely how scientists measured tree rings or pollen molecules to arrive at the specific conclusions that Diamond uses as evidence. (While important to the overall thesis, this is the section that I believe can be skimmed the most.)

The section on modern societies was excellent. He does a great job of discussing the major environmental pressures on our planet by highlighting four societies: Rwanda, Dominican Republic/Haiti, China, and Australia.

If pressed for time, I suggest reading Part 4, Practical Lessons (it's helpful to have the background of the rest of the book for this section, but the ecologically savvy among us can certainly get by without losing too much comprehension).

I rated the content at 4.5 because there's one rubs me wrong. In his chapter on big business vs. the environment, he talks about two oil companies in New Guinea: a subsidiary of Chevron, and a more local operation. He raves about the environmental responsibility Chevron displays in this area, saying that they learned from the Exxon Valdez disaster and know the importance of creating minimal impact and sustainability. He fails to mention, though, that ChevronTexaco abandoned their operations in Ecuador in 1992, leaving an ecological nightmare for the locals? Sure, this subsidiary had nothing to do with Ecuador, as their association is only through several mergers that have taken place in recent years, but I think I'm just bothered by the way he portrays the Chevron Corporation as being entirely responsible for their operations (which may be true in New Guinea) without pointing out that the whole corporation is not perfect. That, of course, makes me wonder what other information may or may not have been included in his analyses. Am I reading into this detail? Probably. I just want the grey areas to be pointed out!

The point remains that his central thesis has merit regarding the environmental situation we find ourselves in currently, and I think it's an important essay to prompt intelligent discussion on the problems and solutions we face. Originally published in 2005, it's interesting to see how the situation has changed since the book (like gas prices?), but it's definitely new enough to be quite relevant to our society today. ...less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

3 comments

Rick rated it:

08/20/07

recommends it for: Everyone

The thesis here is that the success or failure of any culture depends upon five factors:

Climate change,
Environmental preservation or degradation,
The presence of friendly external trade partners,
The presence of external enemies, and finally,
That society's ability and willingness to respond to the previous four factors.

To develop his theory, Diamond discusses about a dozen different societies, past and present, which had experienced various combinations of troubles with the first f...more The thesis here is that the success or failure of any culture depends upon five factors:

Climate change,
Environmental preservation or degradation,
The presence of friendly external trade partners,
The presence of external enemies, and finally,
That society's ability and willingness to respond to the previous four factors.

To develop his theory, Diamond discusses about a dozen different societies, past and present, which had experienced various combinations of troubles with the first four factors, and each of which had responded differently to the challenges that it faced.

In describing the collapse of the society on Easter Island, he ponders what might have been going through the mind of the man who chopped down the very last of the trees that had been utterly indispensable to their civilization at its height. Diamond reasons that as the tree population declined slowly over the course of several generations, its importance in building and commerce likewise diminished, so that by the time only a handful remained, the once vital trees would have seemed nearly valueless. That woodsman would therefore most likely have had no idea how important those trees had been to his great grandparents and would have had no reason to understand the significance of destroying the last one.

In discussing the collapse of the Viking colony in Greenland, Diamond observes that the Vikings might have survived and flourished had they befriended their Inuit neighbors, and learned from them how to cope with the worsening climate. (Unfortunately for the Vikings, Greenland happened to have been uncharacteristically warm during their early years there, and they had no way of knowing that that warm period was to be short-lived.) The Norse colonists might, for example, have tried to copy the kayaks that served the Inuit so well for fishing. Instead, the Vikings looked down on the Inuit as inferiors and pagans (at this point the Norse had converted to Christianity), and clung vainly to a Northern European way of life that was unworkable in Greenland.

(The two examples above are only small samples of their respective sections of the book; neither represents the totality of those sections' arguments.)

Diamond concludes the book on a note of cautious optimism for the modern world's global society. With the advantages of our knowledge of past societies, and our modern technologies (and our understanding of the unintended consequences inherent in all technology), the world can overcome all of the political and environmental crises existing today, provided that governments and big business' are willing to respond intelligently to those crises. He adds that the only way they will have that will is if they're guided by conscientious voters and consumers....less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

1 comments

Robert rated it:

03/21/08

Read in March, 2008

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

I just finished reading Jared Diamond’s new book Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. It’s a brilliant and well-written. In a set of case studies of collapsed civilizations, Diamond reviews the role environmental degradation played in causing the collapse. While he discussed political and cultural causes of societal failure, his emphasis is clearly on the environmental issues that he believes are often the root causes of collapse. In some of the case studies, particularly the R...more I just finished reading Jared Diamond’s new book Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. It’s a brilliant and well-written. In a set of case studies of collapsed civilizations, Diamond reviews the role environmental degradation played in causing the collapse. While he discussed political and cultural causes of societal failure, his emphasis is clearly on the environmental issues that he believes are often the root causes of collapse. In some of the case studies, particularly the Rwanda section, one feels that these political causes deserve more attention, and Diamond comes close to environmental determinism. In general, however, one comes away convinced that environmental degradation has played a key role in many collapses.
The section of the book that’s most interesting to me is simply entitled “Why do some societies made disastrous decisions?” The answer, of course, is “it depends on the society.” There are some cases where societies simply failed to anticipate or perceive an environmental problem, and thus failed to react appropriately. More interesting is when societies perceive an environmental problem, and yet fail to respond. As Diamond correctly points out, this may be because of a purely irrational response by the society (Diamond highlights the Greenland Norse’s stubborn refusal to eat fish even though there was plenty of it around), or because of rational processes of decision-making leading to a suboptimal outcome (the famous example of this is the “tragedy of the commons”).
It strikes me that this question, of rational (yet flawed) and irrational responses to environmental problems, is something environmental NGOs today need to think about. The mainstream
NGOs are focused on “win-win” solutions, which assumes global society has simply not responded rationally to the scientific evidence of environmental degradation. However, it may well be that for many issues like climate change, the rational response of some actors (a company that benefits from an activity that causes degradation of the environment, or a citizen of the developed world more generally that benefits from the vast environmental inequity between the developed and developing world) will be to maximize current personal welfare while damaging the overall system. If most environmental problems require “win-lose” solutions they are, I’d argue, much harder to solve. That’s not to say that “win-win” solution, so-called “no-regrets” actions, should not be taken by NGOs, as the low-hanging fruit. But my reading of Diamond’s book suggests more fundamental environmental problems are “win-lose” situations, that are fundamentally political battles, not simply a matter of ignorance of scientific facts.
...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Mary rated it:

05/14/08

Read in May, 2008

This book gets 5 stars for nobility alone-- it's the kind of book that really might change the world. But it was also, for me anyway, a deeply absorbing and moving read, worthy of 5 stars for the eloquence of his prose.

Jared Diamond is a scientist, and as such he's committed to looking at history and geography objectively. He builds his theories of past collapses on sound evidence, and acknowledges the limitations of his methods up front. But instead of seeming cold and abstract, his wo...more This book gets 5 stars for nobility alone-- it's the kind of book that really might change the world. But it was also, for me anyway, a deeply absorbing and moving read, worthy of 5 stars for the eloquence of his prose.

Jared Diamond is a scientist, and as such he's committed to looking at history and geography objectively. He builds his theories of past collapses on sound evidence, and acknowledges the limitations of his methods up front. But instead of seeming cold and abstract, his work exudes the insatiable curiosity and love of his subject matter (humanity and the environment) that should inform all scientific pursuits.

To return to the noble role of this book, I think much of its power is its appeal to anyone capable of reason OR concern. The concerned, for the most part, are already hip to the environmental cause, but we could all stand to be more informed. The reasonable, however, tend to cite economics as fundamentally incompatible with a lot of environmental concerns. Like feminism, the very mention of environmentalism still puts a lot of people in the defensive mode, or is swatted away as hippie crap. By illuminating environmental crises throughout human history, Collapse forces skeptics to recognize that environmental problems are a) very real and ever-present, b) can and have destroyed countless societies before us, and c) have, in some cases, been overcome by conscious and motivated societies preferring to adjust their habits rather than ensure their own destruction.

And although some sections (China's chapter, in particular) are so depressing that I contemplated not finishing, Diamond has hope that we still have time to fix things. He doesn't reach this conclusion by ignoring "human nature" or the capitalist principles we now live by, but by showing that big business and environmental concerns can coexist, and in some companies, already are. This message alone (much more fully developed in the book, of course) is what really has the power to reverse the current trends.

In short, read this book, then get everyone else to know to read it, too. And become conscious consumers....less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Tony rated it:

03/26/08

Read in February, 2008

While offering up a slight spoiler, I am glad that the author is 'cautiously optimistic' about the future, because after having read this book, I certainly didn't feel that way.

Although it is an environmental book, perhaps my favourite part was that which focused on the economics, Montana. This rural state used to have one of the highest per-capita incomes in the land, now the lowest...oh yeah...and faced with environmentally devastating problems that may never go away. The whole section ree...more While offering up a slight spoiler, I am glad that the author is 'cautiously optimistic' about the future, because after having read this book, I certainly didn't feel that way.

Although it is an environmental book, perhaps my favourite part was that which focused on the economics, Montana. This rural state used to have one of the highest per-capita incomes in the land, now the lowest...oh yeah...and faced with environmentally devastating problems that may never go away. The whole section reeked of what will, in my never-so-humble opinion, will go down as one of the mostly baffling aspects of the 20th century: the lack of awareness concerning externalities. To claim that mineral extraction is not worth it is a highly complicated/specious claim. However, based on this book alone, it seems fairly easy to assess that it certainly is not worth it to the residence near a place where said wealth was/is being extracted. See in the states a company is allowed to take all the cash, put aside a pittance for 'potential' clean-up fees hat always seem to happen, and then are legally allowed to declare bankruptcy, and pass the costs onto the local residence, who inevitably pay for the damage through taxation...that or they drink untreated heavy metals.

(On the plus side..this may be a way of reducing The Republican belief that taxes are the worst thing on the planet: they recognize that taxes are important for essential services, like decontaminating water; or, they refuse to pay taxes for such services, believing them to be the ultimate 'bogeymen' and soon you have less Republicans holding said beliefs)

But don't let my new passion fool you. The book is a wonderful clearing house of general environmental concerns that threaten our planet like never before. But through much of it, the parts that humans caused, unlike natural 20 year droughts...which were often caused by soil devastation....it always seems to come back to the basic equation of too many people demanding too much of the land....I really have no idea how this equation is going to get better with India and China coming online.......less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Glen rated it:

04/06/08

Read in January, 2008

This incisive thesis starts where Guns, Germs, and Steel left off. What is the future for our world? How can we learn from the past to avoid catastrophic failures in the future. Dr. Diamond takes you on a much shorter tour around space/time to investigate the contributing factors to societal collapse. His five point framework consists of: environmental damage, climate change, hostile neighbors, friendly trade partners, and most importantly--society's responses to its environmental problems....more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Nicole rated it:

(review of isbn 0670033375)

02/20/08

Read in February, 2008

recommended to Nicole by: My old book club

Wow, if you've ever wanted to feel guilty and despondent about the environment and how we abuse it, this is the book for you. Diamond is trying to make a point, that being, if we destroy our environment, our civilization is likely to follow suit. He analyzed various past civilizations that are now gone, and found that in addition to other problems they were facing, abuse of their environment was a key problem. He also took a look at several modern cultures that are struggling with a shortage ...more

Like this review? yes

1 comments

Deren rated it:

03/10/08

Read in February, 2008

To begin, I enjoyed this book. In many ways Diamond beats a dead horse about case studies that anyone having taken an intro environmental science course will be familiar with. But, he also provides many counter examples while exploring deeper questions into the processes that have shaped human societal histories. Overall, the underlying philosophy of the book is similar to that which he argued in Guns, germs and steel; that racial or genetic differences between populations are not re...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Davie rated it: