Why Did Human History Unfold Differently On Different Continents For The Last 13,000 Years? by Jared Diamond

           The first thing that I think needs to be pointed out, is that the article might be better read starting with the body and ending with the introduction. To me, that made the most sense and I feel like had I read like that to start, I would’ve been much better off in my understanding of the article. Saying that, “Why Did Human History Unfold Differently On Different Continents For The Last 13,000 Years?” by Jared Diamond is a very interesting read. One of the initial points he makes, and he emphasizes this when he rephrases his original question, is that maybe human history is unfolding similar across continents, but are doing so at different rates. Especially economically, we can find this to be true! He goes on to describe that this question often remains unanswered because of the racist undertones it takes in answering such a question. He then goes through each and every continent and gives examples and reasoning as to why conquering occurred, and why cultural losses (in the case of those being conquered) occurred. The main focus of why this occurs, technology, leads us to the next question to answer.

            As I just stated, technology is the focus of Diamond’s argument on what society needs to succeed. In all the economics classes I’ve taken, technology has always been an important factor in what an economy can do, so reading this was no surprise whatsoever.

            The three factors pertaining to this technology, according to Diamond, are thus: first he states that technology has to be invented or adopted, meaning that societies have a better chance of invention with a higher population, or the more number of societies that a certain continent may contain. Second, the chances if invention go up substantially when there is connection to the outside world. Lastly, technology has to be maintained. We see it all the time with technology nowadays with constant updates on smart phones and computers, and so on and so forth.

            The way I think that’s it best to think about this article and the implications it has on the global economy is how the continents that tend be more in poverty (sadly) are the same ones who have gone through periods of occupation by a more formidable power. Unfortunately, it seems like there’s a long period of recovery after independence for the country to become more well off economically. This involves virtually all of Africa, South America, and other parts of the world. Consequently, these countries are also the ones struggling to recover from the effects of occupation. However, we can see that some previously poorer countries have begun to really use the ideas presented to become some of the world’s most formidable economies. For example, India was once under control by Great Britain, but today, due to its large population and diversity, has become one of the up and coming economies of the world.