Although humans _regardless of
their race or geographical position_ possess similar cognitive abilities, the
life style and the standards of living are very different. History teach us
that there have been some historical inequalities that led to the progress and
organization of mainly European countries while other global societies were
still stagnating in the stone age or were hunter-gathers especially in
southeast Asia, Australia, America, and the Pacific. The question that begs for
inquiry is why was it the way it was? Why Europe leaped so much forward while
other groups enjoyed only primitive technology?
What we are sure of is that IQ is not the driving factor of this disparity.
Other civilizations displaced complex social hierarchies and fascinating
tactics and life styles which made their life comfortable in the hostile
territories they were inhabiting. But why didn’t they domesticate iron and
gunpowder like the Europeans did?
To answer this question, we must
look at the favoring factors that the Eurasians had, starting but the food
security. The book GUNS, GERMS AND STEEL: THE FATES OF HUMAN SOCIETIES by Jared
Diamond, underpins the shift from hunting and gathering to farming as the
ultimate trigger of the historical success of particular societies through
raising population densities and the capacity of creating complicated societal
organizations. Through farming of a small proportion of edible plants and
animals, early farmers were able to produce more edible calories per acre than
any forager. Since farming involves a stationary way of life, mothers could
have shortened birth cycles to two years rather than four years that nomadic hunters
and gatherers needed when moving around with toddlers. The combination of a
high birthrate and an ability to raise more food resulted in a dense population
capable of producing food surpluses and feeding non-food producers. A political
elite could control these food surpluses through taxation to form chiefdoms and
kingdoms capable of conquering wars. Also, food storage allowed having a
standing army, artisans, and scribes who created complex technologies like
steel weaponry and alphabets. The domestication of large mammals enhanced these
benefits through making traction for the plow to extend tillable land, manure
for fertilizing the land and unprecedented transport over the land. Militarily,
horses became a means of transporting armies for assaults during ancient wars
offering significant superiority Finally, being close to the large number
of domesticated animal herds made the microbes in the bodies of animals adapt
to form human epidemic diseases like smallpox and measles. People who were engaged
in food production had developed immunity against such pathogens in their
bodies and therefore used disease as a weapon, leading to the elimination of
about 99 percent of other native populations.
With Europeans enjoying the
advantages mentioned above, The stark inequalities in global history ultimately
stem form the disparities in juxtaposition with other peoples which can be
traced back to the extremely uneven geographical distribution of the wild
domesticable plants and animals. While Western Eurasia, in particular the
Fertile Crescent, enjoyed the largest area of Mediterranean climate,
characterized by dramatic variations of the climate from one season to another
and one year to another. This area created ideal conditions for the development
of annual plants capable of surviving dry periods because of their ability to
produce large, edible and easily stored seeds. As a consequence, 32 out of 56
prize grass species with the biggest seeds appeared in the Mediterranean zone
of Western Eurasia, while Chile, California, and South Africa, possessing a
very similar climate, had only one or two species. Another factor making the
Fertile Crescent suitable for the agricultural revolution is the fact that it
offers a great variety of landscapes within a short distance with many
different harvest periods. Finally, Eurasia is home to the greatest number of
domesticable animals, having 72 species of terrestrial herbivores. It should be
noted that it was possible only because Eurasia did not experience mass
extinctions of mammals in the late Pleistocene, unlike the Americas and
Australia.
In contrast, regions that
developed indigenous agriculture later or less effectively were constrained
entirely by the biological limitations of their local environments, not by the
cultural or intellectual shortcomings of their people. New Guinea lacked any
native large-seeded grasses or domesticable large mammals, forcing farmers to
rely on low-protein root crops like taro, which resulted in severe regional
protein deficiency. Similarly, early farmers in the eastern United States
cultivated local plants like goosefoot and sumpweed, but these crops were
severely disadvantaged by tiny seeds, foul odors, and hayfever-causing pollen.
The eastern United States also completely lacked local wild pulses, fiber
crops, or large domestic animals. Ultimately, the failure of certain native
populations to develop competitive agricultural packages was due to the fact
that their entire available suite of wild species offered very modest potential
for domestication.
Diamond's geographic determinism
was opposed by the Nobel laureates in Economics and the authors of the
book: Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty.
they argued that a nation's economic prosperity or poverty is driven by
its political and economic institutions, not its geography, culture, or
climate. Nations succeed when they establish "inclusive" institutions
that distribute political power broadly, secure property rights, and
incentivize the general population to participate in economic and technological
innovation. Conversely, nations fail when they operate under
"extractive" institutions, where a small, entrenched elite consolidates
power to siphon wealth and resources from the rest of society. These elites
actively stifle economic growth and technological advancement to prevent social
mobility and protect their own dominance.
Therefore, one may say that environmental and societal factors contributed in
the rise of Europe and the stagnation of other parts of the world. one may also
mention that the Europeans endured lots of wars due to rivalry that included al
aspects of public life. This competition leads to improvement, empowerment and
progress as no European nation accepted hegemony of other nation. The sense of
national belonging and patriotism was much more dominant in Europe as citizens championed
the idea of the the common good of their country.