Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lukewhitestone 's review for:
Upheaval: Turning Points for Nations in Crisis
by Jared Diamond
Another thought-provoking book from the interminable Jared Diamond. I particularly enjoy his comparative approach (in this book and others) to history.
This book, which deals with nations dealing with inflection points in there history, which Diamond labels "crises", comes in three parts: the framework basis, the histories, and the learnings. I think the crises are best thought of as testing the mettle of democracy against dictatorship, and the book as a whole can be thought of as a counterpoint to a favorite book of mine: "The Dictator's Handbook". (In TDH, we get rules in how dictatorships survive, in Upheaval we get rules on how democracy might avert dictatorship and itself survive.)
Where the book succeeds, it draws fascinating parallels that I have seen few authors draw as starkly as Diamond. For example, on the tenets of Outside Models (the nation adapting the solutions of other nations to their own situation), and Honest self-appraisal (the nation being brutally honest about their situation), Diamond draws wonderful comparisons and contrasts. I found the case studies of Finland and Chile to be particularly interesting on these points.
Finland had no outside models but was brutally honest about its situation with the USSR. Chile drew on outside models in adapting its laissez faire economy in the midst of Pinochet and deciding to not completely eschew it once he was gone.
The Germany chapter was also fascinating, and the idea of generational memory echoed the Japan chapter as well. (The Japanese who saw the struggles of the Meiji era weren't around to temper the optimism of the days those Meiji transformations brought. Contrastingly, the young adults of 1960s Germany were protesting the ideas of Nazi sympathy that were still around. Keeping the generational memory in mind is an interesting perspective on the directions of nations).
The Indonesia and Australia chapters were also somewhat interesting. Indonesia was a younger nation at the time of its "crisis" so it's an interesting data point. Australia, while the least interesting chapter for me, still offered a few lessons.
Now for the book's shortcomings.
I don't think the crisis framework Diamond spends a significant portion of the book proposing actually works. At best, I remain unconvinced, and at worst, he is egregiously overfitting his model.
Most alarmingly, there is no negative outcome probed here. Chile's descent into 17 years of military dictatorship is the closest we get, and we dive into the whys there, but the conclusions drawn there are weirdly outside of the framework of the book (the idea of political compromise, interesting though it is, is not a tenet of crisis as Diamond defines it). I almost think this section and its parallels deserve their own book. And though this history was obviously very negative, Chile *did* eventually recover. I think any framework needs a total negative example. This book needed a chapter on a country that totally dissolved and then to delve into why.
On top of that, the selection of crisis tenets seems arbitrary and maladroitly applied in certain cases. There's just not enough evidence presented here for me to buy in.
There are other issues besides the framework, too: e.g., his frequent lapses into anecdote and his unconvincing rundown of economic inequality seem out of place and blur the book's focus.
I kind of wish Diamond's central thesis had been regarding the importance of political compromise in a democracy, which is an interesting lesson he draws in Part 3 of this book, and which could have used more time in the spotlight. I am intrigued by this idea, and its drawing of parallels between 1970s Chile and modern USA are arresting, to put it mildly. He just needed more focus on these points to drive them home.
As it is, this book is another awe-inspiring work of comparative historical non-fiction from the polymath Jared Diamond, which winds up being somewhat scatter-shot in its goals and takeaways. Some interesting conclusions are drawn, but it remains unconvincing as an entire framework regarding national success/failure. In spite of its faults, Upheaval is a great work of comparative history. 4 stars.
This book, which deals with nations dealing with inflection points in there history, which Diamond labels "crises", comes in three parts: the framework basis, the histories, and the learnings. I think the crises are best thought of as testing the mettle of democracy against dictatorship, and the book as a whole can be thought of as a counterpoint to a favorite book of mine: "The Dictator's Handbook". (In TDH, we get rules in how dictatorships survive, in Upheaval we get rules on how democracy might avert dictatorship and itself survive.)
Where the book succeeds, it draws fascinating parallels that I have seen few authors draw as starkly as Diamond. For example, on the tenets of Outside Models (the nation adapting the solutions of other nations to their own situation), and Honest self-appraisal (the nation being brutally honest about their situation), Diamond draws wonderful comparisons and contrasts. I found the case studies of Finland and Chile to be particularly interesting on these points.
Finland had no outside models but was brutally honest about its situation with the USSR. Chile drew on outside models in adapting its laissez faire economy in the midst of Pinochet and deciding to not completely eschew it once he was gone.
The Germany chapter was also fascinating, and the idea of generational memory echoed the Japan chapter as well. (The Japanese who saw the struggles of the Meiji era weren't around to temper the optimism of the days those Meiji transformations brought. Contrastingly, the young adults of 1960s Germany were protesting the ideas of Nazi sympathy that were still around. Keeping the generational memory in mind is an interesting perspective on the directions of nations).
The Indonesia and Australia chapters were also somewhat interesting. Indonesia was a younger nation at the time of its "crisis" so it's an interesting data point. Australia, while the least interesting chapter for me, still offered a few lessons.
Now for the book's shortcomings.
I don't think the crisis framework Diamond spends a significant portion of the book proposing actually works. At best, I remain unconvinced, and at worst, he is egregiously overfitting his model.
Most alarmingly, there is no negative outcome probed here. Chile's descent into 17 years of military dictatorship is the closest we get, and we dive into the whys there, but the conclusions drawn there are weirdly outside of the framework of the book (the idea of political compromise, interesting though it is, is not a tenet of crisis as Diamond defines it). I almost think this section and its parallels deserve their own book. And though this history was obviously very negative, Chile *did* eventually recover. I think any framework needs a total negative example. This book needed a chapter on a country that totally dissolved and then to delve into why.
On top of that, the selection of crisis tenets seems arbitrary and maladroitly applied in certain cases. There's just not enough evidence presented here for me to buy in.
There are other issues besides the framework, too: e.g., his frequent lapses into anecdote and his unconvincing rundown of economic inequality seem out of place and blur the book's focus.
I kind of wish Diamond's central thesis had been regarding the importance of political compromise in a democracy, which is an interesting lesson he draws in Part 3 of this book, and which could have used more time in the spotlight. I am intrigued by this idea, and its drawing of parallels between 1970s Chile and modern USA are arresting, to put it mildly. He just needed more focus on these points to drive them home.
As it is, this book is another awe-inspiring work of comparative historical non-fiction from the polymath Jared Diamond, which winds up being somewhat scatter-shot in its goals and takeaways. Some interesting conclusions are drawn, but it remains unconvincing as an entire framework regarding national success/failure. In spite of its faults, Upheaval is a great work of comparative history. 4 stars.