Product Description

The history of nations is a history of haves and have-nots, and as we approach the millennium, the gap between rich and poor countries is widening. In this engrossing and important new work, eminent historian David Landes explores the complex, fascinating and often startling causes of the wealth and poverty of nations. The answers are found not only in the large forces at work in economies: geography, religion, the broad swings of politics, but also in the small surprising details. In Europe, the invention of spectacles doubled the working life of skilled craftsmen, and played a prominent role in the creation of articulated machines, and in China, the failure to adopt the clock fundamentally hindered economic development. The relief of poverty is vital to the survival of us all. As David Landes brilliantly shows, the key to future success lies in understanding the lessons the past has to teach us - lessons uniquely imparted in this groundbreaking and vital book which exemplifies narrative history at its best.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #46730 in Books
• Published on: 1999-04-01
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 661 pages

Amazon.co.uk Review
Professor David S. Landes takes an historic approach to the analysis of the distribution of wealth in this landmark study of world economics. Landes argues that the key to today's disparity between the rich and poor nations of the world stems directly from the Industrial Revolution, in which some countries made the leap to industrialisation and became fabulously rich, while other countries failed to adapt and remained poor. Why some countries were able to industrialise and others weren't has been the subject of much heated debate over the decades; climate, natural resources and geography have all been put forward as explanations--and are all brushed aside by Landes in favour of his own controversial theory: that the ability to effect an industrial revolution is dependent on certain cultural traits, without which industrialisation is impossible to sustain. Landes contrasts the characteristics of successfully industrialised nations-- work, thrift, honesty, patience and tenacity--with those of non-industrial countries, arguing that until these values are internalised by all nations, the gulf between the rich and the poor will continue to grow.

Review
'A masterpiece' Norman Stone 'One of the most important works of history to appear in my lifetime' A N Wilson 'For once, amazingly, a book lives up to the hype ... a blast of fresh air, a work of militant good sense' EVENING STANDARD 'Gripping ... well worth reading' OBSERVER

A N Wilson
'One of the most important works of history to appear in my lifetime'

Customer Reviews

Yes, Culture is Important but...
Professor Landes' thesis in this book is that culture is the key determinant of whether or not a country (or people) becomes wealthy. Landes attempts a Weberian analysis of the reason for the disparity in wealth between (mostly) The West and the Rest; a topic, on which much ink has been spilled and which has been historically loaded with chauvinism, brilliant economic insight, social analysis and the odd dash of racism.

He argues that Calvinist Europe cultivated the cultural virtues that make a society wealthy: hard work, honesty, curiosity, thrift, industry and the respect for private property. Therefore, according to Landes, it is no surprise that the Industrial Revolution, with its resulting increases in productivity that it engendered, took place in Western Europe. Even though Islamic and Chinese civilisations were at similar levels of development with Western Europe in the 1100s, Western Europe had pulled away from the rest by the late 1500s.

Landes further buttresses his argument by contrasting Northwestern (Protestant) Europe with Southern (Catholic) Europe. According to Landes, the discovery of the New World--with its silver mines and treasures--coupled with the Post-Tridentine Catholic Church's emphasis on simple peasant spirituality (none of all that schooling business) contrived to retard economic progress in Southern Europe and its offshoot civilisations in South America. While Spain and Portugal were busy looting and praying, Northern Europe (the Dutch and then the British) were working hard and generating the wealth that culminated and reinforced the Industrial Revolution. Landes then examined the rise of Japan (the best chapter of the book, in my opinion). He argues that Japan's openness to Western education, its ability to learn quickly and to mobilise popular feeling in the service of the national cause put Japan on the road to industrialisation after the Meiji Restoration. So far so good. Landes' thesis that the winners in the capitalist system have cultural values that promote the generation of wealth seemed plausible up to this point.

However, Landes' corollary argument that the absence of "industrial" values (thrift, entrepreneurship, hard work and respect for private property) in poor countries is the key reason for poverty falls flat on its face. He sums up this position succintly in the last chapter of the book: "If we learn anything from the history of economic development, it is that culture matters...One could have foreseen the post-war economic success of Japan and Germany but taking into account culture...the same with Indonesia vs Nigeria." Really?

Obviously, Professor Landes has never been to the bustling markets of Lagos, Nigeria, to witness first-hand the enthusiasm and entrepreneurial drive of Nigerian market women. To argue that Nigeria is poor simply because the culture of the people is inimical to wealth generation is to insult the thousands of hard-working, small-scale entrepreneurs who make a living far from the halls of a corrupt, predatory government. As a Nigerian who has seen the drive, resilience and tenacity of many small-scale entrepreneurs (especially women), I take particular exception to Landes' glib analysis.

The Wealth and Poverty of Nations received much praise for its political-incorrectness. Landes does go out of his way to ruffle politically-correct sensibilities. He rages against left-wing liberals of every breed and often drops in the odd politically-incorrect gems of wisdom. For example, he states, "The British colonists were capable of cold murder, but hot torment and torture?..if I were an [Native American] Indian I would have rather died in British than in Spanish hands". Such an asinine comment is like saying to a Holocaust survivor, "I would have rather died in an industrial-scale extermination camp like Auschwitz than in Stalin's rural concentration camps". Such statements are not just politically-incorrect; they are also tactless and insensitive. One wonders if Landes had an editor.

Tactless remarks notwithstanding, the proof of the cultural argument is its validation in the real world. Test case: India and China. Disappointingly, the book barely discusses post-colonial India and China. Could one have said in 1990 that China and India would achieve remarkable growth rates in the 2000s from a analysis of indian or Chinese culture only? Furthermore, as (Catholic) Spain and Brazil, two countries that came in for a grilling in Landes' book, achieved higher growth rates than many Protestant countries, could one have attributed these growth spurts to "Catholic" culture?

It is clear then that the cultural argument is, at best, insufficient. Landes' thesis suffers from the same flaw that afflicts mono-causal explanations of complex phenomena. Landes explains best: "Economic analysis cherishes the notion that one good explanation should be good enough, but the determinants of complex processes are invariably plural and interrelated." By arguing that culture is the determinant of the wealth and poverty of nations, Landes spectacularly failed to heed his own advice. Is Nigeria poor because Nigerians 'hate' entrepreneurship and wealth generation? Could it be that the causes for Nigeria's (and other Third World countries') poverty are multi-factorial: political and economic challenges of building viable multi-ethnic post-Colonial nation-states; failure to establish the rule of law, geography; the presence of a rent-seeking, predatory ruling class etc?

As one who has personally witnessed the debilitating effects of cultural baggage like clannism in Nigeria, my first reaction to Landes' thesis was to assent in the main. However, after careful reflection, it seemed to me that Landes only got it partly right: Western Europe (and Japan) got ahead because they were the first to establish the rule of law, transparent(ish) government, institutions that support private enterprise and the promotion of national interests. While Western Europe's economic head-start may have been due in part to its cultural inheritance (hard work, thrift, curiosity etc) it seems that other factors such as common ethnicity (at least within nation-states), common language, a sense of nationhood and geography played important roles. Therefore, to argue that Western Europe's success is due mainly to its cultural inheritance is to overstate the case for culture. For all his wit, humour and insight (especially into Japan's economic "miracle"), Landes' case that culture is everything is not convincing; it deserves 3 stars.

Provocative but a bit shallow
My opinion of this book is that anyone who wants to know "the causes of the wealth and poverty of nations" would do better to read Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel" which is more thoroughly researched, more original, more thought through and more readable.

Having said that, Landes' book, while covering exactly the same subject, is as different from Diamond's as it is possible to be, and I would certainly recommend anyone who found GG&S interesting to read this too.

I liked this book for its ideas, its ambition and broad range and the many fascinating facts, stories and anecdotes. On the other hand on those subjects I have some knowledge of I found it rather shallow and sometimes inaccurate or out-of-date.

Landes has a take-no-prisoners style. At first I found this refreshing and enjoyable (since I mostly agree with what he has to say), but eventually I just got sick of his constant whinging about foreigners, political correctness and academic rivals... Despite what the other reviewers may say I would recommend not to read this book all in one go - unless you are a Daily Telegraph reader, in which case I guess you can cope!

Incomplete
It is a nice book but the question why some are so rich and some so poor has not been fully answered. The subject is just too broad I guess. Landes for instance almost completely ignores the development of agriculture. I can recommend this book but for the full picture one must read more about the subject than just this.