“Study the past if you would define the future.” – Confucius We think we’re taught History. But we’re really taught Propaganda. This is the first of a series of articles. When you read the series, you will realize that most of what you learned in History class in school was irrelevant, designed to take advantage of you, and that it prevented you from understanding how the world really works. And if you can’t understand how the world works, you can’t prepare for the future.
Very interesting analysis. If you have traveled around the world it would be straightforward, the plain lands encompass the richest regions and high productive terrains. However, in some countries like Colombia, it does not work that way, astonishingly it is the other way. I do not know what the situation in other Andean regions is, but in Colombia the richest lands are located in the mountains and the poorest lands in the plains, having both of them a lot of rivers. It would be possible to add as a complimentary explanation, to that given by Tomas Pueyo, the terrain land-use or maybe the geological traits of these regions? Most of the times the Geography obeys the Geology rules, and it would be the same constrains for the Technology and future human advances; the Geology will be the chessboard of the World.
Really succinct analysis. One problem: Why are Russia and Eastern Europe (relatively) poor?
Potential Reason 1: They're just hard to defend. Missing that protective, mountainous ring, the doors of the vast Eurasian Plain are open for everyone from the Mongols to the Nazis to blow on through. But that didn't stop the very-flat, heavily-contested, and oft-invaded Low Countries from becoming very rich, and even being world powers, for a time. Denmark's even more vulnerable there, closer to the East, and is far richer than Poland or the Baltics.
Potential Reason 2: History. There was a time when the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was the most progressive polity in the world. To the southeast, Ukraine not only has some of the most fertile land in the world (renowned as far back as when it was known as Scythia by the Ancient Greeks), but also excellent ports along the Black Sea. The Austro-Hungarian Empire in that plumb little basin you mentioned was one of the most formidable in the world... until WWI. And now all of those areas are geopolitically marginal and militarily suspended between outside superpowers. And that erosion of sovereignty began as early as Ancient times or the Middle Ages for most of them. Was this just historical contingency, or back to Reason 1?
Potential Reason 3: Primary production makes a country rich in the period of primitive accumulation, but can become a trap at later stages of development as you eventually become far richer from trade, capitalism, and innovation than from primary production or resource extraction. The UK has some fertile lands in Southern England, but that's not why it became rich. Even its modest Pre-Norman wealth came from exporting slaves and tin and then by the Middle Ages from wool. But at least it could grow its own food. Japan, meanwhile, is as hopeless for agriculture as Greece, but was powerful enough by the late 19th Century to defeat the vast, productive lands of Russia in a war and is still the third-richest country in the world. Switzerland, Luxembourg, and the Nordic Countries, by your geographic schema, shouldn't be among the richest countries in the world, but they are. So, this all puts into question how deterministic this "Chessboard of History" remains, doesn't it?
Tomas -- very nice analysis & insights. I fear geography is rapidly changing from the promoter of civilization to the enemy of the people -- when coupled with climate change. Coastal cities founded on maritime convenience are facing inundation, as are riverside communities flooded by increasingly intense rainfall. The American breadbasket drained by the Mississippi River will experience crop failure and may become unlivable due to extreme summertime heat and humidity. I'm looking forward to your observations about technology, especially its potential for supporting continued human habitation of this planet we still, somewhat longingly, call home.
Your analysis is great and here in Greece we do have the common knowledge that many facts in our history is unbreakable connected with our geography. Βut I have 2 points to mention:
> "No wonder Greece only recently emerged independent from 2000 years of occupation, first by the Romans (from present-day Italy), then by Byzantium , and finally by the Ottoman Empire (both of the last two in present-day Turkey)."
This is not quite true. Byzantium is a recent term that more or less describes the Eastern part of the Roman Empire after the separation. When we speak for the eastern part of the empire, you basically talk about Greeks (Roman Law - Orthodox Christianity - Greek Language). So to talk about 2000 years of occupation, it is not accurate.
> "Remember this when you hear in the news a German minister telling Greeks they need to work harder."
On top of this, geographically speaking, its different thing to have Belgium as a neighbour and totally different story to have Turkey. (Greece' spending 3-5% of GDP in defence purposes).
This also tallies with my research on collective intelligence - check out the last chapter (e pluribus unum) in the augmented collective intelligence at www.supermind.design
Very interesting and well written article however I don't understand the connection with the education at the beginning when you state that they don't teach you the actual things. Everything you wrote in the article is explained and thought in the school since the elementary school, at least in Italy and I am pretty sure in Europe. We spent hrs in understanding the importance of the geography: just think about Egypt or better the Mesopotamia. I am instead curious about your finding on how the technologies and the current period can change this "natural" behavior.
History and geography, so good! Very nice North-South (due to the plates) argument complementing Jared Diamond’s East-West (Guns, germs...) arable land thesis. So interesting, thank you!
if i look at the map i also notice tie danubian plains and i must say the southern part of romania(except the capital bucharest and the back sea ports) and northern part of bulgaria(not only are not united,even though your predictions would suggest that) but are poorer than the mean of their countries.why is that?how does that align with your views and do you have any prediction about this area of the world?
I have another theory but its related. Its too hot the closer you get to the equator for you to be able to want to do much. As we know the heat tires you out. So its not just the lack of water but also the fact if most people around you are not supporting the world you live in with intense commerce you won’t get anwhere much. Look at the old world map and you get the same results
When I sent this to a friend he wrote "Interesting and edifying. One thing he doesn’t mention (yet) is climate. I seem to recall someone (I seem to think it was Montesquieu) theorized that northern/colder climate nations were more advanced than southern/warm weather nations because of climate. Warm weather made people less ambitious and industrious and more hedonistic. I responded that I'm not sure the theory of climate has sufficient supporting data.
Egypt, Greece, Italy, the Incas, the Aztecs, the Ottoman Empire, to name a few were all
founded in warmer climates and dominated big swaths of the globe for a time. During the
Roman Empire, it was northern Europe that were considered barbarian including what is now
the British Isles. It would seem that the development of "technology" driven by trading
over waterways, the consequent sharing of knowledge, and the rewarding impacts of such
information to do things better gave those groups great rewards, and tangible advantages, along with influence and power.
One might argue that the decline of such powerhouses of the warmer climates may be due in part to their incorporation and insidious influence of religions, more than anything
else, that came to interfere with the progression of knowledge to such a degree that Europe entered what has been referred to as "The Dark Ages" which stunted learning until the Renaissance when religious "doctrines" could be pushed back by the compelling elements of science.
One can see that tendency today as nations, including ours, struggle with the forces of
fearful religious groups for influence in how we live. I know of no country dominated by
theocracy that is a model of democracy, personal freedoms, and the development and
encouragement of new ideas. Ironically, the so called communist nations have borrowed
heavily from religious organizations in their demand for unquestioning faith, absolute
loyalty, and personal surrender to the tenants of "the system". I would offer that the
successful indoctrination of humans from birth with the principles of such mind numbing
and anti-thinking dictates are at the core of much of today's strife and unconscionable
Two additions (a) old transportation tech used water more than flatland - not anymore since roads were built at scale...which favors land Plains (instead of “water plains”. (B) if I remember wel Jeffrey Sachs talked about Poverty Traps years ago whereby landlocked countries like Afghanistan are more likely to become failed states.
Very interesting analysis. If you have traveled around the world it would be straightforward, the plain lands encompass the richest regions and high productive terrains. However, in some countries like Colombia, it does not work that way, astonishingly it is the other way. I do not know what the situation in other Andean regions is, but in Colombia the richest lands are located in the mountains and the poorest lands in the plains, having both of them a lot of rivers. It would be possible to add as a complimentary explanation, to that given by Tomas Pueyo, the terrain land-use or maybe the geological traits of these regions? Most of the times the Geography obeys the Geology rules, and it would be the same constrains for the Technology and future human advances; the Geology will be the chessboard of the World.
Really succinct analysis. One problem: Why are Russia and Eastern Europe (relatively) poor?
Potential Reason 1: They're just hard to defend. Missing that protective, mountainous ring, the doors of the vast Eurasian Plain are open for everyone from the Mongols to the Nazis to blow on through. But that didn't stop the very-flat, heavily-contested, and oft-invaded Low Countries from becoming very rich, and even being world powers, for a time. Denmark's even more vulnerable there, closer to the East, and is far richer than Poland or the Baltics.
Potential Reason 2: History. There was a time when the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was the most progressive polity in the world. To the southeast, Ukraine not only has some of the most fertile land in the world (renowned as far back as when it was known as Scythia by the Ancient Greeks), but also excellent ports along the Black Sea. The Austro-Hungarian Empire in that plumb little basin you mentioned was one of the most formidable in the world... until WWI. And now all of those areas are geopolitically marginal and militarily suspended between outside superpowers. And that erosion of sovereignty began as early as Ancient times or the Middle Ages for most of them. Was this just historical contingency, or back to Reason 1?
Potential Reason 3: Primary production makes a country rich in the period of primitive accumulation, but can become a trap at later stages of development as you eventually become far richer from trade, capitalism, and innovation than from primary production or resource extraction. The UK has some fertile lands in Southern England, but that's not why it became rich. Even its modest Pre-Norman wealth came from exporting slaves and tin and then by the Middle Ages from wool. But at least it could grow its own food. Japan, meanwhile, is as hopeless for agriculture as Greece, but was powerful enough by the late 19th Century to defeat the vast, productive lands of Russia in a war and is still the third-richest country in the world. Switzerland, Luxembourg, and the Nordic Countries, by your geographic schema, shouldn't be among the richest countries in the world, but they are. So, this all puts into question how deterministic this "Chessboard of History" remains, doesn't it?
Tomas -- very nice analysis & insights. I fear geography is rapidly changing from the promoter of civilization to the enemy of the people -- when coupled with climate change. Coastal cities founded on maritime convenience are facing inundation, as are riverside communities flooded by increasingly intense rainfall. The American breadbasket drained by the Mississippi River will experience crop failure and may become unlivable due to extreme summertime heat and humidity. I'm looking forward to your observations about technology, especially its potential for supporting continued human habitation of this planet we still, somewhat longingly, call home.
Your analysis is great and here in Greece we do have the common knowledge that many facts in our history is unbreakable connected with our geography. Βut I have 2 points to mention:
> "No wonder Greece only recently emerged independent from 2000 years of occupation, first by the Romans (from present-day Italy), then by Byzantium , and finally by the Ottoman Empire (both of the last two in present-day Turkey)."
This is not quite true. Byzantium is a recent term that more or less describes the Eastern part of the Roman Empire after the separation. When we speak for the eastern part of the empire, you basically talk about Greeks (Roman Law - Orthodox Christianity - Greek Language). So to talk about 2000 years of occupation, it is not accurate.
> "Remember this when you hear in the news a German minister telling Greeks they need to work harder."
On top of this, geographically speaking, its different thing to have Belgium as a neighbour and totally different story to have Turkey. (Greece' spending 3-5% of GDP in defence purposes).
Thanks for sharing :)
Being in possession of valuable, flat, fertile land= some one will try to take it from you. War=technological progress= wealth.
This also tallies with my research on collective intelligence - check out the last chapter (e pluribus unum) in the augmented collective intelligence at www.supermind.design
Very interesting Tomas. Easy and fun to read. Looking forward to your development about Spain from the eyes of a Catalan reader
Claro y conciso . Clarividente. Me encanta y aclara para quien no lo sepa, las diferencias de reparto. Gracias¡¡
Very interesting and well written article however I don't understand the connection with the education at the beginning when you state that they don't teach you the actual things. Everything you wrote in the article is explained and thought in the school since the elementary school, at least in Italy and I am pretty sure in Europe. We spent hrs in understanding the importance of the geography: just think about Egypt or better the Mesopotamia. I am instead curious about your finding on how the technologies and the current period can change this "natural" behavior.
History and geography, so good! Very nice North-South (due to the plates) argument complementing Jared Diamond’s East-West (Guns, germs...) arable land thesis. So interesting, thank you!
Fascinating analysis - looking forward to the next installments, particularly on Technology. Thank you!
if i look at the map i also notice tie danubian plains and i must say the southern part of romania(except the capital bucharest and the back sea ports) and northern part of bulgaria(not only are not united,even though your predictions would suggest that) but are poorer than the mean of their countries.why is that?how does that align with your views and do you have any prediction about this area of the world?
Somebody's been reading George Friedman
I have another theory but its related. Its too hot the closer you get to the equator for you to be able to want to do much. As we know the heat tires you out. So its not just the lack of water but also the fact if most people around you are not supporting the world you live in with intense commerce you won’t get anwhere much. Look at the old world map and you get the same results
When I sent this to a friend he wrote "Interesting and edifying. One thing he doesn’t mention (yet) is climate. I seem to recall someone (I seem to think it was Montesquieu) theorized that northern/colder climate nations were more advanced than southern/warm weather nations because of climate. Warm weather made people less ambitious and industrious and more hedonistic. I responded that I'm not sure the theory of climate has sufficient supporting data.
Egypt, Greece, Italy, the Incas, the Aztecs, the Ottoman Empire, to name a few were all
founded in warmer climates and dominated big swaths of the globe for a time. During the
Roman Empire, it was northern Europe that were considered barbarian including what is now
the British Isles. It would seem that the development of "technology" driven by trading
over waterways, the consequent sharing of knowledge, and the rewarding impacts of such
information to do things better gave those groups great rewards, and tangible advantages, along with influence and power.
One might argue that the decline of such powerhouses of the warmer climates may be due in part to their incorporation and insidious influence of religions, more than anything
else, that came to interfere with the progression of knowledge to such a degree that Europe entered what has been referred to as "The Dark Ages" which stunted learning until the Renaissance when religious "doctrines" could be pushed back by the compelling elements of science.
One can see that tendency today as nations, including ours, struggle with the forces of
fearful religious groups for influence in how we live. I know of no country dominated by
theocracy that is a model of democracy, personal freedoms, and the development and
encouragement of new ideas. Ironically, the so called communist nations have borrowed
heavily from religious organizations in their demand for unquestioning faith, absolute
loyalty, and personal surrender to the tenants of "the system". I would offer that the
successful indoctrination of humans from birth with the principles of such mind numbing
and anti-thinking dictates are at the core of much of today's strife and unconscionable
stupidity.
Two additions (a) old transportation tech used water more than flatland - not anymore since roads were built at scale...which favors land Plains (instead of “water plains”. (B) if I remember wel Jeffrey Sachs talked about Poverty Traps years ago whereby landlocked countries like Afghanistan are more likely to become failed states.