Ref:The Wealth and Poverty of Nations-By David S.Landes.
Sankar:
Thanks for taking the time to find article and post it here. Since I haven't read the book yet I can not comment on it with any authority.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
source: amazon.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
by Amazon.com:
Professor David S. Landes takes a 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 industrialization and became fabulously rich, while other countries failed to adapt and remained poor. Why some countries were able to industrialize 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 favor of his own controversial theory: that the ability to effect an industrial revolution is dependent on certain cultural traits, without which industrialization is impossible to sustain. Landes contrasts the characteristics of successfully industrialized nations--work, thrift, honesty, patience, and tenacity--with those of nonindustrial countries, arguing that until these values are internalized by all nations, the gulf between the rich and poor will continue to grow.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Opinions of couple of readers:
1)
thetenthmuse@geocities.com from California , 05/21/98, rating=7:
A Point the Author Missed!
As someone who has lived in a rich and poor country, and has lots of friends from all over the world, I'd like to share a personal observation that was missed in the book. People from poor countries are just as hard-working and honest, often more than the avarage American. Their culture is full of proverbs and tales about the value of hard work.
However, there is one major difference in the mentality that imo has helped the people from the rich countries - SELFISHNESS. I don't mean this in the derogatory sense. I think, in this case the Me First mentality has proven very helpful in building and maintaing the wealth.
For example, people in poor countries have strong family ties, not just in the immediate family but with their grandparents, cousins, aunts, and uncles. If someone from the family looses a job, his family helps him out. When somebody needs a babysitter, they don't look for a daycare, they call somebody in the family. The same thing if you need a ride to the airport, you're moving, building a room addition, and so on. The mind set is "a favor for a favor," rather than "a service for a payment." Close friends are also treated as a part of the family, both in good times and bad. People are very open with each other, very giving, and prefer spending time in a large company, rather than the privacy (and solitude) of their home.
All this is certainly very nice, but applied on a large scale seems to work against the people. Being so close to family and friends may hold back a person set to build a business. The deeply rooted need to share conflicts with the demands of doing a business Western style. The attitude of the society towards those who disregard their families is very harsh. Generally, the people are raised with the belief that it's better to be poor in a loving family, than rich and alone while in America it's the other way around, at least in reality (I don't count the wishful thinking of religious and other organizations because it's just that - wishful t! hinking, and not reality).
Certainly, lots of people in America do unselfish things like volunteering and giving to charities, but it's different. You can stop doing the volunteer/charity work any time, but you can't cease being a part of your family. See the difference? The family ties you up for a life.
I think the book would have been far more satisfying had David S. Landes looked deeper into the souls of the people in the countries he wrote about.
2)
danieldupre@mindspring.com from Dan Dupre ( danieldupre@mindspring.com , 04/16/98, rating=8:
I plowed through 500 pages of world economic history to discover the secret to growing a successful national economy. You must raise a population of Calvinist workaholics who wear washable cotton underclothing and who live by the motto: " A bad day workin' is better than a good day fishin' ." That said, this is a thorough and most insightful study.
=====================================================================
From Booklist , 02/15/98:
Nowadays, attempts to explain the disparities between rich nations and poor ones are an invitation to controversy, but this is a question Landes has been investigating for most of his career. He is a Harvard history professor and the author of "Technological Change and Development in Western Europe, 1750^-1914," a major chapter in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, later adapted for (and constituting the subtitle of) The Unbound Prometheus (1969). Landes intends "to do world history" and unhesitatingly throws down the gauntlet of Eurocentrism, arguing that "the historical record shows, for the last thousand years, Europe . . . has been the prime mover of development and modernity." Mining details from the panorama of world events throughout time, Landes uses examples from science, technology, medicine, commerce, the military, and cultural mores to make his case. Landes' analysis will provoke and stir discussion; his 70-page bibliography will prove to be an invaluable research, reference, and collection development aid. |
