Rating: 
Summary: A sound thesis of historical cause and effect.
Review: A lucid, enjoyable book that presents a plausible thesis of how cultures advance. Cultures are not museum displays presented for our amusement, but dynamic systems that must either work or fail. The assesment of the utility of a culture can be seen in the well being of the people in that culture. This book makes sense.
Rating: 
Summary: misquided and wrong
Review: After reading this book,it shows you can pull out anything and justify it.A lot this sounds like a bunch of crab designed to make some people feel good.Until we get out of this racist 20th century mentality about the past,we can't present history the way the people who lived it saw it.
Rating: 
Summary: WONDERFUL TRAVEL THROUGH HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY
Review: Books after books Mr Sowell demonstrate his talent and his knowledge. This combination of history, geography, sociology and economics to explain the rise and fall of countries is full of wisdom. There are few equivalent books on the same subject.
Rating:
Summary: Another classic
Review: Conquests and Cultures is another great book from conservative Thomas Sowell. Sowell does an excellent job of countering the movement to apply political-correctness to history. If you enjoyed Sowell's other "Cultures" books, you must not miss this triumphant conclusion.
Rating:
Summary: Another classic
Review: Conquests and Cultures is another great book from conservative Thomas Sowell. Sowell does an excellent job of countering the movement to apply political-correctness to history. If you enjoyed Sowell's other "Cultures" books, you must not miss this triumphant conclusion.
Rating:
Summary: Stings have no venom.
Review: Despite their best efforts, those who reviewed this book negatively or dismissed it as "been there, done that" expose that either their own preconceived notions ran afoul with Sowell's book. Or, their sacred cows were stripped down to expose the cheap hamburger of ideas.
As usual Sowell writes another well-crafted, researched, and documented book. He makes NO conclusions but rather, lets his reader form their own conclusions.
As evidenced by the fact that none of the so called "Politically Incorrect" panel shows NEVER invited Sowell on because no one on the left can counter Sowell's ease of analysis and myth-shattering and that includes lofty lefties like Hitchens, Chomsky, Schlesinger, and Cockburn...so goes the list of those who rail at the idea of a free-thinking minority having the audacity to stray from the Liberal Plantation (Not that Sowell was ever on the plantation in the first place).A good measured read with plenty to challenge the reader (who doesn't wear idealogical blinders). A good book to add to your library.
Rating:
Summary: Stings have no venom.
Review: Despite their best efforts, those who reviewed this book negatively or dismissed it as "been there, done that" expose that either their own preconceived notions ran afoul with Sowell's book. Or, their sacred cows were stripped down to expose the cheap hamburger of ideas.
As usual Sowell writes another well-crafted, researched, and documented book. He makes NO conclusions but rather, lets his reader form their own conclusions.
As evidenced by the fact that none of the so called "Politically Incorrect" panel shows NEVER invited Sowell on because no one on the left can counter Sowell's ease of analysis and myth-shattering and that includes lofty lefties like Hitchens, Chomsky, Schlesinger, and Cockburn...so goes the list of those who rail at the idea of a free-thinking minority having the audacity to stray from the Liberal Plantation (Not that Sowell was ever on the plantation in the first place). A good measured read with plenty to challenge the reader (who doesn't wear idealogical blinders). A good book to add to your library.
Rating:
Summary: Durants Move Over
Review: Good reading, good sense and yet provocative. History in a palatable serving. It makes sense and ties together the major events of history and cultures based on real events. Wish this type of reading material had been available years ago. Do yourself and any students in your life a favor by having this book available as a reference source. Helps to understand modern day politics by providing references to historical background. Dr. Sowell helps his readers to cut through the misguiding romantic fantacies with real life events and history. No political agenda here. Worth the price of purchase many times over. Do it. Buy it.
Rating: 
Summary: Ideology aside...this is mediocre history
Review: I picked up this book without having read any of Sowell's columns or other books, so I didn't have any strong, pre-conceived notions on his political outlook. My objections aren't necessarily with his conclusions. Geography and natural resources have a profound impact on a culture's development? No kidding. However, this is hardly an original thesis. In fact, there isn't much original thought here at all. Sowell seems to be some sort of synthesis of Toynbee and Henry Thomas Buckle, using statistic after statistic to prove that some cultures are inherently superior to others. Agree or disagree, it is up to the reader...but this has been done before. The methodology here can try one's patience. When one tries to wrap up the whole of human historical development in one grand, unifying theory, the result is grossly simplified history. An attempt to explain the differences between the Yankee North and the Antebellum South in the US, for example, by drawing links to the Roman occupation of Britain can really tax one's patience. There may be a point to be made here, but it isn't that simple. Also, Sowell's compulsive use of statistics to prove his points borders on silliness at times, and is compounded by his inconsistency. To demonstrate the superiority of one culture to another, he might cite the fact that one nationality's average height was greater than another...presumably showing that nutrition and medical care were superior, thus producing taller citizens. However, that particular statistic is not applied to all of the cultures that Sowell discusses; statistics are only useful when they are consistently applied, and Sowell should know that. Otherwise, he appears only to be picking and choosing the statistics which might bolster his argument, and that only tends to undermine his whole thesis. I am not particularly a fan of Better History Through Lots of Statistics. It ignores the human element, the fact that individuals can have a great impact on the flow of history. A great leader can overcome his nation's disadvantages just as a poor leader can squander his nation's superiority. Capable leadership can slow the inevitable decline of a culture. This is an element that Sowell largely chooses to ignore. In fact, as one looks through the bibliography, it is apparent that Sowell depends almost entirely on almanacs and similar sources. Perhaps this is why this book often reads like an almanac rather than like a coherent history.
Rating:
Summary: Ideology aside...this is mediocre history
Review: I picked up this book without having read any of Sowell's columns or other books, so I didn't have any strong, pre-conceived notions on his political outlook. My objections aren't necessarily with his conclusions. Geography and natural resources have a profound impact on a culture's development? No kidding. However, this is hardly an original thesis. In fact, there isn't much original thought here at all. Sowell seems to be some sort of synthesis of Toynbee and Henry Thomas Buckle, using statistic after statistic to prove that some cultures are inherently superior to others. Agree or disagree, it is up to the reader...but this has been done before. The methodology here can try one's patience. When one tries to wrap up the whole of human historical development in one grand, unifying theory, the result is grossly simplified history. An attempt to explain the differences between the Yankee North and the Antebellum South in the US, for example, by drawing links to the Roman occupation of Britain can really tax one's patience. There may be a point to be made here, but it isn't that simple. Also, Sowell's compulsive use of statistics to prove his points borders on silliness at times, and is compounded by his inconsistency. To demonstrate the superiority of one culture to another, he might cite the fact that one nationality's average height was greater than another...presumably showing that nutrition and medical care were superior, thus producing taller citizens. However, that particular statistic is not applied to all of the cultures that Sowell discusses; statistics are only useful when they are consistently applied, and Sowell should know that. Otherwise, he appears only to be picking and choosing the statistics which might bolster his argument, and that only tends to undermine his whole thesis. I am not particularly a fan of Better History Through Lots of Statistics. It ignores the human element, the fact that individuals can have a great impact on the flow of history. A great leader can overcome his nation's disadvantages just as a poor leader can squander his nation's superiority. Capable leadership can slow the inevitable decline of a culture. This is an element that Sowell largely chooses to ignore. In fact, as one looks through the bibliography, it is apparent that Sowell depends almost entirely on almanacs and similar sources. Perhaps this is why this book often reads like an almanac rather than like a coherent history.
| 
