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: Brilliant, Succinct, Germane!
Review: I'am writing this review not because I was really impressed by this book but because of some of the comments written earlier. This book fills a need to have a "conservatively correct" history of the world. Certainly the complaints about "political correctness" and Sowell allegedly demonstrating that minorities are totally responsible for their various plights is something a great many people want to hear so they won't feel any responsibility. Sowell in this book uses a great many facts and much statistical information. Unfortunately he has far too much faith in the dubious and weak figures for the past (say before 1800 A.D.) and is too complacent about both their accuracy and his interpretations of the data. Also Sowell judges cultures according to ethical criteria that argues that success somehow proves moral superiority. Sowell also more than implies that failure to devlop along the "proper" lines indicates somesort of serious moral failing. For all of his discussion concerning the enviromental and geographical constraints on development of cultures his view is basically moralistic. In the end his view is an apologia for the triumph of western culture and states by arguing that they "deserved" their success. The result is we get a lot of detail about non-western atrocities and less about western atrocities. For example Aztec Human sacrific is described with shall I say a less than critical look at the problems with Spanish descriptions of it. While at the sametime downplaying spanish atrocities in the Conquest of the Americas. What we have here, dressed up in modern garb, is an old fashioned late nineteenth century world history in which the west is the summit of human achievement and that western dominance is praiseworthy and "deserved". Sowell doesn't seem to get it that the failure to develop civilization and accumulate "cultural capital" is not a ethical failure but a rational response to a situation. Why should people develop civilization is a question Sowell can't seem to understand. This results in a "stalinist" view of history in which economic development justifies or excuses all manner of acts. Thus the conquest of the New World lead to development so it was "justified" because the natives were "stagnant", one of Sowell's many ethical excuses and one that in this case is not true. But then Sowell as long been a purvayer of the idea that so long as atrocities are done by the operation of the "market" rather than the state that that is at least more "alright". So the huge corpus of facts in Sowell's book make it a useful read but just remember that his interpretation is in the service of an ideology and a rather blinkered one at that.
Rating:
Summary: Exciting and informative
Review: If you like history , this is THE book. If your curious about life, or just love knowledge, this is it. It doesnt get any better. Thomas Sowell is not only accurate and impartial, he is a wonderful story teller. If you have any interest at all in this sort of topic, you will be very happy with this book. I am an avid history reader and I rank this in my top 3 of all time. Colorful and easy to read, a surprise on every page. He knows how to stir emotions while presenting facts. A true masterpiece.
Rating:
Summary: The factual information presented here is invaluable.
Review: In Thomas Sowell's preface to this book he writes "what matters ultimately is not what themes and conclusions are proposed here, but the facts behind those themes and conclusions." Those facts are presented in "Conquests and Cultures" in a logical, unmanipulative, and engaging way. They are often not very well known, but critical to those people who want to develop and support arguments about the causes and consequences of the social and economic differences between cultural groups. Sowell, of course, presents not only information but analysis of this information, which in turn leads him to conclusions. Many of these conclusions do attack traditionally held left-wing opinions. A few attack right-wing ones. All are very well argued and deserve serious consideration. However, regardless of whether the conclusions are convincing are not, the objective information presented while trying to prove them still stands. Moreover, Sowell is scrupulous about clearly indicating what is fact and what is opinion. As a result, this book is invaluable to all people who want to be fair-minded, knowledgable, and persuasive when discussing issues of cultural assimilation and isolation, of inter-racial interaction, of economic gaps between different groups, and of the past and present situation of developing countries in Eastern-Europe, Asia, South America, and Africa.
Rating:
Summary: Why not a Pulitzer ???
Review: The series of which this book is part, predates and summarizes the main arguments in Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel" and goes further. Why not a Pulitzer for this one when Diamond's book got one? I think it is another case of liberal bias. The book details the influence of culture and the permeation of it in the performance of different groups of people in history.
Rating:
Summary: Triumphant panorama of conquests of culture
Review: This is a remarkably thorough, well-researched work on major regions and civilizations around the world -- African, Aztec, Inca, Slav, (bative) American Indian. Sowell documents the case of how geography (harbors, arable land, navigable rivers, freedom from monsoons and tropical disease) and ideas (fundamental beliefs and principles widely shared or disseminated) combine to make the world what it is today. "Culture" triumphs if it is sustainable and based on a credible concept that can be embraced by others. Other "cultures" fail or disappear when they are conquered by more dominant cultures or collapse from within due to a fundamental weakness or failure to transmit the culture across people and generations. Much like David Landes' "Wealth and poverty of nations", Sowell shows that societies or cultures that can produce things of value, that educate their young, that innovate, and that encourage personal freedom, initiative, private ownership and advancement based on merit, these cultures are more likely to survive. Sowell dispels myths about racism, diversity and the equality of all cultures. His research is encyclopedic and well-documented. An excellent book for a university course on culture, diversity and global development.
| 
