Customer Reviews

Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress

5 star:		(23)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(11)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

It certainly seems to matter. Why, after all, should Japan have been be rich while Taiwan was poor, if culture did not matter? Or Denmark been a nation of farmers while Holland held dominion over the trade routes of the world? And why, as is asked in one of the most frustratingly tentative essays in this very variable volume, do different immigrant groups to the United States have such very different careers? Of course, it is unfashionable to ask such questions lest someone believe that to say culture matters is to imply that race matters: ie that members of wealthy races are inherently superior to members of poor races. Perhaps that is why the most compelling essays in this book are by an African development economist and a Latin American journalist who exclaim impatiently that of course culture matters and insist that the thing their nations need is to discover the cultural components of economic success and import some. Even more refreshing is the essay by Ronald Inglehardt who brings - gasp - actual measurable data to this debate. Not that anything is quite settled. We are still left with the big questions, like: Why Europe? Why not China? and What was so special about eighteenth century England? On those questions, permit me to recommend two other new books. Nathan Pomeranz's THE GREAT DIVERGENCE, which bends over backwards to prove that China could equally well have given us the industrial revolution, but for a few chance occurances that have nothing to do with culture. And BULLOUGH'S POND by Diana Muir, which, in the course of discussing a number of other things, does lead one to wonder if there may have been something about those Calvinists after all.

Agree or disagree, you have to admit that there is food for thought in this collection. After all, if culture doesn't matter why is Singapore rich while Banglsdesh starves? The problem with this sort of thing is that it is so hard to pin down. Jared Diamond, after all, can tell us exactly how many domesticable plants there were per square mile on any given coast, and a phalanx of econometric historians tells us how taxes or wages impacted growth at given points in the past. By comparison culture is a slippery customer. Still, this is an interesting read. As a companion volume, I recommend Diana Muir's Reflections in Bullough's Pond, a dazzling little volume that plays out the culture wars on the ground.

The essays in this book are uneven. Some go nowhere, while others soar. Generally, the essays toward the beginning of the book -- those by David Landes, Michael Porter, and Carlos Montaner, especially -- are outstanding. In contrast, the essays toward the end of the book are, generally, uninspired and uninspiring.

The theme of the volume is that culture matters. The best half-dozen essays in this book (along with the nice Introduction by Lawrence Harrison) make a powerful case that culture does indeed matter. It remains true that a generally accepted and precise definition of culture remains elusive; certainly, doing useful quantitative analyses of cultures is, as of now, only far off on the horizon. But the imprecisions that still mark discussions and analyses of culture should not prejudice scholars against recognizing the large role that culture plays in determining economic outcomes.

Anyone who believes that economic outcomes are strictly determined by the laws and regulations enforced by a sovereign state should read this book. He or she will have an almost-impossible task defending that position.

Multiculturalism is a lie. It is a lie not because it says we should tolerate minorities (we should), but because it says every culture presents an equally valid way of looking at the world (they don't). This lie has consequences. The most significant being that educators in America and Canada have abandoned teaching Western culture for fear of offending minority cultures. Policy makers in the West take our culture for granted. They don't recognize that rational thinking is not natural, and it took a 1500 year battle with the Catholic Church, culminating in the Reformation and the Enlightenment, before rational thinking became a fixture in Western culture. In the Arab world today, that battle is still waiting to be fought. Consider the following thought pattern 1. a terrorist attack kills scores of people 2. muslims would never kill innocent people 3. therefore, the killers could not have been muslim 4. since they were not muslim, they must have been CIA or Mossad. A person schooled in Western culture - the language of Aristotle and Socrates - will recognize the fallacies in this thought pattern: the false premise (#2), circular reasoning and logical quadruped (#2->#3), and non sequitur (#3->#4). And even Westerners without a classical education will almost instinctively recognize those fallacies, even though they don't know the technical terms of logic. Yet to a person in the Arab world, the above thought pattern seems eminently reasonable. (See http://news.bbc.co.uk, search for "Iraq shrine blast: Your reaction"). Rational thinking, then, is an important difference between Western culture and Arab culture. Not because Westerners are inherently smarter than Arabs, but because Western education has taught European history and philosophy (Aristotle, Socrates, Kant, and Mill, among others) and in doing so given students the tools of logic. There is currently a movement among "multiculturalist" educators to take the European classics out of North American education. Their motive is good - exposing a multiethnic student body to a multiethnic curriculum - but the result would be disastrous. A whole generation of students will come up using the same flawed thinking patterns so common in the Arab world today, and the society those students build will likely come to resemble the violent, repressive theocracies of the Middle East. Indeed, by denying Western culture to our students, we are doing a grave disservice to immigrants who come here precisely because they want a better life for their children. That better life includes a Western education. This book is therefore quite right to say culture matters. If we want to preserve our way of life, then we have to preserve our way of thinking, and the way we think is a direct product of our education in European history and philosophy.

The editors did a reasonable job of bringing in some good minds to explore the topic. However, though the issue of study was relevant and timely, these kinds of books that come out of symposium are generally a little too disultory to really do any topic justice. They are more to justify the costs of the conference and say to the sponsors, "look what we did." This book is no exception. Most of the authors are just re-hashing their own previosuly written articles and throwing a little cultural flavor in to make it presentable.

The reason I give it even 4 stars is that it is in fact the best modern book out there on the topic. What I would like to see at this point is one of the authors to pick up the ball and write an in-depth and coherent work on the subject.

I just started reading the book and I finished the Culture and Economics section. I am not an economist and I am not a sociologist, I am a 27 year old engineer (born in Pakistan and raised in the Middle East) who intends to make a documentary on a related subject. This book is a collection of essays by prominent sociologists and economists written in an easy to understand language (except for some sections in one essay where the authors wants to foist technical terms on you to impress or cajole you into seeing things their way but you will know and identify such people and make your own judgements about what they have to say) and it presents both point of views (the extremes as well as the middle ground).

Although there is one bad thing about the book (you cannot tell clearly which author will argue which side until you are in the middle of the essay : this is particularly the case with people who wish to state that Culture Does NOT Matter. They almost sneak up their arguments on you and beat around the bush for pages before getting there; which probably reflects on their essays).

If anything, reading this book has told me A LOT about African and Latin American cultures (atleast in the first 50 pages). These are deep insights that only an observant student of that culture can deduce. It is very amusing to read them at times while at other times you go "Ok, so these people have problems, I can't do anything about it but I would like to know more about the culture good and bad, and particularly the parts that every culture tries to hide or gloss over".

This book is a good read for all future politicians, economists, businessmen and anyone who is curious about how to interact with various cultures and what are the motivations behind the actions of various cultures. Fabulous, simply fabulous. What is amazing is the media attention a mediocre book like Guns, Germs and Steel received as opposed to this book which is simply sublime. I read passages of it for my younger sister and my friends and to this guy who is working on making our company more efficient (some motivation coach) and my coworkers too, naturally ... tonight I intend to read passages of it to my date over champagne and strawberries (I hope) ... after reading this book I felt a closer attachment to my watch and a greater desire to be more efficient and precise, more hardworking, more thrifty (with the exception of tonight) and more entrepreneurial (sp?)

I'm afraid some may jump to conclusions simply from the title and contributors of this collection. This book is a fascinating discussion on the differences in culture around the world and how these have affected cultural paths. There really is no judgement involved. If you're curious at all about the way modern thought, from the most micro of microeconomics to the universals of anthropology, regards cultural differences and how those differences might contribute in a positive or negative way to the world's future success, then read it. You can be of any political persuasion, if you have an open mind, you will appreciate it.

Culture Matters is a good starting point to familiarize yourself with the arguments relating cultural factors to development. The high quality of most of the authors and the variety of topics provides a solid exposure to the several angles of the issue.

However, the book falls short of a) offering a structured and compelling argument for the relationship between cultural factors and development and b) offering enough evidence that it is not only relevant, but relevant enough to be in the mainstream debate.

It seems to be a reflection of the stage of development of this "school of thought". One finishs the book with the feeling that this school has yet to accomplish two things a) reach a much stronger logical and factual explanation of the causal relations between a society's culture and its level of development; and b) show how much culture matter compared to other variables, such as geography, natural resources, educational system, etc.

Can culture determine development? There are several fair to good essays in this book: those by Lawrence E. Harrison (introduction), Jeffrey Sachs, Ronald Inglehart, Robert B. Edgerton, Richard A. Skweder (and the responses and re-responses!), Orlando Patterson and Barbara Crossette.

As the reader proceeds from one essay to the next, differences emerge, a valuable editorial choice. Some authors argue that culture is a factor, some that it matters a lot, and some, as if grasping for a magic wand, that culture is the only game in town.

The first problem that emerges is that each author has his or her own idea of development. Although Harrison in his introduction lists literacy, life expectancy, the status of women, infant mortality, democracy and human rights, most contributors limit development to economic development, and economic development to the sum total of 'things' produced or possessed. The issue of how people in general acquire these 'things' is largely avoided.

The second problem is that there is a crusade to ignore history. David Landes writes that, through observing cultural characteristics, one could have easily predicted the economic rise of West Germany, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. Apparently all that money we spent in those places to hold back the Soviet Union, Red China and North Korea was wasted. They would have done it anyway. Mariano Grondona's historical and theological analysis of the role of religions is incredibly uninformed and simplistic. (You ought to be able to state someone else's position correctly before criticising it.) He even claims that, "Martin Luther was the religious pioneer of intellectual pluralism." And George III was Thomas Jefferson's best friend.

More general is the dismissal of the colonialism/dependency "myth". The authors believe it's fair to attribute democracy and human rights to the United States, and criticize other countries for their lack of democracy and penchant for military governments. However, the United States overthrew or helped overthrow freely, democratically elected governments in Iran (and brought the Shah to power), Guatemala (leading to 50 years in which tens of thousands of people were massacred), the Congo (we're still living with this one), Haiti (and this), Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, etc. etc. The U.S. trained and funded the militaries in Latin America about which these authors now complain. Why don't they know this?

Most importantly, almost all of these authors (Barbara Crossette and Orlando Patterson excepted) treat culture as if it were timeless, monolithic and outside history. There are subcultures, family cultures, rural cultures, city cultures, town cultures and class cultures (for a start). Cultures change. Cultures adapt. Cultures are ambigous. The most precise the writers in this book get is the distinction between North and South Italy.

It is good, I have learned, to ask a few questions about books like this. Who is speaking? Whose voice is heard? (It's not always the speaker's.) Whose voice isn't heard?

Most important here are the voices not heard. As far as I can tell, not one of these authors grew up poor or lived with the people he (she) now wants to advise. Sad, but not surprising. As close as anyone comes is the mention of liberation theology, which is totally mischaracterized. (The authors who criticized it cannot have read a liberation theologian.) No one asks the poor what they think would help.

There are excellent books for those interested in the view from the bottom: Nancy Scheper-Hughes, "Death Without Weeping"; Roslyn Arlin Mickelson, "Children on the Streets of the Americas"; Jim Yong Kim et al, "Dying for Growth"; and Veena Das et al, "Violence and Subjectivity". For a critique of seeing-from-above, see, James C. Scott, "Seeing Like a State".

Most dangerous is the pervasive concept that if someone is poor, it's their fault. Herrnstein and Murray argued in "The Bell Curve" that the difference was genetic. "Culture Matters" is one step over. It's still their fault, but they can change. I am not arguing that all cultures are equal. I am arguing that it is taking the easy way out to treat a culture as if it were not the product of centuries of internal actions and reactions, its history and geography, as well as interactions with other cultures, histories and geographies. Blame is a slippery slope. As one U.S. Government Agent said about Native Americans, "If they cannot be made like us, they must be killed."

The sadest mistake of all in this book is this. Britain did not free the American colonies. Slave owners did not end slavery. Corporations did not invent rising wages. Democracy, human rights and development are the products of insurrection. Democracy, human rights and development are the achievements of revolutionaries, radicals and union organizers. We can join with those of other cultures who are working for these things. We can even ask their help bringing democracy, human rights and development here, right where we live.

I saw this book reviewed in TIME and decided I had to read it. It's absolutely fascinating to see such a diverse group of scholars write about the role of culture in societal progress. You may not agree with every piece in this book, but every piece in this book will make you think. I particularly liked the articles by Orlando Patterson and David Landes.