Analysis Essay “How did Europe Conquered the World” VS Jared Diamond’s Explanations

The question that our readers may face while reading this paper, is how did Europe Conquer the world? Many may have answers developing or developed already, yet, this question has many diverse answers to it, depending on the person that you ask. There are those that may say that Europe conquered the world due to its political power, and there are others who may say it flourished in its resources, and conquered the world that way. In this paper, we will be comparing the views from economic and history professor Phillip T. Hoffman, and biophysicist, geographer, professor, and Author, Jared Diamond. We will compare their varied views and explanations on “How Europe Conquered the World”, and also explore this question from a personal side as well.

Phillip T. Hoffman’s explanation of how Europe conquered the world, is putting into light the many years of Europe’s economic, political and historical changes, and their effect on Europe’s individual developmental route relating to that of military, rivalry, and war. Political leaders had many incentives to contribute to Europe’s success, not just to make more war, but also, European politicians had the sums to spend, and this helped the succession of the country. Europeans, those of higher class specifically, had the money to build palaces and other buildings, yet most of their finances went into fighting wars. “Leaders elsewhere faced radically different incentives which kept many of them militarily weak” (Hoffman, 2015). Also, Hoffman says, “for this and a variety of other reasons, leaders outside of Europe could not match Europe’s innovations in warfare innovation.” (Hoffman, 2015).  He states also, that because of the geographical closeness that Europe had to many other countries, “it could easily learn from its rivals’ errors and copy their improvements.” (Hoffman, 2015) Comparatively, Diamond’s explanation of how Europe conquered the world, includes a few more factors, than that of Hoffman’s.

Jared Diamond’s explanation of how Europe conquered the world, goes into detail a bit more than just saying Europe conquered the world because they had money and power. Instead, he argues and explains “that the roots of European triumph stretch back thousands of years, and rest in the power of geography. Geography gave Europeans the most productive crops and animals on the planet, and these allowed them to develop guns, germs and steel – three great forces of conquest that have shaped human history.” (PBS, 2005). This explanation dives into the factors that have helped Europe become so successful; talking about their crops, animals, and their ability to resources such as guns, germs, and steel. Also, Diamond discusses in his book Guns, Germs, and Steel, how “Environment molds history,”. (Diamond, pg. 352) Although, seemingly contrasting with his previous statement, Diamond’s theory relates to how countries develop quicker than others, and are able to develop more based on their “geographic” luck. My personal view is gravitating more towards the explanatory side of Jared Diamond.

Both of these explanations to the question of how did Europe conquer the world, may be correct in their own ways, but these are the words of others. However, here are my thoughts and outlook on the topic. I prefer Diamond’s explanation, in its place of Hoffman’s explanation in “How Europe Conquered the World”. Diamond goes more into the environmental view, and as I have said before, notably mentions the various factors to help contribute to Europe’s success.  Although I see reasonable points in both peoples’ explanations, I tend to agree with Jared Diamond more than the other. I cannot see one country, such as Europe developing so far, and conquering such a large origin, while contributing only one or two factors to their succession. Evolution, succession or conquering, should be viewed or researched into the many various contributing factors of that country. Countries and continents need to build on their resources, experiment with environmental changes, and also, consider topics such as money and power.