Scan barcode
junypaganmd's review
5.0
Uno de los mejores libros sobre política, historia y sociología que he leído. Me encantó el enfoque científico aplicado a la historia.
wilsondasilva's review against another edition
5.0
Outstandingly written and coherently argued. The ideas contained in this book, which seek to apply non-linear scientific principles to history and human societies, are profound. I think Turchin is really onto something here.
zdnesbit's review against another edition
4.0
Pivotal for anyone wishing to understand ancient to modern societal formation to collapse.
lassebirk's review against another edition
4.0
SUMMARY: Asabiya, capacity for collective action or social cohesion, is the fuel of empires. Asabiya is especially created on metaethnic frontiers where groups and tribes unite to defend against a common enemy. Turchin applies his theory to the rise of the Russian empire on the metaethnic frontier with the Tatars, on the rise of the Roman empire on the metaethnic frontier with the Gauls, on the rise of the islamic caliphate on the metaethnic frontier of the Byzantine empire, on China's empire established on the fault line with the steppe nomads, and others.
Turchin identifies three layers of cycles for empires:
1. Father-and-son cycles where grandfathers tire of fighting civil wars, but their grandsons did not experience war horrors and regain their grandfathers' war enthusiasm.
2. Secular cycles lasting two to three centuries where demographic, economic, and social structures integrate and disintegrate.
3. Rise and fall of empires consisting of 2, 3 or 4 secular cycles.
Turchin suggests the development of a new science, cliodynamics, to mature the study of history through mathematical and statistical analysis of the dynamics of historical societies. He references Tolstoy's attempt to put the fighting spirit - roughly asabiya - of armies in mathematical terms. Turchin also mentions Trevor N. Dupuy's analysis of World War I and II combats to estimate fighting spirit of Britain, US, and Germany, where Germany outperformed the others.
In the next chapter, Turchin examines Putnam's work on social capital. It would have been interesting to see Turchin attempt to apply more of this work and cliodynamics in general on historical and contemporary events.
Turchin identifies three layers of cycles for empires:
1. Father-and-son cycles where grandfathers tire of fighting civil wars, but their grandsons did not experience war horrors and regain their grandfathers' war enthusiasm.
2. Secular cycles lasting two to three centuries where demographic, economic, and social structures integrate and disintegrate.
3. Rise and fall of empires consisting of 2, 3 or 4 secular cycles.
Turchin suggests the development of a new science, cliodynamics, to mature the study of history through mathematical and statistical analysis of the dynamics of historical societies. He references Tolstoy's attempt to put the fighting spirit - roughly asabiya - of armies in mathematical terms. Turchin also mentions Trevor N. Dupuy's analysis of World War I and II combats to estimate fighting spirit of Britain, US, and Germany, where Germany outperformed the others.
In the next chapter, Turchin examines Putnam's work on social capital. It would have been interesting to see Turchin attempt to apply more of this work and cliodynamics in general on historical and contemporary events.
neoteotihuacan's review against another edition
4.0
There is much to be said about this compelling theory. The author admits its faults...that humans are individually difficult to predict and societies easier to discern, that asabiya (the potential for collective action) is present but only indirectly and abstractly measured. But he also, perhaps rightly, champions the theory's potential. After all, being wrong in science, as Turchin himself writes, is still a useful enterprise.
Empires and states are about the capacity for collective action, Turchin says. The history of each empire passes through cycles of integrative and disintegrative phases, called Secular Cycles, that erode that asabiya down, mostly through the Matthew Principle. Frontiers between enemy cultures birth new empires and states. Asabiya memory seems to have a long half life. Overall, Turchin's theory is like describing how a fire expands, with a gradually cooling core and a red hot edge eating anything in it's path, expanding away from the center.
I enjoyed reading this, even though I have written in the margins, correcting this and disagreeing with that, more than I have with any other book in the last several years. More data is needed. More modeling is needed. More thinking is needed. But Turchin is on to something. This whole idea is an educated hunch...with data to back it up. However, it's not a full-fledged theory. Not yet.
Turchin needs to read up in Moffet, author of "The Human Swarm," who connects the individual to the larger group in behavior and psychology. Humans are biological creatures which surely had an effect on the subject! He needs to read E. O. Wilson's "The Social Conquest Of Earth" to understand humans as eusocial creatures and maybe connect these secular cycles to other species (Turchin does have a biology background). He needs to study up on the new phases of empire described by Immerwahr in "How To Hide An Empire." The US has, through technological innovations, changed what imperialism can look like.
Should you read this book, yourself? Yes. It is compelling stuff. You'll look at history and your own nation-state in a new light. One cannot help but to think very long term about our modern world.
The book can be a difficult read, but the subject is worth thinking about.
Empires and states are about the capacity for collective action, Turchin says. The history of each empire passes through cycles of integrative and disintegrative phases, called Secular Cycles, that erode that asabiya down, mostly through the Matthew Principle. Frontiers between enemy cultures birth new empires and states. Asabiya memory seems to have a long half life. Overall, Turchin's theory is like describing how a fire expands, with a gradually cooling core and a red hot edge eating anything in it's path, expanding away from the center.
I enjoyed reading this, even though I have written in the margins, correcting this and disagreeing with that, more than I have with any other book in the last several years. More data is needed. More modeling is needed. More thinking is needed. But Turchin is on to something. This whole idea is an educated hunch...with data to back it up. However, it's not a full-fledged theory. Not yet.
Turchin needs to read up in Moffet, author of "The Human Swarm," who connects the individual to the larger group in behavior and psychology. Humans are biological creatures which surely had an effect on the subject! He needs to read E. O. Wilson's "The Social Conquest Of Earth" to understand humans as eusocial creatures and maybe connect these secular cycles to other species (Turchin does have a biology background). He needs to study up on the new phases of empire described by Immerwahr in "How To Hide An Empire." The US has, through technological innovations, changed what imperialism can look like.
Should you read this book, yourself? Yes. It is compelling stuff. You'll look at history and your own nation-state in a new light. One cannot help but to think very long term about our modern world.
The book can be a difficult read, but the subject is worth thinking about.
ochers's review against another edition
3.0
Why do empires rise and fall? Asabiya - or cohesion, coined by Ibn Khaldun and appropriated by Turchin. He argues that empires form when under tension via adversaries on the border - when these adversaries are of distinctly opposite 'meta-ethnicities', this tension tends to act as a stressor which can enhance asabiya, leading to the formation of an empire. The strength of this empire is, according to Turchin, correlated with asabiya - which forms as highlighted above.
The hypothesis is interesting - Turchin's use of historical examples such as the Cossacks, and the Roman Empire, serve as crucial points. However, the distinct lack of data, and his (somewhat) reliance on 'cliodynamics' were distinct weaknesses.
The hypothesis is interesting - Turchin's use of historical examples such as the Cossacks, and the Roman Empire, serve as crucial points. However, the distinct lack of data, and his (somewhat) reliance on 'cliodynamics' were distinct weaknesses.
lukescalone's review against another edition
3.0
Ibn Khaldun has cast a long shadow. This is book just a footnote.