Upheaval: Turning Points for Nations in Crisis

A crisis is a turning point and represents a challenge, creating “pressure to devise new coping methods” (7). Previous modes of operation no longer work and some changes must be made to successfully deal with the problem. While there is disagreement over what constitutes a crisis, Diamond adopts a mid-range definition: Crises occur in a range between a few decades and a century. This broad definition sometimes makes it unclear as to whether Diamond’s analysis is addressing a specific crisis, or  a series of succeeding or related crises, such as under dictatorships like Pinochet that create new crises while mitigating others.

Ego strength refers to “having a sense of yourself, having a sense of purpose, and accepting yourself for who you are” (42). Ego strength helps an individual successfully navigate a personal crisis. Nations do not have ego strength; thus, Diamond uses this factor as a metaphor for national identity, which he lists as one of the factors helping a nation to successfully navigate a crisis.

Diamond uses the metaphor of a mosaic to refer to “individuals and nations in whom or in which disparate elements coexist uneasily” (5). Finding the right amount of change to make is key to the successful navigation of a crisis. A change cannot be complete: Some parts of the old must mix with the new. The combined old and new parts form a mosaic.

National identity refers to “the features of language, culture, and history that make a nation unique among the world’s nations, that contribute to national pride, and that a nation’s citizens view themselves as sharing” (52). This factor replaces ego strength in Diamond’s framework for dealing with national crises. It is one of the more important factors in the successful navigation of a crisis, as it is present in all but one case, Indonesia. Even in that case, by the time Indonesia ousted Suharto and had democratic elections, this factor was present.

Pancasila refers to the set of five principles that “serves as an umbrella ideology to unify Indonesia” (189). Articulated by Sukarno, those principles are “belief in one god, Indonesian national unity, humanitarianism, democracy, and social justice for all Indonesians” (189). While Suharto certainly did not abide by these principles, they remain a unifying force, per Diamond, in a country with the weakest level of national identity in his case studies.

Rigidity refers to an inflexible personality. Such persons believe that there is only one resolution to a problem. Flexibility, in contrast, is a factor in Diamond’s framework allowing for the successful resolution of personal crises. Since nations do not have flexible or rigid personalities, Diamond adjusts this factor in his framework: He looks at particular situations and evaluates if there was rigidity or flexibility.

Selective change, or the process of building a fence, allows an individual to identify what is causing the crisis and going wrong while noting the things that are still working well. This is a key factor in the successful navigation of a crisis for both individuals and nations. It is imperative that some changes be made to address a crisis, but that there not be wholesale change, which is impossible. For example, Meiji Japan retained core cultural values while adopting Western methods in various spheres.

Social capital is “the trust, friendships, group affiliations, helping, expectation of being helped built up by actively participating in and being a member of all sorts of groups” (351). Diamond worries that social capital is in short supply in the US of the 21st century. The biggest concern in the US’s unfolding crisis, per Diamond, is polarization and the lack of compromise. The decline in social capital contributes to that problem.