How do they explain western dominance in other world regions?

[JohnT]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
Western Civilisation - a loose term to describe a group of nation states, later expanded in number by the independence and growth of former colonies, characterised by the cross fertilisation of ideas, particularly in the fields of scientific research, finance, industrialisation and political thought, from the late 16th century onwards. Marked by the rise to global domination of the "member" states concurrent with the political and military stagnation of other competing powers, until the losers began to adopt "western" ideas and practices during the 20th century.

Now often denigrated as a concept or identity by writers (and Apolyton posters) whose national and cultural identities were occupied and/or sidelined by the rise of the European and American industrial powers.

Simple enough for you?

And let's not forget that these ideas and impulses arose in the countries of "Western" Europe (as opposed to Eastern Europe), which itself is but a minor prominatory on the, you know, west side of asia. Hence "West." See Paiktis?

Hell, if the Europeans didn't have some power and organization, they could've never rammed through the idea that Europe is an actual continent, rather than just a very big peninsula attached to a real continent.

[debeest]

Dr. Strangelove, your explanation for China's lack of dominance is similar to Jared Diamond's in Guns, Germs, and Steel. I found it inadequate when I read the book, and I still do, but I have no alternative explanation other than China's distance from the New World. I won't argue the point, but I consider the current status to be simply a fluctuation in historical time. It's been different in the past, and it's likely to change again.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The reason that China failed to become the dominant culture of the last half of the last millenium is simply that their culture developed an attitude of disdain for progress, trade and other cultures.

Agreed. The Chinese had massive fleets that went to Africa in the 1400s. By the 1600s, they weren't sailing even as far as Singapore. They just grew fat and happy and sat on their laurels. It is what happens if you aren't challenged by other countries to be better.

[Dr Strangelove]

What happened over the past millenium is not to say that the Chinese won't invent warp drive and be the first nation to visit a neighboring star. It is merely to point out how we happened to arrive at the current situation. Confucian values still suffuse Chinese culture, but they are much weaker and now pose little threat to Chinese scientific endeavors. Western culture was once very anti-progressive also.

[debeest]

Lord Merciless: Yes, the whole world is westernizing now. Modernizing. Same thing, to a considerable extent. That's because the Western world is successful, so the world is changing to reflect it. That doesn't mean that the Western world's success stems from superiority. Our ability to exploit the New World is enough to explain our success all by itself.

For that matter, Western civilization itself isn't what it used to be. The modern Western world will soon be a whole new modern Western world, different from the one we have now. Wouldn't you agree that modern Western government forms, moral codes, education, dress, religion, societal structure, family structure, and art are pretty different from the Greek and Roman antecedents that gave birth to Western civilization? And from the medieval societies from which Western civilization more directly descended? And from the colonial American society? When a new Westernized China arises, it won't be very "Western," it will simply have accommodated and absorbed some modern Western characteristics. Just as all societies through time have done, including modern Western civilization.

The accomplishments of modern times are "greater" than earlier accomplishments because they come after earlier accomplishments. Knowledge increases asymptotically, and thus in any given period of time it's easier to advance farther than in any prior time. How would you rank fire, the wheel, cooking, tool use, irrigation, metal-working, pottery, writing, the alphabet, mathematics, astronomy, navigation, animal domestication, clothing, and religion among the important discoveries? How could we have discovered germ theory, genetic engineering, and space flight without discovering the others first? How could ancient civilizations have made our host of modern discoveries when no one had already laid the groundwork? Someone not from Western civilization, most likely. Do you really feel that Western civilization is entitled to the bulk of the credit?

There's no self-loathing or self-deprecation in acknowledging that your own self or your own family or your own nation or your own religion or your own race or your own culture is just one among many. Common sense would lead you to question whether you just happen to belong to the one special uber-civilization better than all the others.

[Kuciwalker]

Yes if you define hellenic culture by the application of democracy. greeks didnt even have a national identity untill the persian wars and even after only a very shaky. kind of like your "Western civ" huh? only that besides a common enemy greeks spoke the same language and considered everyone else as a barbarian. thats about it.

First, you contradicted yourself within that paragraph. I would say considering "everyone else" barbarians shows a pretty distinct "national identity". Otherwise, how would they tell if someone fell under "everyone else". Second, those aspects you said Greeks shared seem like a pretty good definition of civilization to me.

(btw, I noticed that some people in this thread mentioned that Alexander the Great spread "Hellenic" civilization. Wasn't the conquest of Greece by Macedonia considered the start of "Hellenistic" civilization?)

EDIT: oh, and this thread is one of the most amusing in a long time. Paiktis and Kidicious butting heads is absolutely delicious.

[DAVOUT]

Paiktis, there was a very limited period in the 19th century (between 1830 and 1865) where the occidental nations shared a truly unique feature : they were becoming industrialized when none of the other nations has still done so. Then the Japan made the Meiji revolution consisting of industrializing too, which was done at a fast pace as demonstrated by the defeat of the Russian fleet by the Rising Sun fleet in 1905.
The industrial power was the most spectacular aspect of the occidental civilization, and it is quite possible that it has summarized in the eyes of many its unity.
But after 1865 there was an asian country in the game, and it was no longer possible to define the occidental civilization as including industrialization as a unique feature shared between occidental nations alone.
I am under the impression that Huntington was influenced by the considerable developpement of the technology, and by its domination by the occidental nations, and gave to it the main role in what he calls a civilization. This is not correct for comparing civilizations if this comparison aims to characterize a civilization by its unique features.
But I think that a complete description of a civilization could include features shared with others, if only for possible evolutions (Japan).

[Ned]

Western dominance is due to it technological leadership. Technical progress is related to 1) education and 2) competition. Technologic progress is enhanced by laws that promotes fairness, including intellectual property laws.

A primary source of new technology for last 700 years or so is a permanent arms race in the West.

Competition, patents, the rule of law and an arms race.

These are things that brought the West dominance.

[Agathon]

The Greeks did not have a national identity, but a cultural identity. They referred to themselves as the "Hellenes" and the rest of us as "Barbaroi". The Hellenes were all those who were allowed to compete at the Olympic Games.

Yes, Alexander inaugurated the "Hellenistic" Age. He wasn't a Greek anyway.

[Drake Tungsten]

This is the gayest thread in the history of Western Civilization

What the hell is paiky's problem? I think he just must be pissed that the Former Ottoman Province of Greece isn't considered a part of Western Civilization. We stole all their good ideas and perfected them while they were relegated to the ash-heap of history...

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ned
Western dominance is due to it technological leadership. Technical progress is related to 1) education and 2) competition. Technologic progress is enhanced by laws that promotes fairness, including intellectual property laws.

That's BS. Intellectual property is a recent development. And it doesn't follow anyway, most of the world's greatest music was composed when there either wasn't IP or enforcement was lax.

And "Western Civilization" is a silly idea. The east and west weren't that different 500 years ago - so the Classical inheritance thing is a bit silly. The real explanation is probably quite mundane.

[Bereta_Eder]

you have said nothing which proves the existance of a "Western civ"

[Agathon]

Re: This is the gayest thread in the history of Western Civilization

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
What the hell is paiky's problem? I think he just must be pissed that the Former Ottoman Province of Greece isn't considered a part of Western Civilization. We stole all their good ideas and perfected them while they were relegated to the ash-heap of history...

Since you have used at least two Greek words in that statement, I think you're being a bit mean.

Who are "we"? I mean at various times since the end of the Classical Age various regions have been more or less backward. It's not a simple linear explanation.

I mean who would have thought that a bunch of illiterate farmers who did a bit of boating now and then would end up dominating the globe for 100 years?

Now they're sliding back into obscurity.

[Drake Tungsten]

a bunch of illiterate farmers who did a bit of boating now and then

That's the best description of the Greeks that I have ever heard.

[Bereta_Eder]

aw little drake, you're so amusing