What and who is "The West" ?

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,570
Here are graphic illustrations of languages (written) of some countries from the Western civilization including Russia.

German


Greek


Russian
You know Roman script, so you can read the German excerpt, though you might not understand what it says. But can you read the Greek or the Russian script? Probably not.

The similarities between the scripts are only superficial. There is very close similarity between the South Indian and Thai/Lao scripts. Does this mean that we are one civilization?


Regarding Russia's Byzantine roots, please note that it is not necessarily Eastern (Asian). What are the countries that can claim its Byzantine roots Greece, Yugoslavia, etc. As far as I am concerned they're Europeans and firmly part of the West (you cannot get more "Western" as Greece which is considered "the" cradle of Western civilization).
Greece may be the cradle of Western civilization, but today it is barely Western.

Also, no one said that Russian civilization is the same as the 'East' (meaning Asia). The argument was that Russian/Orthodox civilization is distinct from that of both Western Europe and Asia proper.


BTW, Byzantine Empire is an offshoot of the Roman Empire. In fact the Russians, like their Western European counterparts, are Christians.
There is a world of difference between Russian/Orthodox Christianity and Western Christianity. Many Chinese, Japanese, and Southeast Asians are Buddhists, and the Buddhist religion originated in India. Does this mean that all four of these regions belong to a single civilization?
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
You know Roman script, so you can read the German excerpt, though you might not understand what it says. But can you read the Greek or the Russian script? Probably not.

The similarities between the scripts are only superficial. There is very close similarity between the South Indian and Thai/Lao scripts. Does this mean that we are one civilization?
Greek language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Greek was a widely spoken lingua franca in the Mediterranean world and beyond during classical antiquity, and would eventually become the official parlance of the Byzantine Empire.

Russian language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Borrowings and calques from Byzantine Greek began to enter the Old East Slavic and spoken dialects at this time, which in their turn modified the Old Church Slavonic as well.

German language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Most German vocabulary is derived from the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family.[17] Significant minorities of words are derived from Latin and Greek, with a smaller amount from French and English.

I certainly did not say that the Greek, Russian and German languages are the same. I merely said that they have lose similarities strongly suggesting their common civilizational background, ie. Western civilization.


Greece may be the cradle of Western civilization, but today it is barely Western.







Also, no one said that Russian civilization is the same as the 'East' (meaning Asia). The argument was that Russian/Orthodox civilization is distinct from that of both Western Europe and Asia proper.
This is the start of our conversation:

After all Russia is very much a part of the Western World.
What makes you say that?
Note that what I was referring to in "Western World" is "Western civilization." Here's my complete post -

"Western World" versus "Western Bloc." There should be no confusion. Since the story above is sourced from RT news then I can safely assume that the discourse is about the Western Bloc (the capitalist camp). After all Russia is very much a part of the Western World.
 

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,570
I certainly did not say that the Greek, Russian and German languages are the same. I merely said that they have lose similarities strongly suggesting their common civilizational background, ie. Western civilization.
You did not answer my question. South Indian scripts have close similarity with Southeast Asian scripts like Thai and Lao. Does this mean that India and Southeast Asia belong to one civilization?

Telugu script:


Lao script:


Malayalam script:


Thai script:



Besides the writing system, the sound system is very similar, replete with long and short vowels and other distinctive characteristics of Indian language.


It seems you like images. I have a few to show as well.

Jamakaran Mosque, Iran


Jama Masjid, India


Angkor Wat, Cambodia


Annamalaiyar Temple, India



So, logically, India, Iran, and Cambodia all belong to a single civilization?


Note that what I was referring to in "Western World" is "Western civilization." Here's my complete post -
Perhaps you should differentiate between what aspects of Russian/Slavic culture are external, civilizational influences and which aspects are more or less indigenous and characteristic of Russian/Slavic culture.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
You did not answer my question. South Indian scripts have close similarity with Southeast Asian scripts like Thai and Lao. Does this mean that India and Southeast Asia belong to one civilization?
I admit that "civilization" may be a lose term for it, the more accurate term should be Eastern "World."

Eastern world - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The term Eastern world refers very broadly to the various cultures or social structures and philosophical systems of Asia or geographically the Eastern cultures. This includes the Indian subcontinent (comprising Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the Maldives, and Nepal), the Far East (comprising China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Indonesia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea), the Middle East (Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Yemen, and Egypt), and Central Asia (Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Kyrgyzstan)."


Perhaps you should differentiate between what aspects of Russian/Slavic culture are external, civilizational influences and which aspects are more or less indigenous and characteristic of Russian/Slavic culture.
However hard you try to bring Russia to the East (Eastern World) you simply can't. It's firmly part of the Western World.

But it's another story if we are talking about the 20th century concept of "West" and "East" referring to the political and economic dichotomy between the Western Bloc and the Eastern Bloc countries and their allies.
 
Last edited:

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,570
I admit that "civilization" may be a lose term for it, the more accurate term should be Eastern "World."

Eastern world - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The term Eastern world refers very broadly to the various cultures or social structures and philosophical systems of Asia or geographically the Eastern cultures. This includes the Indian subcontinent (comprising Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the Maldives, and Nepal), the Far East (comprising China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Indonesia, Japan, North Korea, South Korea), the Middle East (Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Yemen, and Egypt), and Central Asia (Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Kyrgyzstan)."
The term "Eastern world" is an extremely broad categorization that includes multiple civilizations. The definition that you appended from Wikipedia is almost entirely useless, since it is based on arbitrary geography and not actual civilizational borders/fault-lines. Would you consider Libya a part of the Western world? Where does Libya (or North Africa in general) fit into this definition? Geographically, North Africa is located much closer to Western Europe than, say, Greece.


However hard you try to bring Russia to the East (Eastern World) you simply can't. It's firmly part of the Western World.
Did you read anything I wrote? I never said that Russia was part of the 'East', I said it was distinct from both 'East' and 'West'. It has been significantly influenced by the West, yes, but that does not make it a part of it.

Russia is as much a part of the 'Western world' as Turkey.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Did you read anything I wrote? I never said that Russia was part of the 'East', I said it was distinct from both 'East' and 'West'. It has been significantly influenced by the West, yes, but that does not make it a part of it.

Personally, I would make the following categories in discussing "East" versus "West":

1. In terms of cultural or civilizational origins/influences and maybe georgraphy, this is the dichotomy between "Western World" and "Eastern World."
2. In terms economic and political distinction that came up during the 20th century, this is the distinction between "Western Bloc" and "Eastern Bloc."
 

LurkerBaba

Super Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
7,882
Likes
8,125
Country flag
Ethics: Racism & Eurocentrism

---
One of my favorite subjects is teaching against eurocentrism in academics. While the laptop experiment suggests that we all learn and think similarly regardless of culture, one of the central messages in education in America and Europe is that we belong to a special culture called "the West" which is superior to other civilizations, particularly in regards to reason and freedom. Often examples from ancient Greece are used to illustrate this superiority, and then the focus becomes modern Europe (ignoring all other cultures and the thousands of years in between the cultures of ancient Greece and modern Europe). This situation, which many like myself call eurocentric (and thus ignorant), is very recent. It came about in the last three hundred years in the wake of European success and dominance of the world. Before that time, Greeks, Romans and Europeans did not describe themselves as "the West", nor did they claim to be superior in terms of reason or freedom relative to all other civilizations.

Greek civilization is indebted to Egyptian, Persian, Mesopotamian and Indian thought. Rome has been the 'father' of Christian Europe since the Roman Empire conquered much of Western Europe and converted them to Roman Catholic Christianity. How did the Greeks come to be the Grandfathers of civilization? How did the myth of "the West" happen?
---


It surprises many to learn that the term "the West" came largely into use in the years following WWII, after the Holocaust showed terrible anti-Semitism. Before WWII, academics freely used the term 'European Race' to describe the ancient Greeks, ancient Romans, and modern Europeans equally. After the Holocaust and the Civil Rights Movement, the term became an eyesore. Academics began increasingly referring to this "race" as "The West.


----

Eric Gerlach's Blog for Thought: Ethics: Racism & Eurocentrism
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Re: Ethics: Racism & Eurocentrism

Often examples from ancient Greece are used to illustrate this superiority, and then the focus becomes modern Europe (ignoring all other cultures and the thousands of years in between the cultures of ancient Greece and modern Europe).

I wouldn't call it West's "superiority," "advantage" should be a more apt term. But this advantage of Western civilization (look at where they are now) is not hard to grasp. I think the crucial ingredient there is their ability to adopt good ideas from all around the World and synthesize it to create a more practical product or culture. In a way they are shameless. But it works. We in the East on the other hand was too attached to our traditional ways or doing things that it is only lately that we are adopting.
 

Aruni

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
47
Likes
37
Edward Said's Orientalism is my personal favourite on the subject of Euro-centricism. Since the days of empire the West has invented the "other" which is the East, the "them" to the "us". The hapless colonised people of this "East" fell into the trap of defining themselves as an anti-thesis of the West. Some of our early anti-colonial thinkers had very noble intentions when they were trying to argue that we are not irrational, sentimental, lack foresight, etc. but the cardinal sin they committed was to define our very own being in the terms of the West. As such, our very own existence has become an exercise in comparing how we are similar to, or different from, the mother ship, the West, the benchmark against which all of humanity should be compared.

In the immortal words of Rabindranath Tagore -

We have for over a century been dragged by the prosperous West behind its chariot, choked by the dust, deafened by the noise, humbled by our own helplessness, and overwhelmed by the speed. We agreed to acknowledge that this chariot-drive was progress, and that progress was civilization. If we ever ventured to ask, 'Progress towards what, and progress for whom,' it was considered to be peculiarly and ridiculously oriental to entertain such doubts about the absoluteness of progress.

Until 1948 there lived a man about whom Tagore wrote -

Of late, a voice has come to us bidding us to take count not only of the scientific perfection of the chariot but of the depth of the ditches lying across its path.

That man was a lanky Bania from Porbander who went by the name of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.

As he and his ideas have long been dead, we're all Westerners now. The last Indian died with Godse's bullet.
 

Known_Unknown

Devil's Advocate
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
2,626
Likes
1,670
Re: Source materials for understanding Indian history and culture

The Europeans did the best they could with their limited cultural knowledge of India to decipher those ancient texts. To claim their translations were malicious with a bit of knowledge gained through hindsight is idiotic.

Before the Europeans came, did any Indian scholars try to interpret or reconstruct this past glory of Indian civilization? Almost all of what we know today about ancient India is thanks to the efforts of a small bunch of British, French and German Indologists. Our knowledge hasn't advanced much since independence. While we keep fighting within ourselves to dig up places like Dwarka, Ayodhya and the Ram Setu, the West has invented groundbreaking new methods based on radiocarbon dating, isotope analysis and DNA matching to further our understanding of world history.

The author's analysis reeks of sour grapes syndrome. Unless we have the wherewithal to do our own fact based research, blaming the original researchers and attributing motives to them is childish.
 

panduranghari

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
1,786
Likes
1,245
Re: Source materials for understanding Indian history and culture

The Europeans did the best they could with their limited cultural knowledge of India to decipher those ancient texts. To claim their translations were malicious with a bit of knowledge gained through hindsight is idiotic.

Before the Europeans came, did any Indian scholars try to interpret or reconstruct this past glory of Indian civilization? Almost all of what we know today about ancient India is thanks to the efforts of a small bunch of British, French and German Indologists. Our knowledge hasn't advanced much since independence. While we keep fighting within ourselves to dig up places like Dwarka, Ayodhya and the Ram Setu, the West has invented groundbreaking new methods based on radiocarbon dating, isotope analysis and DNA matching to further our understanding of world history.

The author's analysis reeks of sour grapes syndrome. Unless we have the wherewithal to do our own fact based research, blaming the original researchers and attributing motives to them is childish.
After Renaissance, Europe wants to move out of the Judeo-Christian, Greco-Roman ethos of Western civlization to a post Christian world. Hence all these distortions of others' past and claiming others past as their own to get rid of their present and move into a brave new world.


Rome did that to the Jews. They took over Christ and blamed the Jews for the crucification and created a blood fued running thru past two millenia. After the fall of Rome, converted Goths who had no clue persecuted the Jews of Iberia even those who had left Jerusalem centuries before Christ!
Islam did that successfully. They took over a female parts worshiping cult and put a Judeo-Christian mask on it called it Islam. And to cover up their stealing they relegated women to a very subservient role in their society.
This the stealing from/dispossesing the heathen and despising him for having first come up with valuable goods in first place.


Same thing. They want Sanskrit from the Hindus and despise them for being heathen!
 

blank_quest

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
2,119
Likes
925
Country flag
Re: Source materials for understanding Indian history and culture

After Renaissance, Europe wants to move out of the Judeo-Christian, Greco-Roman ethos of Western civlization to a post Christian world. Hence all these distortions of others' past and claiming others past as their own to get rid of their present and move into a brave new world.


Rome did that to the Jews. They took over Christ and blamed the Jews for the crucification and created a blood fued running thru past two millenia. After the fall of Rome, converted Goths who had no clue persecuted the Jews of Iberia even those who had left Jerusalem centuries before Christ!
Islam did that successfully. They took over a female parts worshiping cult and put a Judeo-Christian mask on it called it Islam. And to cover up their stealing they relegated women to a very subservient role in their society.
This the stealing from/dispossesing the heathen and despising him for having first come up with valuable goods in first place.


Same thing. They want Sanskrit from the Hindus and despise them for being heathen!
I didn't get you, Whats this female part of religion? ,heard it for the first time.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Re: Source materials for understanding Indian history and culture

I didn't get you, Whats this female part of religion? ,heard it for the first time.
Hmmm, I am also trying to decipher that message. PanduRangHari, please elaborate.
 

panduranghari

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
1,786
Likes
1,245
Re: Source materials for understanding Indian history and culture

Hmmm, I am also trying to decipher that message. PanduRangHari, please elaborate.
Here is something to read through and dwell on.

The name given in the Old Testament to the old Semitic mother-goddess, called in Phenicia, Ashtarte; in Babylonia, Ishtar; and in Arabia, Athtar. (For her worship among the Hebrews, see Astarte.) Ashtoreth is derived from Ashtart by a distortion after the analogy of "Bosheth" (compare Jastrow, "Jour. Biblical Literature" xiii. 28, note).

The Goddess in Phenicia.
Ashtarte was the chief goddess of the Sidonians, among whom she was worshiped as an independent divinity, and also under the name "Ashtarte of the name of Baal," as a counterpart of Baal (compare "C. I. S." i. 3 and "Hebraica," x. 33). A fragment quoted in Philo Biblos connects the worship of Ashtarte with Tyre (compare also Josephus, "Ant." viii. 5, § 3; "Contra Ap." i. 18, who quotes Menander), while Lucian ("De Syria Dea," §§ 6-9) describes in some detail her worship at Gebal (Byblos), in which the wailing for Tammuz was a prominent feature. As a part of this ritual, women were obliged to sacrifice either their hair or their chastity. A shrine of this goddess was found also in the city of Askelon in Philistia (Herodotus, i. 105), in which the armor was hung after the battle of Gilboa (I Sam. xxxi. 10).

n Phenician Colonies.
The Phenician colonies carried the worship of Ashtoreth into the Mediterranean. In Cyprus she had important temples at Citium and Paphos, and left a deep impression on its civilization (compare "Heb." x. 42-46 and "Jour. of Hellenic Studies," 1888, pp. 175-206). It also left its impress in Malta and Sicily ("Heb." x. 46-49). From Cyprus her cult found its way to Corinth and other parts of Greece, where it corrupted the simple purity of the old Greek family life (compare Farnell's "Cults of the Greek States," xxi.-xxiii.). From Sicily it made its way to some extent into Italy.

In North Africa, Ashtoreth was known as Tanith (see Barton, "Semitic Origins," p. 253, note 6), to which is frequently attached the epithet "Face of Baal," showing that she was often regarded as sub-ordinate to that god. She was also called Dido (Love), and was, as Augustine says ("De Civitate Dei," ii. 4), worshiped with obscene rites (compare "Heb." x. 48-53).

In Babylonia.
In Babylonia and Assyria she was worshiped as Ishtar at several different shrines, in each of which the goddess possessed slightly varying characteristics. Erech was one of the oldest and most important of these shrines, where she was called also Nanâ, and generally appears as the goddess of sexual love and of fertility.

At Agade she was worshiped as the spouse of Shamash ("Heb." x. 24-26), and at Babylon as that of Marduk. At the latter shrine, where she was called Zarpanit, she was the goddess of fertility for both plants and animals. According to Herodotus (i. 199), every Babylonian woman once in her life was compelled to offer her person at Zarpanit's shrine (compare "Heb." x. 15-23).

From Babylonia, emigrants carried her worship to Assyria, as represented in the Assyrian inscriptions. In Assyria, at Nineveh, and Assur she was regarded as the spouse of Assur and the mother of gods and men. With the god Assur she was supreme, although other gods were worshiped. Another shrine of hers of high antiquity was at Arbela. From the reign of Sennacherib onward the Ishtar of Arbela is regarded as distinct from the other Ishtars. She had no spouse, was mother, and a goddess of war. Probably her worship there had never been united with that of a male deity (compare "Heb." ix. 131-155).

In Arabia.
In Arabia she was known as Athtar, and in southern Arabia at least was changed into a masculine deity. An interesting inscription ("Jour. Asiat." 8 ser., ii. 256 et seq.) exhibits this transition in process (compare "Heb." x. 204). As a goddess Athtar was a mother, and was bifurcated (rather than transformed) into a masculine and feminine deity, the father and the mother of mankind (compare Mordtmann, "Himyaritische Inschriften und Alterthümer," No. 869). The father was known as Athtar, or by such epithets as "Ilmaqqahu," "Talab Riyam," etc.; the mother, as Shams (compare Barton, "Semitic Origins," pp. 129 et seq.).

In Abyssinia.
As a god, Athtar was the god of fertility. From southern Arabia his worship was transferred to Abyssinia, where he was known as Astar, and where many features of his worship still survive in the rites of the Abyssinian church (compare "Epigraphische Denkmäler aus Abessinien"; Bent, "Sacred City of the Ethiopians"; and Glaser, "Die Abessinier in Arabien und Africa").

In northern Arabia the name Athtar does not appear; but there are two goddesses, Al-Uzza and Al-Lat, who are shown elsewhere as goddesses of fertility scarcely disguised under these epithets (compare "Heb." x. 58-66). Al-Uzza was worshiped especially at Nakhla and Mecca, and Al-Lat at Taif and by the Nabatæans (compare "C. I. S." ii. Nos. 170, 182, 183). She is mentioned by Herodotus, iii. 8.

This cult thus presents an underlying unity throughout the Semitic world, with many local differences. Various animals were sacred to this deity in different places, while she was frequently pictured in their form. Thus, at Eryx she was thought to assume the form of a dove, and of a dove and a gazelle at Mecca. At Arbela she was conceived byAssurbanipal as a warrioress, behung with bow and quiver ("Hebraica," ix. 162); while Zidonian coins picture her standing on the prow of a galley and pointing forward as though guiding the vessel on its way. Other local circumstances gave her many other forms. Thus, in Sabæa she was identified with the sun and the morning star; at Mecca and in Assyria, with Venus; and at Zidon, with the moon.

Schrader ("C. I. O. T." 2d ed.), Sayce ("Hibbert Lect." 252), and Driver (Hastings' "Dict. of the Bible") hold to the non-Semitic origin of this cult. Paul Haupt ("Z. D. M. G." 34, 758 et seq.), Zimmern ("Bab. Buss." 38), Friedrich Delitzsch ("Assyrian Grammar," p. 181), Moore ("Encyc. Bib."), G. Hoffmann ("Ueber Einige Phönizische Inschriften," 22n), and Barton ("Heb." x. 69 et seq.) have argued on the other side. It is hardly possible that the most universally worshiped of Semitic divinities should have been of non-Semitic origin. It appears plausible to assume that the goddess originated in Arabia in primitive Semitic times in connection with the culture of the date-palm, and that, as the Semites migrated, she was transplanted to the different countries (compare Barton, "Semitic Origins," ch. iii.-v.).
link
 
Last edited:

panduranghari

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
1,786
Likes
1,245
Re: Source materials for understanding Indian history and culture

The Europeans did the best they could with their limited cultural knowledge of India to decipher those ancient texts. To claim their translations were malicious with a bit of knowledge gained through hindsight is idiotic.

Before the Europeans came, did any Indian scholars try to interpret or reconstruct this past glory of Indian civilization? Almost all of what we know today about ancient India is thanks to the efforts of a small bunch of British, French and German Indologists. Our knowledge hasn't advanced much since independence. While we keep fighting within ourselves to dig up places like Dwarka, Ayodhya and the Ram Setu, the West has invented groundbreaking new methods based on radiocarbon dating, isotope analysis and DNA matching to further our understanding of world history.

The author's analysis reeks of sour grapes syndrome. Unless we have the wherewithal to do our own fact based research, blaming the original researchers and attributing motives to them is childish.
Shem, Ham and Japeth- the sons of Noah.

Japheth is the father of the Japhetic race >>>>>>>>>>>Read Europeans

Shem is the father of the Semitic race>>>>>>>>>>>>Read Jews

Ham is the father of the Hamitic race>>>>>>>>>>>>Read Indians

Ham was the cursed one.

Vedic texts are older than 4004BCE - the year when everything was created. These Europeans find it unacceptable THAT A CURSED RACE CAN PRODUCE SUCH THOUGHT PROCESSES which Vedas Signify.

So now they want to show AIT. AIT is debunked by genetics as well. So now these bastards from madarrasa-e-Harvard are showing a strawman called PROTO-INDO-EUROPEAN language from which Sanskrut is derived.

They are hell bent on proving the origin of vedic texts is somewhere in Central asia close to Caucusus.

They are clinging to the bones, it will be soon time when the truth will prevail.

I love when you try defending the germanic races.
 

blank_quest

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
2,119
Likes
925
Country flag
@pandu are you referring to Uzaat , lat , manat . as referred in Satanic Verses.
 

Global Defence

Articles

Top