What and who is "The West" ?

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
I don't know why you are so intent on dividing the world between the 'East' and 'West', as if all human societies and civilizations fall into one of these two categories.
Here is the answer to your question. :lol:

AsianObserve's world of reasoning involves a singular bi-state capacitor. It either has charge, or is devoid of charge.
For AsianObserve, either you are Eastern or Western. He is completely into the digital age.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
For AsianObserve, either you are Eastern or Western. He is completely into the digital age.

What's wrong with being "Eastern"? Does it make me a lesser human being? Or have an inferior culture? Nobody can tell me that as an Asian I'm a laggard, certainly not Western people (look at where they are now). Asia is the future and I think the future has already arrived.

If you have inferiority complex and would fight tooth and nail against being labelled as "Eastern" (because you think it will degrade you), me, I have no such complex.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Answered in red inline.

What's wrong with being "Eastern"? [Nothing.] Does it make me a lesser human being? [No.] Or have an inferior culture? [No.] Nobody can tell me that as an Asian I'm a laggard, certainly not Western people. [Nobody said so.] Asia is the future and I think the future has already arrived. [I agree. We're almost entirely into the purely digital age.]

If you have inferiority complex and would fight tooth and nail against being labelled as "Eastern" (because you think it will degrade you), me, I have no such complex.[I don't have inferiority complex, but I do have a complex analogy, like an analog device. I don't like over simplification of people into 'either East, or West,' classification, where, in reality, it is much more complex.]
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
"I don't have inferiority complex, but I do have a complex analogy, like an analog device."

A knack for making simple things complicated, that explains it. Word of advice, please stop living in the gray World and take a position.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
"I don't have inferiority complex, but I do have a complex analogy, like an analog device."

A knack for making simple things complicated, that explains it. Word of advice, please stop living in the gray World and take a position.
How many position do I have to choose from? Only two - West or East?
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
How many position do I have to choose from? Only two - West or East?

Huh? We're threshing out a sub premise now. The positions in contention here are not the major premise of the thread on how to define "East" and "West," it's between do you believe in major civilizational amalgamations or there are no amalgamations at all (every civilization is unique and cannot be lumped with neighboring civilizations into "East" versus "West" however interrelated they are in a lot or some ways). This is how the debate has now turned into.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Huh? We're threshing out a sub premise now. The positions in contention here are not the major premise of the thread on how to define "East" and "West," it's between do you believe in major civilizational amalgamations or there are no amalgamations at all (every civilization is unique and cannot be lumped with neighboring civilizations into "East" versus "West" however interrelated they are in a lot or some ways). This is how the debate has now turned into.
Ok, and I already took a centrist view. You may disagree, or agree. What is new in this discussion now?
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Since you took a neutral view then I guess we have to wait for civ's rejoinder...
 

opesys

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
279
Likes
138
''East" vs "West"
If you take a detailed look at it don't you think 'East' is simply following the footsteps of 'West' and at the same time being good or little better at it ? I don't think any major country in the east today is really relying on its past culture to make progress. 'West' what it is known today to everybody is majorly because of its progress in science, technology, economics, music, movies, liberal life style...

So if 'east' is simply following western style to make progress then why differentiate between 'east' and 'west' ? especially talking about east's past,culture in this context is ridiculous...

I would differentiate it this way... "who is working hard and serious about their future" vs "who is not working hard and not serious about their future"
 
Last edited:

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
''East" vs "West"
If you take a detailed look at it don't you think 'East' is simply following the footsteps of 'West' and at the same time being good or little better at it ? I don't think any major country in the east today is really relying on its past culture to make progress. 'West' what it is known today to everybody is majorly because of its progress in science, technology, economics, music, movies, liberal life style...

So if 'east' is simply following western style to make progress then why differentiate between 'east' and 'west' ? especially talking about east's past,culture in this context is ridiculous...

I would differentiate it this way... "who is working hard and serious about their future" vs "who is not working hard and not serious about their future"

The civilizational distinctions is relevant only for academic purposes and frankly is always a source of lively discussion. I agree with you that with globalisation and the interaction if not integration of societies through internationalised media, trade and travel these civilizational distinctions are becoming moot (which is a good thing). But that will not stop us from discussion the matter.
 

opesys

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
279
Likes
138
The civilizational distinctions is relevant only for academic purposes and frankly is always a source of lively discussion. I agree with you that with globalisation and the interaction if not integration of societies through internationalised media, trade and travel these civilizational distinctions are becoming moot (which is a good thing). But that will not stop us from discussion the matter.
If you are discussing history then yes this is definitely an interesting topic. My point was 'east' vs 'west' based on civilization is not relevant in becoming "the future" in the current situation we are in.
I misunderstood because at some point you said, "...Asia is the future and I think the future has already arrived". What I was trying to say was Asia becoming the future has nothing to do much with it's past or culture or the civilization it developed... The only reason why Asia will be the future is because in the recent past (for may be 500 years) it has not experienced being recognized by the rest of the world for what it is... 'east' feels a need to show the world that it is as good as the 'west' and also wants to enjoy a little luxurious and comfortable life like the west.. It's a cycle and it doesn't matter to what civilization one belongs to...for few years somebody or the other will enjoy the status of superpower..Right now it looks like 'west' is becoming a little complacent especially if you look at the western youth today and the same time 'east' is becoming more active..so probably for a few years until the wheel turns 'east' will regain some of its lost glory and then a later point probably 'west' may wake up and the cycle will continue...
 
Last edited:

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Since the advent of international trades and Western colonialism the unique civilizational marks of the Worlds civilizations has been slowly but steadily eroding. Now the relatively recent phenomenon of globalization of trade and information, coupled with more affordable and easier international travel, has only accelerated the process. Increasingly we are being integrated across borders and cultures into a global community. So all these interesting talks about past civilizations may be becoming moot. Of course it does not stop us from having an economic discussion about civlizations.
 

panduranghari

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
1,786
Likes
1,245
The civilizational distinctions is relevant only for academic purposes and frankly is always a source of lively discussion. I agree with you that with globalisation and the interaction if not integration of societies through internationalised media, trade and travel these civilizational distinctions are becoming moot (which is a good thing). But that will not stop us from discussion the matter.
I disagree. Western Universalism is not good. Even nature prefers variety over similarity.
 

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,570
I thought you already accepted my clarification?
As far as I know, you never provided a definition for the 'Western world'. You had earlier posted a definition of the 'Eastern world', which I rejected since it was based on arbitrary geography. You also seem to believe that any entity which doesn't belong to the 'East' by definition belongs to the 'West', which doesn't make any sense.

Just for curiosity's sake, where would you place sub-Saharan Africa in your bipolar civilizational world? In the 'West' or in the 'East'? Or for that matter, what about the indigenous civilizations of the Americas, like the Aztecs, Mayas, and Incas? Shouldn't they be more Western than the West, geographically speaking? Or are they part of the 'East' too?


Then why call ourselves Asians if there's no point in an amalgamation anyway or them as Europeans or Middle Eastern?
The term 'Asian' is simply a geographic term, nothing more. Just like the terms 'African' and 'European'.


This amalgamation of related civilizations or cultures cut both ways, it can be a tool for putting down a large swath of people into a group so that they can be distinguished as sub par with another amalgamated people in terms of culture or civilization (what you are alluding to in your insistence of going against the "East" and "West" thing, which you consider as a historical conspiracy by the West to put us down) or it could be a rallying cry for an amalgamated people, who otherwise would be at each other's throat for their petty civilizational differences without looking at their broader shared legacy to work together more closely.
Pan-Asianism as an ideology is very recent. It emerged in the late 19th century as a direct response to European imperialism and colonialism, by advocating the creation a continental identity based on a singular common interest (namely, the resisting Western encroachment). This identity had to be created because there exists no 'natural' affinity between the various, diverse peoples of Asia. The only thing that they had in common in the 19th century was the shared experience of being subjugated by various European powers. Unfortunately, Pan-Asianism was never a particularly popular or successful ideology. After the passing of Sun Yat-sen, one of the most prominent Pan-Asianists, the militarist regime in Japan hijacked and misused the ideology to justify their own imperialism and exploitation. The subsequent Cold War further sidelined Pan-Asianism.

I actually consider myself to be a modern Pan-Asianist, but this does not mean simply taking the orientalist concept of the 'East' as the opposite of the 'West' and turning it on its head. In order for Pan-Asianism to be successful, it important to first recognize that Asia is far from a monolithic entity, and that it actually comprises multiple, unique civilizations. The purpose of Pan-Asianism in the modern era should be to advocate a broad alliance and cooperation between Asian civilizations to make possible the reclaiming of Asia's historical place in the global system.


In any case, the globalisation of culture is erasing the civilizational differences and fusing us all into a globalised civilization. This is a source of optimism for me for the future (there are of course reactionaries who are waging a violent global fight to stop this phenomenon).
Are we really being fused into a 'global' civilization? I am not seeing it happen. Sure, people move around the world a lot more than they the did in the past, and global communication is also much quicker and more pervasive than before, but civilizational boundaries are as relevant today as they ever were.

The classic example of hardcore Islamist protesters in Pakistan chanting 'Death to America' while wearing Levi's jeans and drinking Coca-Cola illustrates the fact that globalization and the spread of Western materialist culture has little impact on actual ideologies and paradigms. The day when we are a 'globalised civilization' will be when all human beings share a common paradigm of viewing the world, which will not happen anytime soon.


In other words there's really a discernable cultural or civilizational distinction between Asians and Middle Easterns.
So, if there is a "discernable cultural or civilizational distinction between Asians and Middle Easterns" (sic), why group them together as the 'East'? Why continue the fantasy of believing that all 'Easterners' are essentially the 'same'? With the possible exception of Iran, the West Asian (I don't like the term "Middle Eastern") countries have little civilizational similarity with other Asian countries. To me personally, there is actually not much difference between a West Asian and a European in terms of how 'different' they are from Indians. The opposite is also true; countries like Algeria and Turkey have much more in common with European countries like France and Hungary than with other Asian countries like India or China.
 

opesys

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
279
Likes
138
Are we really being fused into a 'global' civilization? I am not seeing it happen. Sure, people move around the world a lot more than they the did in the past, and global communication is also much quicker and more pervasive than before, but civilizational boundaries are as relevant today as they ever were.
What aspect of the eastern or any local civilization are you talking about which is relevant today ? Education? Dress ? Movies ? Music ? Life style in general ? Everyone is following west's model. Even linguistic boundaries are getting narrow these days... India is the highest English speaking population in the world today! China is catching up..so are Koreans...


The classic example of hardcore Islamist protesters in Pakistan chanting 'Death to America' while wearing Levi's jeans and drinking Coca-Cola illustrates the fact that globalization and the spread of Western materialist culture has little impact on actual ideologies and paradigms. The day when we are a 'globalised civilization' will be when all human beings share a common paradigm of viewing the world, which will not happen anytime soon.
............
Are you trying to defend the hypocrisy of Pakistanis? These are mostly unemployed angry people who don't know what they are doing exactly. No way these kind of people will influence how the future civilization will look like... They are actually protesting against the drone attacks and not really the ideology or paradigm of the western civilization..
 
Last edited:

civfanatic

Retired
Ambassador
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
4,562
Likes
2,570
What aspect of the eastern or any local civilization are you talking about which is relevant today ? Education? Dress ? Movies ? Music ? Life style in general ? Everyone is following west's model. Even linguistic boundaries are getting narrow these days... India is the highest English speaking population in the world today! China is catching up..so are Koreans...
If you think that education, dress, movies, and music are the hallmarks of 'civilization', then your concept of 'civilization' is flawed. What's important is ideology and how an individual views the world. An American, Egyptian, and Chinese may all enjoy Hollywood movies and wear business suits to work but they will likely view the world (and themselves) very differently, and that is what really counts. This aspect of civilization is strongly tied to language, since language determines how one thinks.


Are you trying to defend the hypocrisy of Pakistanis? These are mostly unemployed angry people who don't know what they are doing exactly. No way these kind of people will influence how the future civilization will look like... They are actually protesting against the drone attacks and not really the ideology or paradigm of the western civilization..
How did you come to the conclusion that I am 'defending the hypocrisy of Pakistanis'? My point is that superficial material aspects of Western civilization are exactly that - superficial. They don't change how people think and thus they are irrelevant. Pop culture is irrelevant too; Pakistanis are avid watchers of Bollywood but that doesn't make them pro-India.

And I don't know if you are serious with the last part. The average Pakistani is okay with Westernization of the country, really?
 

LurkerBaba

Super Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
7,882
Likes
8,125
Country flag
Education/Dress/Movies/Music is extremely superficial. I'm willing to bet that a Japanese wearing a suit would be more in tune with his civilizational ethos than a Khaki-wearing, chai-drinking JNUwallah
 

opesys

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
279
Likes
138
If you think that education, dress, movies, and music are the hallmarks of 'civilization', then your concept of 'civilization' is flawed. What's important is ideology and how an individual views the world. An American, Egyptian, and Chinese may all enjoy Hollywood movies and wear business suits to work but they will likely view the world (and themselves) very differently, and that is what really counts. This aspect of civilization is strongly tied to language, since language determines how one thinks.
How one views the world (and themselves) is a very generic thing. In the context of let's say economics to do large scale businesses most businessmen "views the world" like how 'west' does. Take any large scale corporations in the east like Samsung, ZTE, Honda, Hyundai,Tata all follow business model that is largely developed in the west. May be the selling point of the goods to the customers may be still a little local to that country but even that is also changing..as people are getting influenced by the western way of life slowly even the selling point is becoming like in the west. Is there any concrete example you can give that where the thinking of the local people in the east matters ? Regarding language, it is actually meant only for communication. May be the nationalists in the east are still enforcing on the idea of using the local language...but as the society becomes more and more liberal people will cross the linguistic barrier too and will adopt English for all official communication purpose...

How did you come to the conclusion that I am 'defending the hypocrisy of Pakistanis'? My point is that superficial material aspects of Western civilization are exactly that - superficial. They don't change how people think and thus they are irrelevant. Pop culture is irrelevant too; Pakistanis are avid watchers of Bollywood but that doesn't make them pro-India.

And I don't know if you are serious with the last part. The average Pakistani is okay with Westernization of the country, really?
Western style of life is not superficial anymore. Just go through everything that an educated person does right from morning till he goes to bed...everything is western in style. Western civilization has already changed the way people think. If something is still left to be changed it will be changed too... Who would have thought that shows like 'Big Boss' would be done in India ?It was a decent hit in India! Have you MTV roadies ? There is nothing Indian in it and it is still a hit! People's thinking has changed!
Have you seen Bollywood movies lately? Nearly every other movie is a Hollywood flick these days..in another 10 years nearly 90% of the Bollywood movies will be like Hollywood movies...
 
Last edited:

LurkerBaba

Super Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
7,882
Likes
8,125
Country flag
MTV Roadies, Bollywood, Big Boss etc is pop-culture. Not civilizational values
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top