I’ve realized a problem that occasionally is brought up in news and conversations but is not elaborated on or seriously considered by many (atleast I think). Most are aware of a cultural divide between the Western and Eastern hemispheres of the world. The West is more modernized then the East to put it in simple terms. One would go as far as to say they are two different worlds . Our religons are different, our economics and politics are far apart, and there are people on each side that want to kill everyone on the opposite side . Has anyone else been noticing that we might be moving closer to a global civil war? Maybe I’m just crazy but I think the evidence is there. Much in the present time can be translated into a East/West confrontation. 9/11 was very much an attack because of our cultural divide centering around difference in wealth and religon. As a product of that the war on terrorism, though in my view neccesarry, is a confrontation between East and West. The war on Iraq and the situation in Korea are all examples of confrontation. China is emerging as the world’s second super power setting the stage for a U.S.-China(capitalism-communism) rivalry. On a private level many in the East see the West as a heartless culture and are jealous of the massive wealth of countries such as America. Many in America and Europe view the East as uncivilized and want to modernize them. Both are wrong and what bugs me the most is that it’s all because we don’t understand each other. The stage is set though. The tension grows larger and more frequent. Though nothing of a civil war is near I believe we should be worried. This topic should be one looked over more so our leaders can take steps of prevention. Am I right or just paranoid? Can you think of anymore examples of East/West confrontation?
i think you are certainty not paranoid.
there is a deffinate divide that is now ever so more apparant then before, of culture and politics between east and west. to me it seems that these, in there very nature, can not co-exist.
as we see the united states of america go rampage on their global cursade to libirate, the concept of a ‘new world order’ doesnt seem too far off and no longer ficticous. and we are certain to see more wars in the very near future.
To quote Mongo:
id say its quite the contrary, as it is now that we finally do understand each other. beliefes are conflicting, and for these to co-riside it would involve in one not fully upholding thier own values.
perhaps there is space for compromises and solutions, but will they be searched for? both parties are spreading and now sharing one common ideology - to capitalize.
I’d say there are alot of different conflicts–economic, ideological, religious, geopgraphical, etc.–and sometimes several line up at once. China, for instance, is a complicated case. One the one hand it is embracing capitalism and the US is welcoming it to the table as an economic ally. At the same time, it is resolutely totalitarian and militaristic, and thus a political enemy. Korea is a simple case, they’ve isolated themselves in every possible way from just about everyone, even China. To a lesser degree, that was true of Iraq. Hussein did not have many friends, even among Arab leaders. The armies of civilian suicide bombers did not emerge to defend him as promised.
The point is, that whatever global turmoil there may or may not be, I don’t see anything like a global civil war. Local skirmishes. Possibly temporary alliances. But no unified fronts facing off against each other.
There’s a book that goes into this: Jihad vs. McWorld. Basically neo-traditionalism vs. old fashioned modernity. I’ll have to look at it again with this question in mind.
That said, I’m on the side of the people who want to modernize the “East,” or rather to see it be modernized. I am curious to know why I am wrong 
I would think that most people would like a higher standard of living, terrorists notwithstanding.
And I tend to think of Islam as part of Western cultural history, not Eastern, but that’s another thing.
In China they could have driven cars around 1600, had the leaders there just let the industrial revolution spark off when it could. So, the conditions for industrial revolution were there in China much ahead of any Western area. The last 30 years in the West has meant less and less free time for people or time outside of work. If that’s what getting modernised is about, I wonder if the leaders in China didn’t have right in a certain way after all.
I think it was the repressive bureaucratic tradition in China that prevented advance. It is IMO no coincidence that individual rights emerged first in Western Europe, and it can still be seen today that the further east you go the more prevalent repressive collectivism seems to be. The difference lies in thousands of years of culture making their mark of individal mindsets, and short of extremely radical action (complete rebuilding, similar to what happened in Japan) it is unlikely to disappear in a hurry.
In China they could have driven cars around 1600, had the leaders there just let the industrial revolution spark off when it could. So, the conditions for industrial revolution were there in China much ahead of any Western area.
Unlike you, postmodern, I don’t see highly paid 1st world workers as poor victims who should have their oppurtunities withheld by a repressive State just so they could have the free time which they evidently didn’t want anyway. Are you writing in from your abacus?
Alexander the Great had a steam engine. It was used to open and close a palace door! The same invention, re-discovered, revolutionized the economies of Western Europe and America and helped them dominate the world. I doubt seriously that China could have been full of cars “around 1600,” just as I doubt that Marcus Aurelius could have been driving around in a Ferrari but decided not to because he wanted more “free time.” To account for something like the existence of a Toyota hatchback, you need alot more than just theoretical knowledge of combustion. It takes a certain kind of culture and infrastructure which Europe and its offshoots have been developing for centuries.
I think it was the repressive bureaucratic tradition in China that prevented advance.
Fascism and totalitarianism are often a means of speeding up this gestation process. As much as I hate to admit it, China’s economic growth in recent years is probably due to the fact that the country is run by a more or less single-minded all-powerful bureacracy that has growth as its #1 goal. That is, it is growing because it has ditched communism (it has), not because it has embraced democracy (it hasn’t).
I’ve read–and been been infuriated by–right-wing writers defending General Pinochet’s legacy in Chile because of the solid economic institutions and policies he enacted (when he wasn’t murdering people). But you know what? They have a point, as revolting as it is. It may well be that the human sufferring averted by Pinochet’s economic policies more than offsets the misery inflicted by his torture squads. Chile is the most solid economy in South America in large part because of Pinochet’s policies. Ultimately, I’d say no. But that’s an emotional and moral stance, not a rational, economic one.
There’s a great graphic novel/comic book called The Watchmen that takes exactly this dilema as its theme. Written by Alan Moore. What if morality’s goals are best achieved by ruthlessness?
I guess the question is does wealth lead to a demand for the protection of property rights and individual liberties, i.e. democracy. Or is it the other way around? Or some other relation entirely…
Some people believe the typographic culture specific to the West to be the reason to why things are as they are in the West today, in the way that the phonetic alphabet encourages individualism in a higher degree than any other alphabet. Postmodern thought thinks the subduement of all other senses than the eyes is too narrow and welcomes a culture more in touch with reality. This means a culture where notibly the ears get a higher importance in the everyday hierarchy between the senses created by the alphabetic culture developed a long time ago in Greece. Humans in mental balance need something more than the analytic abilties accuired throught the alphabetisation/individualisation. In postmodern thought there is also the recognition that every word and every analytical work means creating a virtual reality differing from how things really are. The goal is to seek an understanding of this, which becomes easier and easier as a multimedia landscape develops where news are mixed with entertainment etc. Such a multimedia landscape only reveals very clearly the illusionary concept of every perception of reality with its basis in the typographic culture and mysticism will thus be as highly appreaciated as it once was.
China as the West and Japan has been dependent of a state to achieve a progressing society, but in China things developed so that those in power didn’t dear to give the start signal to an industrial revolution and from 1300 only consolidated their power, which was the start to their downfall and Mao’s success. There didn’t happen much in China between 1300 and 1800 compared to how it had been… China did have a supreme military once, but as those in power were obsessed with not doing anything threatening their position they never got to know that… Other circumstances and…
So, history as we all know shows how little planning lies behind everything and mere coincidences lie behind the West’s current supremacy. And the dominating paradigms of today are tomorrow’s…