Non-Western Worldview

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Keshav »

Igorr wrote: Do you mean Rashtriya Svayamsevak Sangh?
It was a joke that didn't go to well with some of the other posters who forget that I coincidentally happen to be Indian and Hindu. Sorry about that.
No, I dont think it is. But many of Russians are interested in pre-christian Russian religeon cult. As it's well known most close to Iranian Avestism and Induism. THere are many groups trying to revive these cults in Russia. Many peoples in Russia are keeping the national religeon in parallel with Abrahamit one.
So they're mixing the Russian Orthodox Church with the old religions?
Ossetians, Finn and Ugric tribe in the European Russia North and Siberia etc. The Russian tradition religeon and Hinduism have common Indo-European root while Slavs are the most close to Indo-Aryan in linguistic aspect. I 'll give you a number of parallels in Russian and Sanskrit to feel the closeness. Only a note: sometimes pra-indoeuropean 'L' transformed to 'R' in sanskrit, 'n-' to 'a-', g' to 'h' or 'j', 's' to 'h'. Where Sanskrit has 'a' , Russian has 'o', 'vo' or 'e', 'ye'.
I can't confirm any of the Sanskrit words because I'm not priviliged enough to understand it :wink: but I'd be interestd to know what the traditional Russian religion was. Do you have any links on it? Are there any aspects (festivals, holidays, rituals) that exist side by side with the ROC? For example, I've heard that Persians celebrate Zoroastrian holidays despite being Muslim.
Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Yogi_G »

Sorry Ramana garu for having gone OT...

Brihaspati ji, as always, some good points made by you but let me respond to second para as that is about Indic view of West and more in line with this thread...

One thing I have understood having spent 2 years in this country is that the West is just as fallible if not more than the "East"....When in India teachers, relatives and elders alike all kept telling stories about how punctual and clean people are in the West (they mean Goras and of course in US), how learned they are and how tolerant they are....I am sorry for the strong language but I realized that it is a load of bakwaas and hype....While it has to be accepted that in both factors the West is definitely better than the East, I still feel that it is not all rosy as is taught back home...Be it in the workplace or outside Western people are equipped with the same negative traits as is prevalent back home. Be it being late to a meeting or honouring a word or corruption or bending the rules or hoodwinking customers or lying politicians, people here in the States are just as suceptible for breaking rules as back home, only on a degree much lesser pronounced...

I am not sure if I am the only guy with such a thought line, I could be wrong but am just penning down my thoughts here....

In hindsight all those hyped up stories of the West you hear back home of the super-efficient West is nothing but a hollow shell!! We need to fix that ahem stereotype. Again the culprit is the education system which always shows the West in good light (mostly) which again leads to the prevalence of super-efficient stereotypes of the West....this makes Indian audiences all the more receptive to movies and concepts such as SDM... Now I have my doubts about the Japanese, for both back home and here in the West tales of their super-efficient are abound :wink:

JMT....
Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Yogi_G »

So they're mixing the Russian Orthodox Church with the old religions?
Keshavji, a while back I had seen a program in Discovery where a western guy went deep into the Russian lands and was explaining the lifestyle there (I think the program was about re-tracing Jason's steps of golden fleece fame)...they showed a typical home in which you could see the images of Christ and nearby were some more Murtis of not sure who. THe guy then said that the local populace prayed to both Christ (Orthodox Church brand) and a "Pagan" god...sorry not sure which other religion was being prayed but I hope it anwers your question...
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

In the remote parts of the Russian interior magic and "white witchraft" appears to have flourished even during the diehard days of Communism. Most organized religions have been unbale to completely wipe off older pagan practices in the west and Rus, and simply sometimes transformed and adopted within the canon. It is also possible, that the pagan practices were more in tune with nature and humanity of the geography concerned, rather than the Abrahamic traditions which carried stamps of abstraction and the different specific geography where they evolved. Once the state compulsion to impose these religious structures weaken, the people will revert to the more life celebratory and less guilt-driven ideologies.

From the Indic viewpoint, we did manage to integrate the living world as a fundamental aspect of our spirituality which is derided as animism or magic or shamanism. The older Upanishadic form of Indic spirituality can give a great sense of liberation to the west. One aspect of the problem is that long getting used to centralized, micromanaging, rule based religions can create the need for a replacement by something similar that reduces the burden on the western brain - and the increasing danger of attraction for Islam.
Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Igorr »

Keshav wrote:I'd be interestd to know what the traditional Russian religion was. Do you have any links on it? Are there any aspects (festivals, holidays, rituals) that exist side by side with the ROC? For example, I've heard that Persians celebrate Zoroastrian holidays despite being Muslim.
For example, Russians celebrate a pagan holidays Maslenitsa between Feb.23-March.1 as they did it before Christianity. BTW, Ru-Church is recognising it. But last 15 years many Russians make efforts to revive traditioonal cults in more profounded maner. THey also try to be recognized as separated religeous community.

For example this is Russian pagan calendar with all the pre-christian holidays, recommended for celebrating. 4 main holidays are for solstice (solncestoyanie) and equinox (ravno-denstvie) and others - for different gods. The name of the religeon in Russian is Rodnoverie. These are the volkhves (the priests) and the "jertva" (yajna).
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Sanku »

Igorr have you read the "Nightwatch" series in original Russian? What do you think of it? What is the response in Russia? How accurate does it have a description of Russia and how influenced it is by existing and deep seated Russian thinking about world and the nature of good/bad duality in general?
Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Igorr »

Sanku wrote:Igorr have you read the "Nightwatch" series in original Russian? What do you think of it? What is the response in Russia? How accurate does it have a description of Russia and how influenced it is by existing and deep seated Russian thinking about world and the nature of good/bad duality in general?
IMHO Russians are much more tolerant to different pluralistic thinking, then Europeans. Theya are more like Indians, Chinese or Japan. They more free can worship to more than one religeouse cult. THe Abrahamic religeouse monism and antagonism of 'white' and 'black' is rejected by Russian national mind. Russia never knew 'religeous war' in European mean of the word. Nightwatch' - is only one example of such complementation of 'good' and 'evil' in Russian mind. Indeed the Russian view is rather relativistic.

Some more: the Russian pantheon
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Sanku »

Thanks Igorr...

Well actually I thought that Nightwatch was the series with most "grey" in it compared to most western Sci-Fi I have read. So I would actually think that it too is a example of what you said about Russians not seeing too much in black and white. I just wanted to know if it was an exception or as usual. So it seems Nightwatch is still not grey enough still though :)

I really liked it BTW -- as I have liked most Russian Authors.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Philip »

Indian women of brilliance and grit
By Jawed Naqvi
Monday, 02 Mar, 2009 | 11:43 AM PST |

Such is the magic of India, more so its women, that I want my friends from Pakistan to experience. - AP

WHEN unforgivable events happen in India such as the demolition of the Babri mosque in 1992 or the massacre of innocent Sikhs in 1984 and the Gujarat pogrom of Muslims in 2002, they fortify the ideological underpinnings behind religious separatism, which resulted, for example, in Pakistan. Of course Pakistan’s detractors in India, on the other hand, are only too happy to exude perverse glee at the catastrophic challenge it faces today from Muslim zealots. You wanted a country for Muslims, now take that, they say mockingly.

I want to put light on a clutch of events from last week, all involving women of amazing brilliance and grit which made me miss some of my Pakistani friends – in the sense that I wished they were here in Delhi to share and savour the pleasures, the insights and the hope that ever so often spring up from the deep recesses of India. Let me start with a lecture on history and heritage Prof Romila Thapar gave on Saturday. You don’t get to hear Prof Thapar often these days, so it was a rare treat. She began with what is almost an invocation with her: Since the present is rooted in the past, the most reliable way to understand the present is by a better understanding of the past. She must have been very young when Gandhi and Jinnah and Nehru, all influenced by the rudimentary if erratic historiography available to them, had embarked on the interpretation of their past to decide the future of the subcontinent. Apart from the colonial nonsense about India’s past the leaders had inherited, Allama Iqbal too had promoted a static view of Indian civilisation, which Indian leaders have been parroting ever since. Greece, Egypt and Rome the great civilisations that they were had disappeared with the passage of time, the learned poet mused. But India was different. It had survived centuries of adversities.

In a second Prof Thapar put the questioner at ease. The Harrappan civilisation had disappeared completely and so had others that once straddled southern or northern India. So what are we talking about? Moreover, the concept of civilisations is a relatively new entrant. I checked that out separately. Oddly enough the word ‘civilisation’ only came into existence in the 18th century.

Is there for example an Indian civilisation? There are at least two essential Indias. One is humid, with copious rainfall, lakes, marshes, forests and jungles, aquatic plants and flowers the land of people with dark skins. In sharp contrast, is the other India. The India of the Indo-Gangetic plain, plus the Deccan plateau the home of the lighter skinned, many of them warlike. Gandhi is once supposed to have been asked what he thought of Western Civilisation. ‘It’s a very good idea,’ he retorted. Aside from the spurious or factual quotation, there is, in fact, no such thing as Western Civilisation. That notion or term is entirely a Cold War construct. Russia is as much a part of Western Civilisation as is Germany. East and West Germany were reunited, as it were, in the twinkling of an eye proving that East was also West.

So next time when some corny peace delegation comes calling to celebrate the civilisational unity of India and Pakistan, or boasting that India and Pakistan are two separate civilisations, you know how to change the subject. There is an abiding commonality in the Punjab and Bengal, but if you stretch it to Balochistan and Nagaland, you are wasting your time. I do not know if Prof Thapar would agree with my perorations. She made a few other important points of vital use to those grappling with the dominant mythology of a golden period from our past but I have to move on to other events involving Indian women last week.

A few years ago, anti-terrorist police killed two unarmed men in Delhi’s Ansal Plaza shopping complex. Last week I met Dr Hari Krishna, in his late 60s, who witnessed the encounter. He has slapped the police with a case of cold-blooded murder of unarmed, innocent men. Dr Krishna is a god-fearing Hindu and the men who were killed were Muslim. He is a homoeopath who treats cancer patients and claims good results. The police say he is a quack. But he was still a witness and that is what counts. The courts have accepted his plea to file the case. Dr Krishna is fighting the case alone. His wife is the only one standing by him. ‘They are like our children. They should have the protection of law,’ she told him encouragingly.

I can tell you, India has no dearth of Dr Krishnas. You only have to seek them out. He was talking last week to a group of students at Jamia Milia Islamia in Delhi in the company of writer Arundhati Roy and Manisha Sethi, a woman teacher at the university who has helped prepare an independent report on what is known as the Batla House encounter, which took place not far from the campus. ‘When people asked me in America where do you live, I said I live near Jamia. They said ‘oh! that great Jamia University’. And here these people are trying to paint this campus as a den of terrorists,’ Dr Krishna said, wiping tears that just wouldn’t stop welling up.

The Batla House encounter followed a spate of bomb blasts in Delhi in September last year. The police officer that led the assault, in which two Muslim students were killed, was also shot and there are questions about how that happened. Any way the policeman was decorated with a gallantry award. Manisha and Arundhati have punched holes in the police theory, as have scores of lawyers, journalists and teachers among others. But the government has so far refused to order a judicial probe. It’s not clear whether the report is now available on the web.

It was the anniversary of the Gujarat violence on Saturday. Who all have been working hardest to expose the truth there and also to provide legal support to the victims? Dozens of women come to mind, not the least tenacious among them being Teesta Setalvad and Shabnam Hashmi. And now film actor Nandita Das tells me that her feature film ‘Firaaq’ about the Gujarat tragedy is finally due to be released on March 20. The courageous film has won several awards, a prestigious one being at the Kara Film Festival. It’s a complex story of Hindus and Muslims in Gujarat trying to get on with life after the traumatic events. I saw it at a private screening in Delhi. Dipti Naval’s portrayal of a Gujarati Hindu housewife has a haunting quality about it. Naseeruddin Shah plays an ageing Muslim musician who is besotted with the 14th century poetry of Wali Gujrati (also known as Wali Dakhani). He is so absorbed in his syncretic world that he refuses to accept the news of the violence that his servant regularly follows on TV.

‘Kucha-e-yaar ain Kaasi hai, Jogiy-e-dil wahin ka baasi hai’. (The sacred city of Kaashi is where my beloved lives. My grieving heart belongs there.) Wali’s lines recited by Naseeuruddin are pivotal in the movie.

Nandita Das is half Gujrati. Urdu is not her mother tongue but you can’t tell that from the script. She has amazing grit and intellectual integrity. There was another aspect of India that I saw last week, and no Indian or Pakistani is likely to experience it ever again. You missed seeing more than a dozen Buddhist nuns from Ladakh in Delhi last week. Their singing of ancient chants in unison was truly magical. But anybody can go to Ladakh and, with a little bit of luck, see them singing there too. What I saw was truly unique. The Buddhist nuns were swaying to the music of the legendary Sufi singers of Allepo, an ensemble of musicians rooted in Islamic mysticism from Syria. They made the swirling dervish amidst them look passé. Such is the magic of India, more so its women, that I want my friends from Pakistan to experience. I consider them more rewarding than the seminars and discussions about peace that we have been having since time immemorial.

jawednaqvi@gmail.com

PS:He at least despite his bias (easily seen),recognises that Indian courts are better than Paki ones and how Indian women are emancipated and free,unlike their counterparts in the land of the pure.Perhaps Naqvi should return to Swat and preach his message there.It might be his last!
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Sanku »

Philip, have you actually read what you have posted above? :eek: :eek: :shock:

Thats on par standard nonsense psy-ops, quoting know liars and intellectual **** like Romila Thapar (Harrapan civilization vanished -- yeah right)
SRoy
BRFite
Posts: 1938
Joined: 15 Jul 2005 06:45
Location: Kolkata
Contact:

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by SRoy »

Philip,

The post of yours has rendered the entire thread useless.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

So civilizations on India could vanish according to Thapar? Was this the only one to vanish on India or were there others? Then again if civilizations did not exist before the 18th century, how could they vanish when they did not exist? Some issues with the Ladakhi Sufi swaying - Tibetans and Ladakhis have a special form of spiritual gyrating dance form which has been there according to them long before Sufism was born. However the Sufi sect which gyrated as part of spiritual connection could have actually derived this from the extensive Silk Route connections that we know existed between Persia and Eastern ladakh as part of business and spiritual travels. Anyway, are we to consider this particular author's admiration for certain types of Indian women a part of non-western world view?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59810
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by ramana »

X-Posted....
harbans wrote:Some interesting points have been made here. My take on some for example..when we say we're thinking from a 'Western' or what i prefer 'Modern' moral perspective, is it unfair to ask how much of these modern moral perspectives have been influenced from Indian thought and literature. Indeed most Renaissance thinkers openly acknowledged most of the much debated schools of Western philosophy having 'Eastern' roots. Voltaire was most brazen and unashamed about it. Even as Europe colonized India, it's vast knowledge made available fired up the thoughts of some of Europes greatest thinkers that resulted in Modern perspectives and mores. When Europeans came in large numbers to India, it would seem surprising and strange that this land of Fakirs was indeed the source of much of their knowledge and humanity. Compare the Hindu code of War with the Geneva convention formed possibly 5 millenia after..the former is still more humane. Additionally the Europeans that made it into India started justifying Western morality as superior basically on Race issues. Justification took the course of exceptions being applied as rules for natives (e.g Sati) so 800 Sati deaths in few years was more for us, while 800 witch burning incidents in Europe was just an aberration. The moral distortion originates principally from a racial perspective and sought to be justified even till the present day, though in lot subtler terms by the Wendy Doningers and Mark Witzels. But a reason for our own sense of inferiority possibly lies in not comprehending how 'Western' morality was really developed through Upanashidic and Vedic shruti and thought even as we were being colonized. Looking at it this way helps also solve the dilemna, why of all British colonies India turns to Modern (and not Western) democratic tradition so much like a duck takes to water. Why India gravitates continuosly towards guaranteeing minority rights, valuing Human rights and other so called Western moral initiations to the savage world. One has to see how easy it is for those that move out of a village setup forget a so called deeply entrenched and discriminatory caste system, or how easily abhorred we are of a single case of Sati in a decade, or even in the 18th century how easy it was for the Arya Samaji's to propagate a rational system of thought amongst the 'pious Casteist Hindu'..while the Arthashastra would have had some verses on how it's ok for 25 year olds to marry 9 year olds, the marriage was essentially a social pledge and the book not exactly one that was implemented on a large scale before that era. Because it states so, it is solving some moral dilemna in a village type set up in that era and because it deems it Ok, it indeed was a moral problem of sorts even then. The point is not what a smriti said or what society started implementing after it was written, the point is today it is considered abhorrent very easily. It is not resisted. So while discrepencies might and had indeed creeped into our societies, the moral initiative to curb those always lay within the spiritual and philosophical framework of Hindu society.

JMTs etc..
and
harbans wrote:Just a little continuation from what i posted above..it was the protestent denominations that gathered the maximum from India..whether Germany or England or France. It were philosophers and thinkers from here that discovered Grammar as analyzed by Panini and then thought about analyzing their own languages in such detail. The interest of the Max Muellers in India originated essentially from the firing up of knowledge in Europe that was happening from large influx of Indian thought (though only to top level thinkers in Europe). And as mentioned racial motives to morality sought to be exemplified by Schopenhauer and implemented using contorted Hindu symbols by Hitler for example. However as society developed the protestent denominations did realize the folly in colonization and sought to rectify the same by implementing fairer laws within their own societies. A look at catholic countries such as dominated by Spain and Portugal shows a much lesser infiltration to Indian thought and thus lagging behind the present moral standards of the "West". One look at the South American continent confirms why democracy and human rights comes more easy to India than essentially catholic and European origin ruled states, while India does this steadily for 6 decades and more. Same with the Phillipines and other Catholic dominated countries. Democracy and rights issues don't come easy. The least influenced by Indian thought, philosophy are ofcourse the Arabs and Islamic countries. We know where they stand in the 'rights and morality department'. The third lot come are those countries of East and South East Asia (most were influenced over several centuries by Hindu/ Buddhist) thought. They've had trouble implementing democracy too as they did not imbibe philosophical influences like what protestent denominations did. India subtly passed the 'Morality' baton to the protestent denominations even while it was being colonized them and besieged by Muslim conquerors. A clever thing to do..coming to think.
and
harbans wrote:Shiv ji, appreciate the thums up on that from you. But in the continuing post, i did want to emphasize a linkage between those who prospered firstly through devouring knowledge and philosophy from here, then through wealth attained part by colonization and part by ethics that encouraged industriousness and hard work from here. Germans, French and the British are leaders in that and they subsequently dominated. Knowledge in Medieval Europe flowed from these centers more than from Greece unlike ancient times where Greeks again prospered and learnt from their links to India. Europe has always benefitted from India's amazing quest for knowledge and more, ancient as well as medieval times. Take China for example, they'll not say this open, but India is reverred as an elder brother. This countries quest for Truth is continual, and sometimes we do self flagellate more so than citizens of any other nation..precisely because we search deeper for Truth,. When large sections of our population were beseiged by onslaughts lasting more than a thousand years, it was prudent that knowledge be kept confined for fear that open bearers of the same would face the fate of the monks in Nalanda or Taxila, but it was prudent so too that it be transmitted. Like the ancients said about Knowledge..it would to the best future bearers of it,.with all their shortcomings and growth pangs, the protestent denominations of the Christian religion did do a fair enough job of revitalizing and translating texts to significant sections of their own population, even though through their own kind disseminating those views in hardly subtle different ways. The consequence of such was an enlightenment within their own societies that disengaged the Yoke of Islam from large parts of India and freed it not only of themselves but of Islamic rule. That was India's destiny and it achieved it with understatably some pain. The quest for truth remains alive on this forum, heartburn too in varying degrees, but it's all too visible. I've met too many Westerners and Chinese and Japanese who are simply too astonished at India's leap into the knowledge fold. It took them much too long to attain a society that prides a large part of it's GDP from a knowledge based economy. India did that easy. More stark is many of their knowledge based economies and tech shortages are propped up by a disproportionately large percent of Indians..coupled with the fact that Indians compromise the least percentage of people in their prisons or with criminal records of all other nationalist or religious denominations. (US maintains such records and available on adherents.com). Thus this is not just a fluke as some make it out to be. Or a result of British influence..it runs much deeper and it's something we've all carried within our souls for thousands of years and amongst the greatest trepidations. So while their may be exceptions to what i say, the general thrust is that ancient and medieval societies with max contact with India and it's culture were the biggest beneficieries of wealth and moral values. To think we're falling for 'Western' morals may be very incorrect to assume in case we look at things this way. JMT though think their is much value and truth to this POV IMHO.
Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Keshav »

SRoy wrote:Philip,

The post of yours has rendered the entire thread useless.
Let's cut Philip some slack. He's not trying to provoke anything and although the article itself had no point (it really didn't), Philip understands the bias inherent in it.
R Vaidya
BRFite
Posts: 128
Joined: 04 Feb 2003 12:31

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by R Vaidya »

Time to Get Back Black money in Swiss accounts


http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?news ... 5&pageid=0


Note: The expression DDM has been used in an MSM
RVaidya
Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Keshav »

R Vaidya wrote:Time to Get Back Black money in Swiss accounts


http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?news ... 5&pageid=0


Note: The expression DDM has been used in an MSM
RVaidya
The pop-culture importance of BRF, perhaps?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59810
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by ramana »

There is fatal flaw in Western society programming. Ever since the Greek City-states overcame their enemies in the Peloponnesian wars and in turn got conqured by the Macedonians to modern times- economic crisis, defeat of an existential enemy leads to the the own demise within a generation or two. Why is that?
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

Could be insufficient intellectual and material resources. It has only flourished when it could extract surplus from more productive areas outside its geo-political sphere. In trying to defeat existential enemies, it overspends its resources, and if these enemies are based in those productive areas whose exploitation is crucial for prosperity - then the very act of defeat also deliberately targets destruction of the means of such production, as a tactical step to weaken the enemy. This in turn then leads to subsequent impoverishment as the defeated areas are left bone-dry and Europes prosperity declines.

This is basically a parasitic civilization, developed probably out of surviving in an extremely hostile environment right from the depths of the last ice-age. It is essentially a looting, marauding culture that models all others by itself - as potential looters and marauders of its "prosperity", and therefore stops enrichment (would not have been a problem if it was creative enough on its own) from others. This anxiety also makes it misrepresnt its own source of prosperity by robbing others, and reconstructs as legitimate and sourced from its own. This creates a problem for future generations as they are kept away from knowing about the real sources of their prosperity and do not grow up to extract resources form others. After a time this creates a crisis, and then they have to rediscover their actual basis of prosperity and then they go out again - to latch on to parasitic extraction from outside - and the cycle repeats.
abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by abhischekcc »

I think west needs an 'other' to stay united. Just like the Church needs Satan to justify its presence.

The deeper reason may be that western 'ethics' are based on individualism, which is simply a politically correct way of saying 'selfishness'. Selfishness does not create the glue that holds society together. Mutual self sacrifice, something like the caste system, can and does hold society together. The lack of an altruistic foundation of society is their biggest weakness.
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Johann »

The synthesis of individualism and communal responsibility was the idea of citizenship, being a full stakeholder in the overall success of the state and society. Citizens started out as an elite minority, the counterbalance to royal power, but expanded over time, until in the 20th century it came to embrace almost everyone in society.

The other trend in the West from the Alexander's Hellenisation project onwards has been homogenisation of political-cultural identity.
When you identify with the people around you, and you believe the survival of the state is in your benefit, people are willing to go to great lengths. Isnt that why nationalism, a relatively new way of thinking caught on so quickly all around the world?
Ever since the Greek City-states overcame their enemies in the Peloponnesian wars and in turn got conqured by the Macedonians to modern times- economic crisis, defeat of an existential enemy leads to the the own demise within a generation or two. Why is that?
Depends on what you mean by demise. States that overcome challenges grow and confront new challenges - if they cant handle them they fail.

However the Macedonians themselves ended up being Hellenised by the people they conquered, and up propagating Hellenic culture and people far and wide. There were for example some very interesting interactions between Buddhism, Greek culture, Nestorian Christianity and Zoroastrian thought in the Greco-Bactrian kingdoms which I'm still trying to understand, but which seems to have given Buddhism a particular flavour - the use of missionaries, a close association with state patronage, a neoplatonic kind of philosophica outlook, etc.

The same thing with the Romans - the outlines of Europe are roughly of those people who retained a sense of identification with the heritage of the Roman Empire (which itself became largely Greek in the eastern half). It has come to include the people such as the Germans for example who played a very large part in defeating and then bringing down the Roman Empire. While Russia identifies with the Greek rather than the Latin half of the Roman Empire, it has nonetheless as a self-conscious heir 'Romanised' peoples all the way to the Pacific.

I think we have to distinguish between states, cultures and civilisations.
This is basically a parasitic civilization, developed probably out of surviving in an extremely hostile environment right from the depths of the last ice-age. It is essentially a looting, marauding culture that models all others by itself - as potential looters and marauders of its "prosperity", and therefore stops enrichment (would not have been a problem if it was creative enough on its own) from others. This anxiety also makes it misrepresnt its own source of prosperity by robbing others
Europe's history can not be reduced to a history of the colonial period.

It is the surpluses in *European* population and capital that financed the initial stages of colonialism - they were very much venture capital enterprises, high risk, high outlay. How were those surpluses accumulated?

There's been a great deal of work done on the growth rates of medieval Europe, which were extremely high at a time when the Islamic world and the tough nomadic cultures of the steppes hemmed it in, when there was not much more than the ruins of the Roman Empire to build on. How had Europe come so far?

The world has had no shortage of nomadic peoples who conquered settled peoples thanks to the mobility of livestock, and a warrior culture. Arabs, Turks, Mongols, etc. The pre-conquest surpluses of these societies are not created by manipulating the environment itself, or development of the same range of technologies and modes of production. The Europeans werent the world's greatest horsemen or camel riders by a very, very long way.

European growth rates were built on repeated, dramatic productivity gains in agriculture, usually from metallurgy and crafting - first the iron age which allowed heavily forested land to be cleared and cultivated, and then innovations with yokes,plows and crop rotation within Europe, steadily increasing use of wind and water energy based on imported, and then improved technology. The emergence of a strong mercantile class magnified capital accumulation. Intellectually too there was a real dynamism that proved stronger than orthodox Greco-semitic religious dogma - investments in higher education, curiosity about the past, about other cultures paved the way for the scientific revolution that preceded the industrial revolution.

Without the synergy from economic, social, technological, intellectual, and yes military dynamism Europe would have remained a shrinking area filled with poor, cold, wet farmers waiting for the next raid by ever-expanding Arabs and Berbers. They would have fought of course, but why should they have won? Why should their horizons have expanded beyond what they were?
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

The Roman empire survived on African grain towards its latter days. Archaeological evidence suggests that the Roman state weakened suficiently to vastly deteriorate in its military kit for soldiers towards the latter days. Ultimately it could no longer hold its extended frontiers and withdrew towards the centre, split, unified for brief periods but essentially was overrun and lost power to various Germanic tribes. It was the Eastern Roman empire which survived throughout until falling before Ottomans right before the start of the colonial period. Even the eastern empire's territory continuously shrank. The growth rates typically quoted are relative to the earlier lesser known transition period between fall of the western Roman empire to the rise of the independent Christian kingdoms mostly dominated by the Germanic colonizing aristocracy.

The earlier part of the "medieval" suffered from the "little ice age" when agriculture suffered in Europe. But this is also the period from which detailed surveys appear, and when the climate improved, agricultural production improved - pushing up growth rates dramtically. Moreover, trade with central Asia never really dried up or stopped completely, even through wars and competition from nomadic steppe empires. When low GDP economies begin to grow, growth rates appear fantastically high. A lot of work done on European growth cycles have deliberately focused on trying to show "indigenous" "endemic" growth possibly from a politcial consciousness of alternative attempts to show that Europes' growth kickstarted with extraction of profits from the triangular Atlantic trade, and which also involved the politically uncomfortable slave trade and its role in possible industrial revolution.
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Johann »

The earlier part of the "medieval" suffered from the "little ice age" when agriculture suffered in Europe. But this is also the period from which detailed surveys appear, and when the climate improved, agricultural production improved - pushing up growth rates dramtically.
The little ice age is understood to have begun to have an impact on agriculture from the 14th century in the northernmost settled latitudes, waxing and waning until the 19th century.

Its actually easier easier to argue that colonial expansion and slavery allowed Europeans to
(a) compensate for reduced agricultural output
(b) cut the middleman out, bypassing the Muslim world's highly profitable control of all trade in and out of Europe.

Yet which colonies will explain Leonardo Da Vinci and Michaelangelo, or Francis Bacon and Shakespeare?

As a side note, written records are available for a number of areas in Europe going back to the 7th century - births, deaths, harvests, etc, plus of course architecture and archaeology tell us about material life, technology, nutrition, etc.
work done on European growth cycles have deliberately focused on trying to show "indigenous" "endemic" growth possibly from a politcial consciousness of alternative attempts to show that Europes' growth kickstarted with extraction of profits from the triangular Atlantic trade, and which also involved the politically uncomfortable slave trade and its role in possible industrial revolution.


The slave trade can not explain the intellectual revolution of the renaissance ocurring within Europe that predates the scientific revolution, which in turn predates the industrial revolution.

The slave trade began in the 16th century with the colonisation of the Americas by first the Spanish and Portuguese, who did *not* contribute greatly to the renaissance.

Why should a backwards, dogmatic, bloodthirsty bunch of savages go on a university building spree in the 13th century? Why is it that despite calamities like the black death wiping out as many one in three in many communities, that investment in trade and education does not reduce, but actually accelarates? How was Gutenberg's printing press developed and why take off in such a big way in Europe? How did these kill-happy barbarians end up building mechanical clocks? Why were watermills, windmills, etc used more intensively per capita than any other place in the world.

Europe has a history of ruthlesness, but they have had a very, very long history of appreciating the practical power and value of knowledge, and a relatively lower threshhold fear of the social and poltical upheaval that profound technological and philosophical changes can cause.
There is a pattern of energetically borrowing and developing both knowledge and technology, and using it to energetically transform every facet of life, whether trade, agriculture, warfare, politics or social structures. Without productivity and capacity (and that includes management capacity) expanded to the maximum extent possible, long term growth can never be sustained.

Is Europe the only part of the world that can do this? Of course not. No one likes to be kicked around. That would be ridiculous, but it is the kind of conceit that 19th and early 20th century West was full of until the Japanese started to sober them up in 1905, but its still taken time for the message to penetrate in to general awareness in the West.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

The intellectual flourishing could possibly have been helped by the absorption of knowledge from Islamic sources from Moorish Spain, which also is supposed to have accelerated after the fall of the Islamic regime, and the absorption from emigrating scholars or "libraries" from the Byzantine as well as North African or other Islamic sources, with the Byzantine one probably again accelerating after the fall of Constantinople. Contact with the Islamic world during the Crusades also sits squarely in the middle of the "medieval" period. The Ventian fleet definitely carried on a thriving business with regimes definitely under Islamic control. The Islamic scholars had translated and preserved classical European works and reintroduced them to Europe in the late middle period. So the two "falls" - one of the Moorish Spain (whose fall began centuries earlier than the final expulsion) and the other of Constantinople could be catalytic factors in the intellectual "flowering".

By records I meant, records of the order of the Domesday Books, or the French survey of 1328, etc. But these again are snapshots although extensive. Manorial records, lease agreements, deeds, heriots, records of sales and rents all make up a huge supplementary record, yes, but these are less frequent for the early period compared to the later ones. Chronicler records are used but also looked at sceptically because of possibility of exaggaration. The so-called "Dark ages" used to be called so essentially because there were less surviving records available.

Yes there was a 1000-1200 "warm period" which could have promoted agricultural growth, but this did not suffice to protect the population from the plague, as well as indications of stagnation.
Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Keshav »

Johann wrote:
The little ice age is understood to have begun to have an impact on agriculture from the 14th century in the northernmost settled latitudes, waxing and waning until the 19th century.
It certainly waned by the late 1700s when the agricultural revolution took place, introducing new, hardy vegetables such as potato and cabbage which lead to a greater population and lead almost directly into the industrial revolution.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59810
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by ramana »

The history of these people needs to be understood for they had a great impact on the ancient world both Westward (Mediterranean) and Eastward(India) and later under Islam they continued to have an impact on history to date. Currently Arab vs Iranian or Sunni vs Shia. And under the Achemenids they were the ones who freed the Jews and sent them back to Jerusalem.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthia
Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Yogi_G »

Sorry, cudnt figure out which other thread could best accomodate this post,

I was wondering today on which power/empire mis-behaved the most during its heyday. Misbehave as in sorround its diplomacy/dealings/perceptions/analysis with a veil of arrogance and degrade/invade other peoples and cultures. Take for example the current Western world (for now US and UK onleee)...

1. Most recent, slumdog millionaire, no not the movie but the concept behind it and the intentions
2. The terms third world and cheap labour
3. Evangelical Christinity (the notion of civilizing pagan savage natives)
4. Imperialism (well every power @ some point is guilt of it)
5. Racism
6. Euro-centricism
7. Pre-emptive strikes (notion of my security is first in world at the cost of introducing regional chaos)
8. Lord Macaluay
9. Witzel
10. McArthur (careless talk of nuking other countries)

etc etc etc etc etc etc...reading the above points I was for a minute alarmed that I sound like a leftist list of greviances against the evil capitalists but believe me, no such leanings but what I have done is list some of the points by which the West has mis-behaved.

Like the current day West, many other great powers/empires have mis-behaved like the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Persians, the Indians (well relatively less) , the Caliphates, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Russians/Soviets etc etc. Indians have to an extent exhibited such traits (the term Mleccha for example but again its a moot point) but it was never built into our genes as it has been in the west. In our best days miltrarily and financially we never mis-used the chance by invading another country or culture (bar the Cholas)...we never practised racism or imperialism...


So in your opinion, which do you think is the most mis-behaved power/country/empire in history? I know kigdoms and empires by instinct tend to be imperialist, am not disputing that, but the arrogance factor and its resulting harm is what I am looking at...your thoughts please...
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

"Misbehave" implies there exists a preferred list of "acceptable behaviours". Now what is that list? Acceptable behaviour tends to vary in time place and people. :D
Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Yogi_G »

brihaspati wrote:"Misbehave" implies there exists a preferred list of "acceptable behaviours". Now what is that list? Acceptable behaviour tends to vary in time place and people. :D
A good point Brihaspati ji. That is why I laid special emphasis on the word arrogance which in any day and age is frowned upon, pride is acceptable but arrogance and racism is not. I also resigned to the fact that imperialism was (and for some powers today :wink: is) acceptable for kings and emperor...
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

Yogi_Gji, thought about the arrogance aspect. But I am coming round to the conclusion that arrogance cannot be harmful in the long run, since over long exposure to such arrogance, some among those at the receiving end will develop a reverse "arrogance" and resistance, while some ofcourse will have collaborated and shared in the "imperialist arrogance". Depending on the inherent, pre-imperialism cultural and ideological strength the "defeated culture" can even revive and overthrow the "winners" in time, and the "arrogance" of the previous imperialist can ultimately lead to its demise.

What appears to be more harmful is the deliberate and determined extermination of the centres of ideological resistance and continuity of the colonized or subjugated population. In India this project failed both in Islamic hands and British hands becuase they targeted the elite intellect they could see, and whom they thought of as the ideological leadership according to the models of their own society. However, the ideology of India was too complex and too ingrained into the mass psyche to be taken out by simply buying out or liquidating the "elite intellectuals".

By this criterion, the Greeks appear to be more harmful than the Romans (except under Alexander - who alone seems to have tried to pursue a "pure" policy of imperialism subsuming racial/ideological arrigance - and got involved in quite a few conflicts with the "Greeks" because of this - as per his biographers). The Romans at least had no problem in acknowledging their admiration and debt for Greek philosophy, and they have not been that much known to have targeted specifically Greek intellectuals or philosophers for liquidation (unless as part of their generic liquidation campaigns against all of the population in a city or area). They even took on board Josephus, a member of the Jewish intellectual leadership all the while targeting the political ambitions of the Jews. But they still did intervene in the ideological life of subjugated peoples according to their persoanl or state political needs.

Among the "Persians", only Cyrus appears to stand out and Cyrus will stand as less harmful than the Romans, since Cyrus actually restored and did not intervene in the "ideological life" (then the worship of native cults) of the conquered, and is not known to have targeted the intelectual leadership of the time - the priests of the cults.

Not much is known about the deliberate ideological impact of Egyptians in their colonies in Nubia and the Levant, for Cnaanite cults appear to have retained their intellectual independence from Egyptian intervention. The Chinese were restricted to probably only the South and south western half of their current extent for most of their history, and historically they do not appear to have targeted intellectuals outside their territories when they conquered. They definitely took active interests in luring outsiders to enrich their ideological spectrum. The Japanaese were perhaps more arrogant in their imperialist phase but do not show signs of overt targeting of "other" intellectuals unless on Japanese soil - as part of the hated Gai Jin. I would plave them both as below the Greeks and Romans but above Cyrus.

The British in their imperialist phase did not specifically target Indian intellect for liquidation, until the fag end of their career on Indian soil, when they saw that Indian nationalism was beginning to identify with "Bharatyia/Hindu" as its spring-well of strength - targeting individuals like Shyamaprasad Mukherjee (who conveniently passed away like so many of those brains the British hated - out of "natural" causes and in confinement). I would place them at par with the Romans remembering that some of them for their own purposes also helped restore/revive/res-exploration of Bharatyia material that the Indian non-Muslim had almost forgotten in the wider public discourse after centuries of Islamic repression. This would be comparable to how the Romans used Greek philosophy for their own purpose but still helped to continue or eulogize the Greek contribution.

Russians are problematic. In different periods they have behaved differently. The Caliphate comes out at the top of the list for obvious reasons (in spite of indications that Indian intellectuals were probably carted off to the middle east - although for unknow or unspecified reasons - but probably to write down or provide input for the remarkable "Arabic" burst of Islamic scholarship on non-religious knowledge around the early Caliphate period). Islamic scholarship almost never acknowledges the Indic contribution except Al Beruni, and we know that their chroniclers claim specific targeted liquidation of Indian intellectuals and intellectual material.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59810
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by ramana »

I ws watching Hisotry channel presentation on Ancient Technologies and one episode was on an Arab engineer/scientist Ismail Al-Jazari who lived in 1206. The interesting thing is he wrote and illustrated a book on "Knowldege" and documented about 50 inventions of all sorts. A copy exists in the Topkapi Museum now. Recall the Ottomons were savages about the time of Al Jazari. Dubai has a bunch of his descripotions made into working models-Elephant Clock etc. He had a neat anti shipping torpedo - a saucer with a rocket motor and two outriggers for stability which could take out a wooden ship at a thousand yards. GD would love it!

My thought was that he was pioneer before Leonardo Da Vinci and his notebooks. Seeing the proximty of the Middle East and Italy, I wouldnt be surprised if Leonardo saw his book even if it wasnt translated. The styles are so similar it cant be coincidence.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Singha »

thanks Ramana. Leonardo had a fertile and curious mind and could easily have picked it from
folks like Zazari. Phd's always do "literature survey" in the field.

the first submarine that was actually used had a really scary design and was man powered with
oars with a keg of gunpowder attached on top to attack ships in harbour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtle_(submarine)
Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Keshav »

Not sure if you were joking or not but you linked to a non-existent article.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59810
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by ramana »

GD, Al Jazari's "torpedo" looked like a turtle! The underside provides a skimming surface. The two long out riggers provide stability. The head houses the charge which explodes with a delay fuse. A long tube on the top-side provides thrust to cover the standoff distance. Looked more like a anti-blocade weapon than a ship-borne weapon.

Look at History Channel site. might have links.

My point was DaVinci might have seen the book to get inspired.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

Ramana wrote
Recall the Ottomons were savages about the time of Al Jazari. Dubai has a bunch of his descripotions made into working models-Elephant Clock etc. He had a neat anti shipping torpedo - a saucer with a rocket motor and two outriggers for stability which could take out a wooden ship at a thousand yards. GD would love it!
That description looks very close to something I saw about ancient Chinese naval warfare technology. I am not sure it was not a copy of a copy - for rockets were definitely used in China before the middle east and west-Asia. And Arbas had been sailing to Chinese ports from the earliest days of Islamic expansion, they also had a habit of patronizing Islamic scholars to go out and translate and copy texts from culture they knew were more knowledgeable than themselves - like Al Beruni.
Sriman
BRFite
Posts: 1858
Joined: 02 Mar 2009 11:38
Location: Committee for the Promotion of Vice and the Prevention of Virtue

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Sriman »

Keshav wrote:
Not sure if you were joking or not but you linked to a non-existent article.
Just a malformed url. try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtle_(submarine)
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Johann »

brihaspati wrote:The intellectual flourishing could possibly have been helped by the absorption of knowledge from Islamic sources from Moorish Spain, which also is supposed to have accelerated after the fall of the Islamic regime, and the absorption from emigrating scholars or "libraries" from the Byzantine as well as North African or other Islamic sources, with the Byzantine one probably again accelerating after the fall of Constantinople. Contact with the Islamic world during the Crusades also sits squarely in the middle of the "medieval" period. The Ventian fleet definitely carried on a thriving business with regimes definitely under Islamic control. The Islamic scholars had translated and preserved classical European works and reintroduced them to Europe in the late middle period. So the two "falls" - one of the Moorish Spain (whose fall began centuries earlier than the final expulsion) and the other of Constantinople could be catalytic factors in the intellectual "flowering".
Brihaspati,

I think I've already pointed out that contact with both Byzantine and the Islamic world enabled Latin-Germanic Europe to recover from the 'dark ages'.

But both South Korea and the Philippines were in contact with America since the late 19th century, and both experienced Japanese occupation. Can we really explain South Korea's growth, and the Philippenes lagging on that basis?

Why shouldnt have the Ottoman Empire been the one that saw the explosive growth of philosophy, science, technology and commerce when Andalusia and Byzantine fell? There was certainly a great deal of absorption that took place, but quite simply the Ottoman Empire was not investing in higher education in the same way (for fundamentally religious reasons), nor did its political systems encourage the same degree of efficiency in land cultivation or trade.

Agriculture and trade in Muslim lands in particular was also handicapped by inheritance laws which tended to fragment holdings - so typically wealthy families did not own land itself, only the right to tax land owned by the state. Tax farming does not invite investment in the land. Similarly with trade, the impossibility of creating the legal entity of a corporation meant that building private capital beyond a single generation (Islamic law demands that all partnerships are terminated at death) was very difficult. There were a whole range of financial instruments that developed that gave European merchants a competitive advantage over Muslims in terms of raising capital, absorbing risk and thus losses, etc.

For example before the black death, England was approaching Egypt in GDP. By the 13th century the Muslim world was actually importing, rather than exporting textiles and cloth from Europe, especially England, the Netherlands and Italy, despite access to India and China. A trade reversal that took place as European manufacturing quality and volumes went up and its costs dropped. After the Black Death, with very high rates of mortality in both states, there should have been similar outcomes. In fact what hapened was that in England, grain prices dropped, and wages went up (since labour was scarcer) - the net result was that the average standard of living rose. In Egypt the opposite happened - grain prices skyrocketed, and purchasing power collapsed. Why the divergence? In England landlords though powerful were forced to bid competitively for labour. In Egypt the landlords stuck together and refused to pay more - the result was peasant starvation and flight from the countryside, reduction in grain production, and skyrocketing prices. This only reinforced Egyptian disinvestment in manufacturing, while the opposite was happening in key parts of Europe.

Allowing labour mobility and bargaining power, encouraging responsible ownership of property (instead of rent collecting absentee landlordism), encouraging trade to grow, heavily investing in higher education, embracing and driving technological change - these are what turned around a very bleak European situation. Without those foundations, there could be no world-empire building, and no prosperity after empire ended. Force of arms, or force of arms combined with religious dogma, etc, etc are never enough.
surinder
BRFite
Posts: 1464
Joined: 08 Apr 2005 06:57
Location: Badal Ki Chaaon Mein

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by surinder »

Yogi_G wrote:So in your opinion, which do you think is the most mis-behaved power/country/empire in history? I know kigdoms and empires by instinct tend to be imperialist, am not disputing that, but the arrogance factor and its resulting harm is what I am looking at...your thoughts please...
I think the most destructive of all has been Great Britain. At its height, it occoupied 25% of the world, holding about 25% of the world population in its imperial iron hold. It has probably ended many dozens of dynasties all around the world (many ancient ones in India). It has caused genocide on the native poplations of South Africa, North America, Australia & NZ. It has caused many languages and cultures to go extinct. It has supplanted english in many nations at the cost their own languages. It has partitioned many nations setting the new neighbor up for perennial enmity and blood baths. Some historian should tall all the British imperial wars and add up all the casualties due to them: that would be an eye-opener, IMHO. I think the British win hands down.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by brihaspati »

What is the opinion on Nietzsche's critic of the western worldview - primarily western Christianity? Do we consider him "western"?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59810
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by ramana »

A very good book review x-posted...
Acharya wrote:
How Rome Fell: Death of a Superpower
by Adrian Goldsworthy (Author)


# Hardcover: 560 pages
# Publisher: Yale University Press (May 12, 2009)
# Language: English
# ISBN-10: 0300137192
# ISBN-13: 978-0300137194
In AD 200, the Roman Empire seemed unassailable. Its vast territory accounted for most of the known world. By the end of the fifth century, Roman rule had vanished in western Europe and much of northern Africa, and only a shrunken Eastern Empire remained. What accounts for this improbable decline? Here, Adrian Goldsworthy applies the scholarship, perspective, and narrative skill that defined his monumental Caesar to address perhaps the greatest of all historical questions—how Rome fell.

It was a period of remarkable personalities, from the philosopher-emperor Marcus Aurelius to emperors like Diocletian, who portrayed themselves as tough, even brutal, soldiers. It was a time of revolutionary ideas, especially in religion, as Christianity went from persecuted sect to the religion of state and emperors. Goldsworthy pays particular attention to the willingness of Roman soldiers to fight and kill each other. Ultimately, this is the story of how an empire without a serious rival rotted from within, its rulers and institutions putting short-term ambition and personal survival over the wider good of the state.

How Rome Fell is a brilliant successor to Goldsworthy's "monumental" (The Atlantic) Caesar.
About the Author

Adrian Goldsworthy is the author of many books about the ancient world including Caesar, The Roman Army at War, and In the Name of Rome. He lectures widely and consults on historical documentaries produced by the History Channel, National Geographic, and the BBC. He lives in Wales.


The work is divided into three parts. Part 1 traces the reign of Marcus Aurelius through the Crisis of the Third century to the rise of Diocletian. In many ways the reign of Marcus Aurelius was the height of the empire left by Augustus, but the generations that followed witnessed a painful transformative process. Part II begins with Diocletian's attempts to rebuild from the rubble, reorganizing the empire into a new entity. It ends with the political split of the empire between East and West. Part III then details the sordid legacy of the Western Empire as emperors fought rivals, and barbarian warlords fought Roman generalissimos who were themselves often of barbarian extraction. The West increasingly loses ground until it is a patchwork of barbarian kingdoms loosely carrying on Roman traditions. Part III ends with the rise of the Islamic invaders who in turn dismember the outer realms of the surviving Eastern empire.

Goldsworthy's book is largely in response to the most recent scholars, such as Peter Heather, who paint a picture of a vibrant later empire only torn apart by Germanic supertribes and a reborn Persian superpower. Goldsworthy disagrees on both fronts. He claims there is no sufficient evidence to paint the later empire as being as prosperous or as strong as Augustus' Principate. Nor does he see the Persians or various barbarian tribes as being especially larger or more organized opponents than what confronted the earlier emperors. Instead Rome's greatest enemy was itself. The constant civil wars fought after Marcus Aurelius destabilized Roman society and weakened the borders, allowing otherwise weak enemies to exploit Roman instability.

The later emperors cared more about mere survival than about imperial welfare at large, which led to deleterious reforms. Senators were excluded from military command so as to no longer threaten the emperor, but ironically this opened the power struggle to a much wider and far less predictable strata of society below them, namely Equestrian officers and bureaucrats.
Furthermore, the split between the civil bureaucracy and the military forces, and the increasing division of both into smaller units, was designed to prevent any one official from having the resources to overthrow the emperor. But this also had the effect of reducing the empire's ability to quickly marshal the necessary resources to oppose foreign invasion. The result was of course an increasing trickle of foreign foes who were allowed to occupy the land, thus depriving the West of needed tax revenue, which in turn weakened the army and bureaucracy, and so encouraging more infiltration and forced settlement.

The tale of western Roman collapse is a long and depressing epic, but Goldsworthy tells it expertly. The prose is enchanting: intelligent but direct and always engaging. Where some saw his Caesar biography as rather needlessly verbose, the author manages in this work to condense about four hundred years of Roman history into as many pages. The books also contains various maps and illustrations, charts and tables, and several pages of photographs. The last hundred pages is populated by a chronology, glossary, bibliography, end notes and an index. This is an excellent narrative for the general reader interested in late antiquity, whether or not one fully agrees with the author's conclusions.

Actually you see the same symptoms of decline in all monarchies and even totalitarian systems. One capable founder followed by a bunch of middling leaders are followed by a brilliant overachiever and in turn followed by petty rulers who are pre-occupied with survival tactics.

You see this even in Indian history the Mauryas, the Guptas, Cholas, Sultanates, Vijayanagara, Mughals and Indian National Congress thru the Nehru dynasty. It almost happened in US with the Republicans. A peaceful method of regime change, such as elections allow, ensures state continuity and existence. Incapable leaders can be changed and the nation survives. Such nations have history while others have dynasty histories.
Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Non-Western Worldview

Post by Johann »

Ramana,

Rome's imperial expansion was based on the health of its political system, but the expansion threatened the health of the political system.

The choice was Republic or Empire. The Republic was better at using social/class cohesion to manage the intensity political competition, but the empire offered wealth.

Rome's biggest failure was its inability to develop a mechanism for the peaceful orderly transfer of power from one emperor to the next.
The Islamic caliphate suffered from exactly the same problem.

Primogeniture seems like a simple and obvious solution, but it wasnt always so. Without it dynastic succession was often a brutal and exhausting war of attrition between relatives, or a merry go around as palace guards murdered rulers and put the throne up to bid.

Europe's adoption of primogeniture as the principle of succession provided a measure of basic political stability that was missing in the Roman and Islamic empires. With political stability comes a greater incentive to invest in the longer term, rather than the short term battle for survival.

Whether a political system is based on monarchy or democracy, it has to built around practices that reward longer term thinking.
Post Reply