Western Universalism - what's the big deal?

[sanman]

Sanjeev Sanyal Exposes Global Ratings Conspiracy And Western Echo Chambers

[ricky_v]

https://brusselssignal.eu/2024/12/is-it ... perialism/

Imperialism is making a comeback, which is why I decided to turn this column into a three-part series to put forward my argument as to why that is the case. The often eccentric but also insightful Nassim Nicholas Taleb of “Black Swan” fame (the book about probabilities, not the movie about ballet) recently defended Turkey’s policies towards Syria on economic grounds:


That being said, the idea that countries with centuries of experience in governance should take direct or indirect control over areas that have shown themselves time and again to be incapable of self-governance might not be the worst idea. In fact, in the often-announced multipolar age it might be inevitable.

While I still remain sceptical about the concept of multipolarity, for this would require at least one other country that is equal to the United States in its capabilities, I do think that there will be regional powershifts allowing for regional hegemons to arise. We see this currently happening in the Middle East, and what Taleb is enthusiastically referring to is nothing but a 21st century version of Ottoman imperialism.

In a recent party speech, Turkish President Erdoğan talked openly about his ambitions to “revise the outcome of World War I and annex Syrian territories (formerly Ottoman provinces) into Turkey.” Contrary to Western Europe, where a post-modern and post-nationalist mindset is still dominating the elite mindset, the rest of the world is moving on to a neo-imperialist mindset.

Not all of these “imperialisms” will look the same, but they will all have the same characteristics of pursuing spheres of interests at the expense of neighbouring countries. Russia, for example, is following its traditional playbook of territorial expansion – a strategy as old as Peter I, who also happens to be Putin’s role model. The invasion of Ukraine had many motivating factors from Moscow’s point of view, but as Putin made clear in an essay he himself wrote on the “Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians,” there is a clear imperialist motive. The same goes for Russian meddling in Central Asia and the Caucasus as well as the desire to establish military bases in the Middle East and Africa.

China, on the other hand, appears to pursue its traditional model of imperialism via a modern version of the tribute system. Beijing barely ever directly intervenes, but it creates financial dependencies, known as debt-trap diplomacy. China is the world’s largest bilateral creditor, and it would be naïve to believe that Chinese money flows without any strings attached. The Belt-and-Road initiative is a scheme to shield China from sanctions via the creation of resource pipelines (both metaphorically and literally) and make the global South dependent on China. This is a global version of the tribute system made fit for the 21st century: The tributary system was the framework through which China managed its foreign relations from around the Han dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE) to the Qing dynasty (1644–1911/12).


The world is not moving closer to a happy family of “multiple poles” but a world of renewed imperial conflict, and Europe has not yet found its role or purpose in this emerging world.

[A_Gupta]

How does India achieve its national objectives such as Vikasit Bharat amidst all the neo-imperialist fighting?

[ricky_v]

that is a difficult question to answer, A_Gupta ji; i have always believed that internal policy making is influenced by the features stated in the directive principles of state policy, summarising from co-pilot:

The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) are guidelines and principles set out in Part IV of the Indian Constitution. They are not enforceable by any court, but they aim to provide a framework for the governance of the country. The main objective of these principles is to ensure social and economic democracy and to provide a just and equitable society. Here are some key aspects:

directive principles of state policy
The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) are guidelines and principles set out in Part IV of the Indian Constitution. They are not enforceable by any court, but they aim to provide a framework for the governance of the country. The main objective of these principles is to ensure social and economic democracy and to provide a just and equitable society. Here are some key aspects:

Key Principles
Economic and Social Welfare: The state should promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting a social order in which justice, social, economic, and political, shall inform all the institutions of national life.

Minimizing Inequality: The state should strive to minimize inequalities in income and eliminate inequalities in status, facilities, and opportunities.

Right to Work, Education, and Public Assistance: The state should provide the right to an adequate means of livelihood, equal pay for equal work, and free and compulsory education for children.

Promotion of Health: The state should work towards raising the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and improving public health.

Equal Justice and Free Legal Aid: The state should promote equal justice and provide free legal aid to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.

Environmental Protection: The state should protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.

Promotion of International Peace and Security: The state should foster respect for international law and treaty obligations and encourage settlement of international disputes by arbitration.

Purpose and Importance
Guiding Governance: They serve as a guide for the state to establish and maintain a just society.

Policy Formulation: They help in the formulation and implementation of policies that aim to achieve socio-economic development.

Constitutional Objectives: They reflect the ideals that the Constitution aims to achieve, such as democracy, social justice, and equality.

While these principles are not legally enforceable, they are crucial in shaping policies and laws that promote the overall well-being of the citizens.

Would you like to delve into any specific aspect of the Directive Principles of State Policy?

as far as the internal mechanisms are considered, india will fulfill the above based on political compulsions, and should in theory, work out as business- as-usual

vikasit bharat on the other hand:

vikasit bharat stated goals
The Viksit Bharat 2047 initiative is a comprehensive vision plan by the Government of India to transform the country into a developed nation by the year 2047, marking the 100th anniversary of its independence. The initiative focuses on various aspects of development, including economic growth, social progress, environmental sustainability, and good governance1.

Key Goals of Viksit Bharat 2047
Economic Growth: Enhance productivity and resilience in agriculture, promote employment and skilling, and boost manufacturing and services.

Social Development: Ensure inclusive human resource development and social justice, with a focus on the four pillars: Yuva (Youth), Garib (Poor), Mahila (Women), and Kisan (Farmers).

Infrastructure Development: Improve urban development, energy security, and infrastructure.

Innovation and Research: Foster innovation, research, and development to drive technological advancements.

Environmental Sustainability: Protect and improve the environment, and promote sustainable practices.

Regional Development: Implement plans like Purvodaya for the all-round development of the eastern region of India, covering states like Jharkhand, Bihar, Odisha, West Bengal, and Andhra Pradesh.

Global Partnerships: Encourage international cooperation and partnerships to achieve development goals.

The initiative aims to create a prosperous India in harmony with modern infrastructure and nature, providing opportunities for all citizens to reach their potential.

Does this align with what you were looking for, or is there a specific aspect you'd like to know more about?

vikasit bharat and the dpsp, imo, are aligned in their overall outlook, with vb the stated goal, and the dpsp the mechanism to reach it.
now, in this interconnected world, it is always possible that decisions of a country influence outlook outside the said country's borders, but if we are speaking of formulating / refining the internal machinery, and considering that we have been dealing with imperialistic tendencies of many friedns and foes all the time, this neo-imperialism should not adversely affect india's goals

[Haresh]

Not sure where to put this,
Admin Please move if required

I study the collapse of empires... here's why wokeism will be the downfall of America

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech ... erica.html

[ricky_v]

current climes from the views of a christian site

https://www.wordonfire.org/articles/are ... democracy/

In 1930, Spanish philosopher José Ortega y Gasset published the book for which he is best known, The Revolt of the Masses. Though he wrote a century ago and his focus was on Europe, it is hard to imagine a book more relevant to life in Western democracies in general and the United States in particular. He warns that democracy has overrun its proper bounds and for that reason, we face a crisis, so much so that we may be in the last stages of modern democratic government.

Although the Constitution begins “We the People,” in a healthy democracy that does not mean everyone should try to govern. In a true democracy, Ortega y Gasset explains, a large majority of the citizenry recognize that self-government is limited, given that most are incapable of taking the reins of government, nor should they try.

But when Ortega y Gasset says the masses have revolted, he means that the majority of the country is no longer willing to recognize the men and women of excellence needed for leadership. These masses, he explains, are made of mediocre men and women who “demand nothing special of themselves, but for whom to live is to be every moment what they already are.” The people of the masses are “mere buoys that float on the waves.”


Ortega y Gasset calls this dangerous condition “hyper-democracy.” In a hyper-democracy, excellence is scorned; indeed, for middling men and women, excellence is a threat to a distorted idea of equality: “Who are you to say that anyone is better than me?” In a hyper-democracy, not only do the masses consider themselves capable of leadership, they also self-assuredly believe they have the right to impose their will on everyone else. The quality of political discourse degenerates and meaningful discussion is replaced by abuse and violence. Social media makes a bad situation worse by solidifying and confirming these pedestrian opinions, further homogenizing the masses.

Democracy, however, is the flip side of a polity, where everyone demands a right to steer the ship of state, qualified or not. It’s really even worse than it sounds. Ortega y Gasset explains that governing is not just a political act, because our public life is “intellectual, moral, economic, religious; it comprises all our collective habits, including our fashions both of dress and of amusement.” When democracy begins to degenerate, violent protests, chaos, and anarchy are the consequence. Eventually, the country is willing to accept tyranny to put things aright because anything is better than chaos.

The political lesson of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar is not a warning about tyrants. It is rather a disquieting portrait of how easily the emotions and attitudes of the populace are manipulated, first one way, and then the next.

Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville, in his early nineteenth-century astute observations on the United States, Democracy in America, writes that Americans, having formed a new country across the Atlantic, think they have escaped tyrannical government—but they have not. Rather, America has traded one form of tyranny for another. This condition, he explains, is the “tyranny of the majority,” and it is far more oppressive than any tyranny in Europe. Tocqueville marvels at how effective the majority is in shaping public opinion and disallowing competing ideas. Freedom of speech and freedom of conscience are at risk. He also notes that the cultural tastes of a democracy may become banal.

The American founders designed a republic because they knew that democracies are never secure. This is explained, among other places, in Federalist Papers #9 and #10. John Adams—never one to mince words—wrote to a friend, “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” The founders feared mob rule: They saw it too often in the history of Greece, Rome, and the Italian city-states.

There is another ******** of democracy that has appeared in our day, the “pseudo-majority.” It may look like a genuine majority, but it is not. It operates in at least two different ways, and in both, the mainstream media is complicit. In The Wizard of Oz, when Dorothy and company reach the Emerald City, they are confronted by a terrifying, all-powerful, fire-breathing, smoke-belching, supersized, mechanical Wizard of Oz. But then little Toto pulls back the curtain to reveal that “The Great and Powerful Oz” is just an ordinary man, and a rather shy one at that. The mass media, promoting the opinions of “the elite,” operates in a similar fashion. They choose what we will hear and how we will hear it, claiming they represent “public opinion,” regularly trotting out polls that tell us how to think. We dare not disagree for fear of ridicule or worse. Opponents are shouted down and inundated in a cesspool of cancel culture. They are a noisy new Wizard of Oz when, in fact, they represent far fewer than they would have us think.

Does that mean a democracy? There seem to be two paradoxical objections to religious faith in today’s democratic regimes. One is that life has been so comfortable for Christians that too many are complacent. As Ralph Wood observes, the Church is no longer “visible.”

No one wants to live under communist oppression. Roman Catholicism, however, thrived in Poland during the Cold War. In a nation of around thirty million, approximately eleven million came out to see Pope John Paul II when he visited the country in June 1979. That is a third of the country, a staggering number.

The reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union are manifold and complex; Poland was the first Soviet domino to fall, followed by Hungary, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania. Today, in the US and Europe, Bishop Robert Barron notes that for every one person who joins the Church, six or seven abandon the faith; about half of the young people who are raised Catholic are leaving the Church.

Today, the Catholic Church in democratic Poland is in decline.