From: c34657b@saha.hut.fi (Tuomas Viljanen)
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture
Organization: The Nibelungenlied Incorporated
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:46:00 GMT

In article <19764@ector.cs.purdue.edu> cutchin@cs.purdue.edu (Steve Cutchin) writes:
>
>In article <JMC.92Sep28214354@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) wr
>    tendencies  as abberations.  Let me make a list of some of the more
>    negative creations of Western Culture:

Mr. Cutchin tries to convince the following examples are proofs of the evilness
and moral inferiority of the "Western" civilization (i.e. "only the Western Civ
can produce such horrendous consequences"). However, all these can be proven
faulty, as
  
>    1.  Nuclear Warfare.

Nuclear warfare is not a product of the Western civilization alone; it is the
by-product of the nuclear technology. No matter who would have discovered the
nuclear fission he had surely made nuclear weapons. People are similar every-
where; when mankind discovered iron, it immediately began to forge swords. If
the Chinese had discovered tthe nuclear fission, they surely would have immed-
iately began to build atomic bombs. No need for Western depravity for this.
 
>    2.  Capitalism (yes Mr McCarthy this has negative aspects).

Capitalism is the worst economical system available - sans all those alternat-
ive systems tested, like Communism etc. And more efficient economical system
will always push less efficient system aside - an example of cultural evolution
Again, no Western depravity needed for this.

>    3.  World Wars I and II.

Oh dear. Is the Western civilization the only civilization on this globe which
wage wars ? Wars are an universal phenomenon, by no means an indigenous Western
phenomenon. WWII was, in fact, began in the Far East, where Japan practised her
expansionist, aggressive military policy on China for several years before the
outbreak of war in West. The sneak attack to Pearl Harbor finally turned the
Great Powers' War into the Second World War.

>    4.  The Crusades.

Ever heard about jihad ? Ikko-ikki ? What makes Crusades so curious among all
the conquests during the world history ? Hasn't the other civilizations than
the Western ever been expansionist and power-hungry ? Was the Saljuq conquest
in the Byzantine Asia Minor, which triggered the Crusades, less bad phenomenon
than the Crusades ? 

>    5.  The Catholic Church.

What makes the Catholic Church so an evil thing ? Atrocities have been practis-
ed in the name of all ideologies and religions, the Catholic Church is by no
means especially vicious in that point of wiev

>    6.  The Holocaust.

The Westerners are, in fact, pure novices in the noble art of genocide. The
largest body count I have yet heard comes from the Mongol China conquest, where
the Mongols managed to slaughter some 120 MILLION Chinese during their reign.
I have heard they had a plan to turn the whole china into steppes to feed their
horses. Pity they did not succeed, the Prezwalski horse would have survived...
In addition, I would count the Cambodian genocide as equal to the Holocaust.
People are similar everywhere, not just in the West.

>    7.  Mili Vanilli. :-)

Oh dear. No comments.

>    These cultural aspects of Western culture are just as much an inherent
>    aspect of it as the more 'beneficial' kinds that Mr McCarthy lists.
>    So I would say that western culture while succesfully exploiting and 
>    destroying large segments of the global population is in no way superior
>    to any other culture.   Unless one defines superior to be 'doing whatever
>    the hell I want'.

Might makes right, man ! Haven't you learned it yet ? I would suggest for
reading Sun Tzu, Macchiavelli, Clausewitz or other classics. It does not
make any difference whether the civilization is Eastern or Western, people
are similar everywhere. If, say, the Chinese had first reached the state
of technology and civilization the Europeans were from 1600 onwards, they
certainly would have behaved just like the Westerners did. The strongest
is always right, this is a cold reality.

>    I do not even consider the myriad of arguments that what McCarthy extolls
>    as 'benefits' are considered by many as not being benefits.  Particularly
>    the idea of societal 'progress' is often pushed for by the west yet why
>    should one want ones society to 'progress'.  Is it really a benefit?  I
>    am calling into question here Mr McCarthy's belief that organization,
>    rule of law, written constitutions are beneficial things.  Is 'progress'
>    itself a benefit?  I think you will find many in the west and east who
>    have lived near polluted areas who will argue that 'progress' is not
>    such a universally wonderfull thing.

The Mayas managed to build up themselves a very own ecological disaster in
the Yucatan Peninsula, just without the aid of "progressed" technology. The
progress itself does not cause ecological problems: it is the application
of the progress. Progressed technology can be also used for environmental
protection in much more efficient ways than non-progressed technology.

I would rather live in the modern high-tech socitey, than in, say, the
medieval India or China, in which the progress had stagnated for centuries,
even for millenniums. A dynamic, progressing civilization is more pleasant
place to live in than the static, stagnated civilizations.



  ++ Tuomas Viljanen                     ++ For a battle like Crecy, you do  ++
  ++ Lahderanta 20 A 19                  ++ not need a military genius like  ++
  ++ SF-02720 Espoo 72 FINLAND           ++ Edward III. All you need is an   ++
  ++ 358-0-592175 or c34657b@saha.hut.fi ++ idiot like the Duke of Alencon.  ++
Xref: sparky soc.history:8784 soc.culture.indian:32962