Which Culture is Superior ? Middle Eastern or Western?

[anarres]

Have I said anything to suggest that I thought you did not?
My problem is that rambuchan was implying that Provolution's stance is the quintessentially Western one; I was hinting at the fact that a very large number of Westerners have stances closer to yours.

Fair comment then, I was totally confused by your reference to my attitude as "Western".

But I do feel you are being a pedant, or at least willingly not understanding Rambuchan: His comment about Provolution is simple - that is is a western trait to feel the need to be superior culturally (or maybe it is that it is a western trait to feel your culture is under constant threat). Either way, I am sure you could have gleaned more meaning than you claimed to...

 

[anarres]

Um? Near as I'm aware, I haven't ascribed any motives to you. Saying that someone is a revisionist is a statement about what they do, not about their motives for doing so.

Hey, I guess this is proof you really are a pedant. I'll try to be correct in my language when I post from now on.

I have to ask though - why when you point out pedantic mistakes do you never address what they meant? Do you really not get it and have to ask for clarification?

 

[Rambuchan]

My problem is that rambuchan was implying that Provolution's stance is the quintessentially Western one; I was hinting at the fact that a very large number of Westerners have stances closer to yours.

I think you've been quite perceptive here. I agree that Anarres' viewpiont is perhaps the closest to your 'average Western Joe tax payer's'. I find Anares' contributions to be quite valid and sensible.

I am focusing on Prov's comments because I find that they are:

- Founded on poor methodology (judging two cultures by the standards and values of just one of those cultures - saying that you don't care much for moral relativism is a lazy palm off here - he is yet to fully answer the arguments put against him)

- Provocative ('challenger civ')

- Generally destructive to the conversation because, as you've pointed out, he is trying to occupy the role of defending Western culture with his heavier posturing and again, provocative language, bringing a bad name to those with more subtle, acceptable and representative views of Westerners:

Obviously , I am a Western supremacist(my bold), and there is no doubt that people on the other side has already labeled me a "bigot" etc. You know what, I am fine with that, as moral relativism, political correctness and historical revisionism are aspects I do not care too much about. Many of us see that The West is supreme to the Middle East, in blatantly all respects (my bold).

Also when I have been mentioning the 'ancient asian cultures' I have mainly been thinking of India and Hinudism. I really don't know as much as others about China's history, hence me deferring to Aneeshm. My comments should therefore be read in a Hindu context.

 

[The Last Conformist]

No , I didn't .

It might have had such a culture/tradition . That is irrelevant to what I said . I said that the need to assert said superiority came only after they were repeatedly invaded ( "The Carving of the Chinese Melon" is what it was called ) .

The successive Chinese empires refused to treat foreign states as equals (unless forced at the point of a sword or gun). That isn't asserting superiority?

Maybe I'm just not getting what you're trying to say. Rambuchan said of Asian cultures that "they do not require, or require less, of a sense of superiority over other cultures", and you appeared to agree. Since it was apparently indended as a laudatory statement, and since cultural supremacism is widely frowned upon, it seemed a safe inference you (pl) meant that they not only had less need of supremacism (how'd one measure that, anyway?), but also less actual supremacism.

Now, you claim that neither China's cultural supremacism nor, apparently, it's haughty attitude in dealing with "lesser" civilizations falsifies your claim about needing to assert their superiority. I confess myself confused.

 

[aneeshm]

Did China need to assert its supremacy ? No . They did it when they could , but it was not any great need . And they have never really tried to assert supremacy over India ( Mao was an aberratin ) . Again , we talk of the court , not of the people .

We're both pedants , TLC . This can go on forever .

When dealing with cultures , it is better to take the culture as a whole , rather than bits an peices ( like just the court ) .

 

[The Last Conformist]

Hey, I guess this is proof you really are a pedant. I'll try to be correct in my language when I post from now on.

Yes, I'm a pedant. Already my kindergarten teachers complained about it.

I have to ask though - why when you point out pedantic mistakes do you never address what they meant? Do you really not get it and have to ask for clarification?

When I ask for clarification, it usually means I'm unsure what the other party meant. People often tell me to listen to what they mean, not what they say, but I have genuine trouble with that. I'm not trying to be obnoxious, but I really hate guessing what people mean and getting it wrong.

(I suppose this is one of the reasons some people thought I had Asperger's when I was a kid.)

 

[The Last Conformist]

Did China need to assert its supremacy ? No . They did it when they could , but it was not any great need . And they have never really tried to assert supremacy over India ( Mao was an aberratin ) . Again , we talk of the court , not of the people .

I still don't get the point. But I suppose it's a side issue anyway.

 

[Provolution]

I can turn the argument further.

Now it is suddenly wrong methodology and poor methodology to compare The West and the Middle East the way I did. This is like comparing apples and pears.
Why should my "provocative" and "destructive" arguments be of less worth than the morally relativist, politically correct and historically revisionist, not to mention ethically bankrupt and logically double standard arguments posturing the other side. Why is the pan-Arabic militant jingoist argumentation considered "kosher", where my rhetoric for the West consider inappropriate because I happen to live within the civilizational leader? Since this is not a court or a scientific inquiry, I am not obliged to play by the same rules as the ones trying to discredit me. Again, double standards, they argue that you cannot compare two cultures, but they still argue to compare my argumentation inferior to them, just on a smaller scale. "Rambuchan/Annares supreme to the poor untravelled bigot Provolution, and China/India [Forget Middle East please]
so culturally experienced, mature and full of cultural integrity that no organizational, technological and cultural revolution is required to remain competitive as culture".

I see modality upon modality breach in cascades of argumentative loops, shortcuts, preferiential treatment of spurious ideas, affirmative action of super-tolerant ideas, persecution of non-politically corect streams. I can see the citizen censorship of some Western Ideas of fullfilment and realization are considered racist [Condeleeza Rice a black woman as National Security Advisor in America vs. White female playboy bunnies imported to the Gulf States], I can see the transgression on human rights and Western cultural customs are ignored for the Arab World, but blown out of proportion if taken place in the West. China and India is brought in all the time to pay for the bailing out of the Middle East, where this is strictly pitting a society in opposition to Western concepts and way of living. In finality, I look forward to the day the Arab World loses its relative signficance with the phasing out of petrochemical development, the rise of women's rights and the closing of borders to their theocratic misogynist 5fth columnist religious leaders which has no mission to spread their useless political leadership to a much more evolved Western World, which has managed to denounce clerical powers after several religious wars ending the darkness from the Vatican and bringing the Western Civilization forward through Age of Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution, Information Age and finally a shift to a Space Driven Economy.

The question remains, which civilization do you identify with, and do you recognize a clash of civilizations, and if you do, which side do you side with.

This is not a racial issue, but a cultural issue.

 

[Provolution]

@ Prov: I think you have asked a question which is hardly debatable, given all those provisos that culture is a very mute concept. And if you do accept that there is some sort of tangible 'thing' called culture you are measuring both cultures by only the standards of one of them - patents, space travel, military prowess and so on.

Should there not be a a good constant to measure them by?

You cannot take a Cat and a Fish and say that the Cat is the superior animal because it has more fur and whiskers than the fish. This is illustratively akin to what you are doing and a highly selective method at that.

If we follow your methodology we could say Western culture is absolutely hopeless because it (and I don't personally subscribe to any of these myself):

- Consistently fails to allow / encourage people to make the Hajj pilgrimage
- Has converted far fewer into the Islamic Ummah than Middle Eastern culture
- Has failed to spread the Arabic language with any success
- Builds some mosques but not very elaborate or decorative ones
- Fails to deliver large numbers of children to families
- Continues to promote a corrupt and illusiory governmental system

And these ones you'll love:
- Failed to kill many infidels (although friendly fire has lifted the figures quite well)
- Does not accept a woman's place in the world for what it should be

If you measure up the two cultures from the Middle Eastern / Muslim perspective I think we'll see that Western Culture is in a complete shambles.

By the Arab Yardstick, the West is indeed a failure that should be subverted or destroyed with the limited means they got at hand.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Now it is suddenly wrong methodology and poor methodology to compare The West and the Middle East the way I did. This is like comparing apples and pears.

You won't ever find a consensus on which criteria should be used for comparing cultures. I suppose that means this whole debate is meaningless, but let's go on ...

Why should my "provocative" and "destructive" arguments be of less worth than the morally relativist, politically correct and historically revisionist, not to mention ethically bankrupt and logically double standard arguments posturing the other side.

Arguments? You're modus operandi is largely argumentation by assertion.

Why is the pan-Arabic militant jingoist argumentation considered "kosher", where my rhetoric for the West consider inappropriate because I happen to live within the civilizational leader?

They're both inappropriate because they're both bull****.

Since this is not a court or a scientific inquiry, I am not obliged to play by the same rules as the ones trying to discredit me. Again, double standards, they argue that you cannot compare two cultures, but they still argue to compare my argumentation inferior to them, just on a smaller scale.

Please explain who you get from "comparison of cultures inadmissible" to "comparison of arguments inadmissible".

"Rambuchan/Annares supreme to the poor untravelled bigot Provolution,

I'm no fan of either anarres or Rambuchan, but they're both alot more polite and reasoned than you.
[snip]

I can see the citizen censorship of some Western Ideas of fullfilment and realization are considered racist [Condeleeza Rice a black woman as National Security Advisor in America vs. White female playboy bunnies imported to the Gulf States],

Can't figure out what you're trying to say here. Citizen censorship?

I can see the transgression on human rights and Western cultural customs are ignored for the Arab World, but blown out of proportion if taken place in the West.

This, of course, isn't inconsistent if one takes the relativist position that cultures get to define what goes within themselves.

In finality, I look forward to the day the Arab World loses its relative signficance with the phasing out of petrochemical development, the rise of women's rights and the closing of borders to their theocratic misogynist 5fth columnist religious leaders which has no mission to spread their useless political leadership to a much more evolved Western World,

For the sake of form; much more evolved by which metric?

which has managed to denounce clerical powers after several religious wars ending the darkness from the Vatican and bringing the Western Civilization forward through Age of Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution, Information Age and finally a shift to a Space Driven Economy.

Space Driven Economy? When did we switch the subject to science fiction?

The question remains, which civilization do you identify with, and do you recognize a clash of civilizations, and if you do, which side do you side with.

Trying a with us or against us? Well, I'm certainly against you.

Now, do I need point out that which culture one does identify with does not have any necessary bearing on which one considers superior. Your finish amounts to little more than a non sequitur.

As for clashes of civilizations, neither the West nor the Middle East is anything like a unified block. Ironically, several of the nastiest regimes of the Middle East are important American allies. This far, civilizational clashes remain little more than a slogan.

 

[Provolution]

Space Driven Economy?

We are already inside one. Internet require satellites, weatherforecasting, environmental control and so on.

Against me? Be my guest, I do not look for "allies" here anyways, but to whip up a curious and fiery discussion with some intensity. Polite and reasoned, Annares and Rambuchan? Depends on how you consider politeness, but I did not attack the posters themselves. I know for sure that if I wrote this in the Middle East, I would disappear, and some Islamic Priest would travel in my place to the West as an asylum seeker.

 

[Rambuchan]

Now it is suddenly wrong methodology and poor methodology to compare The West and the Middle East the way I did. This is like comparing apples and pears.

Yes. And you haven't really refuted this. I adopted your comparative method in an attempt to get a discussion out of you. Still haven't got it.

Why should my "provocative" and "destructive" arguments be of less worth than the morally relativist, politically correct and historically revisionist...

Because you are spreading a sense of hate, clearly evident from your language: 'useless', 'jingoist','misogynist 5fth columnist religious leaders' and so on.

...not to mention ethically bankrupt and logically double standard arguments posturing the other side.

In what way is a policitally correct view that seeks to promote equality ethically bankrupt?

Why is the pan-Arabic militant jingoist argumentation considered "kosher"....

If someone finds where I have said this be sure to PM me.

...where my rhetoric for the West consider inappropriate because I happen to live within the civilizational leader?

Not because you live there but because of my reasons above. You are deliberately seeking to denigrate people with this thread - now that's ethically bankrupt!

Since this is not a court or a scientific inquiry, I am not obliged to play by the same rules as the ones trying to discredit me.

This is why I hold out very little hope of ever having a decent discussion with you. Not that we need to be told.

Again, double standards, they argue that you cannot compare two cultures, but they still argue to compare my argumentation inferior to them, just on a smaller scale.

Again, playing your game for the sake of engaging in a discussion, something you won't do. Still waiting for you to evaluate the West by Arabic values. Wouldn't that be logical? Wouldn't it achieve the finality in arguement which you keep claiming?

"Rambuchan/Annares supreme to the poor untravelled bigot Provolution, and China/India [Forget Middle East please]so culturally experienced, mature and full of cultural integrity that no organizational, technological and cultural revolution is required to remain competitive as culture".

You're the one coming with ideas of supremacy. All I am doing (and I believe Annares) is saying that your position is untenable, which is proven by the fact you dance around the issue, refusing to play by any accepted rules of debate, even dropping your own reasoning when it is utilised to discredit you.

I see modality upon modality breach in cascades of argumentative loops, shortcuts, preferiential treatment of spurious ideas...

Yes, these are found in your posts which specifically neglect the positive influence Arabic culture had on Europe leading up to the Enlightenment. I cite the library in Cordoba releasing the secrets of Arab science to the Europeans to lift them out of the Dark Ages. I cite the complete whitewashing of any idea that other cultures have and still play a part in the Western world's current success. Now this is particularly spurious, preferencial, shortcutting.

...affirmative action of super-tolerant ideas, persecution of non-politically corect streams.

If you discredit these notions do you object to the Nazi project or in a milder case, the BNP?

I can see the citizen censorship of some Western Ideas of fullfilment and realization are considered racist [Condeleeza Rice a black woman as National Security Advisor in America vs. White female playboy bunnies imported to the Gulf States]

What?

I can see the transgression on human rights and Western cultural customs are ignored for the Arab World, but blown out of proportion if taken place in the West.

I haven't really gone about it this way.

China and India is brought in all the time to pay for the bailing out of the Middle East

In an attempt to measure the worth of Western culture as people are seeking a definition of culture.

In finality, I look forward to the day the Arab World loses its relative signficance with the phasing out of petrochemical development, the rise of women's rights and the closing of borders to their theocratic misogynist 5fth columnist religious leaders which has no mission to spread their useless political leadership to a much more evolved Western World, which has managed to denounce clerical powers after several religious wars ending the darkness from the Vatican and bringing the Western Civilization forward through Age of Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution, Information Age and finally a shift to a Space Driven Economy.

I said destructive before. I'll say it again. Nowhere in this paragraph do we get a sense of you being open to engaging the Arab world in dialogue. You will never know why they hate you and you hate them this way. You will never realise why they think they are superior and you'll never really get to tell them why you think the West is superior. Also your potted history's conclusion should end...."and finally a shift into rampant consumerism, early heart disease, lethargy, destruction of the world's resources and ecosystems (you could start this one a bit earlier actually), fossile fuel dependancy (oh this one too), a loss of morality and discipline, a failure to narrow the world's poverty gap, a general dumbing down of culture and so on.

The question remains, which civilization do you identify with, and do you recognize a clash of civilizations, and if you do, which side do you side with.

I identify myself with Western civilisation (accepting the definition handed down here) and Indian culture. I recognise a clash of civilisations, but why should I side with any in particular? I stopped looking at the world like it was some Star Wars movie ages ago.

This is not a racial issue, but a cultural issue.

Then you should tone your denigration of the Arab world down a bit.

 

[Provolution]

Still, about half of us posting here consider the West Supreme to the Middle East. Not because we argue moral relativist, but because we sense this is the way it is. Denying us these instincts is not a right you can usurp as an immigrant from India.
Of course, the West is free to take whatever action it wants, but I find the results here pretty fun, about 40 % Pro West, 60 % culturally relativist and one single ME protest voice. Now, I do look forward to what criteria people find important.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Space Driven Economy?

We are already inside one. Internet require satellites, weatherforecasting, environmental control and so on.

And that amounts to a space driven economy? You'll have to present some quite convincing economical data before I consider that anything but empty slogan-making.

Polite and reasoned, Annares and Rambuchan? Depends on how you consider politeness, but I did not attack the posters themselves.

Well, just to pick a single sentence from a recent post of yours, you implied they're politically correct, historically revisionist, ethically bankrupt, and employing double standards. No attack there, no. You're not using a deliberately confrontational style either, oh no.

I know for sure that if I wrote this in the Middle East, I would disappear, and some Islamic Priest would travel in my place to the West as an asylum seeker.

On the subject of asylum seekers, we could always go passing judgements by procreative success ...

I notice a pretty much total lack of responses to requests for clarifications and justifications.

 

[Perfection]

Provolution, if you're so keen on comparing these two cultures, you must have a objective, or at least highly agreed-upon, methodology to compare the two. Since this is a highly complex methodology I see no possible way to judge except based on a summative culture score (subsequently modified to respect difference in member amounts). Let's assume you have godlike intellect capable of making such calculation, show evidence of that by demonstrating how many Beethovens the Halocaust is worth.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Still, about half of us posting here consider the West Supreme to the Middle East. Not because we argue moral relativist, but because we sense this is the way it is.

Mind reader, ey? Cognizant of everyone's motivations, clearly.

Too bad, this moral relativist voted for the West.

Denying us these instincts is not a right you can usurp as an immigrant from India.

No personal attacks here, no.

Of course, the West is free to take whatever action it wants

And you complain about moral relativism? Happen to be an adherent of might is right as a moral absolute?

Now, I do look forward to what criteria people find important.

I already mentioned mine.

 

[Rambuchan]

Still, about half of us posting here consider the West Supreme to the Middle East. Not because we argue moral relativist, but because we sense this is the way it is. Denying us these instincts is not a right you can usurp as an immigrant from India.

I'm now getting a sense of what Prov would be like if ever given the reigns of power and also an understanding of how Jews felt in Nazi, Germany. This superiority / hatred bo**ocks has clearly spilt over into every facet of your personality and I can only restate my pity and also stress my disappointment in a fellow citizen.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

I can't be a fair judge, as I have a bias from living in a Western Culture. However, I don't think any culture is superior to another, nor should cultures be ranked at all.

 

[Provolution]

I'm now getting a sense of what Prov would be like if ever given the reigns of power and also an understanding of how Jews felt in Nazi, Germany. This superiority / hatred bo**ocks has clearly spilt over into every facet of your personality and I can only restate my pity and also stress my disappointment in a fellow citizen.

Very typical, using the ethnix card to play out the "bad conscience for the Imperial crimes legacy" and label your opponents as nazists. Disclaimer: I do not think any race is supreme to another race. I for one think Nelson Mandela, Colin Powell, Condeleeza Rice, Kofi Annam, Deng Xiaoping, Mahatma Ghandi and several others are great leaders, and I met several good people from many cultures. I also do not consider Moslems a problem per se, as we see Malaysia and Indonesia are progressive states in each their fields of democracy. Yet, it is disturbing to see that NONE of the arab nations are democracies. It is also disturbing to see that they think they can teach the West a lesson on women's rights, institutions and lawmaking.
Cultures that challenge my society in my own land, enforcing their ancient customs into my habitat with the endorsement of naive liberals I consider a sham. I have no problems with immigrants endorsing the terms set by the host nation. In fact, Indian, East Asian and African immigrants have in various respects contributed greatly to their Western hosts. However, only arab immigrants insist on making their male theological political leaders institutions in our land. Islam consider politics and religion as inseparable by arab doctrine. Why do many Westerners endorse most immigrants, but have a problem with masses of zealots organized along the lines of family reuinfication through arranged marriages, use of terror, hint of potential political violence if conditions are not met and clerical political control?
Sex mutilation, forced marriages and honorary killings and so on.

If we enforce a strict legal regime criminalizing and enforcing complete control over these transgressions, I can see no further problem. In fact, we can take more of these immigrants in if we know they are succesfully converted to the Western plurist project. Namecalling and hinting nazism is a cheap Ethnix trick used to silence political opposition with cheap political correctness, historical revisionism, moral relativism and generic abuse of the racist and nazist labels.
In fact, I know several pakistanis that want to end further migration to protect their own interests.

 

[Perfection]

I'm sorry, but you're going to have to do better then that. Political systems aren't the entire culture. You don't see me judging a car by the quality of its lugnuts do you?