Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Clash of Civilizations Revisited and application to Generational Theory
#1
A bit of an introduction about my views on Generational Theory, I am Orthodox Strauss and Howe, the four-stroke model is solid and is validated by evidence. However, I have quite several disagreements with many of their interpretations.  For example; I see the American Civil War saeculum as a normal one, with a 4T running from 1850-1868/9 and a Civic Generation some of us who were on the old T4T forum, call the Gilded whose cohorts were from the late 1820s to late 1840s.

Also, I disagree with Neil Howe about the whole Middle East being on one saeculum, rather the Arab World is on one saeculum, while the Turko-Iranian world is another which Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Mongolia are on as well. Indeed, the subject of this post, will be my hypothesis that the world is made of different civilizations or ‘worlds’ each with their own individual saeculum.
 My main influence in this theory, is the book the Clash of Civilizations by Samuel P. Huntington. My only disagreement with Huntington is how he defined the Civilizations or "worlds".


Because his definitions do not fit in how people in different parts of the world, consider as their world.

· People in the Indian sub-continent despite religious differences often see themselves as part of an Indian civilization or world.
· Russians, Georgians, Armenians, Mongols, Turkic and Iranian people, have a sense of regarding part of the same world which is called 'Eurasia'. Indeed there is a political ideology called Eurasianism which argues for the unity of these people in a world they call 'Eurasia'.
· Thais, Filipinos, Vietnamese,Malays and Indonesians do see themselves as part of a South-East Asian world.
· Latin Americans and people in the Caribbean islands see themselves as much a part of the West as Europeans and North Americans do.
· As well as people in the Arab lands, even peoples such as Somalis and Non-Arab Muslim West and East Africans consider themselves as part of the ‘Arab World’. Also, I think Non-Muslim populations as well.
· Sub-Saharan Africans see themselves being part of an African civilization or 'world', expect perhaps the Somali's, Mauritanians Sudanese and maybe the Ethiopians who see themselves as part of the 'Arab World'.
· Many orthodox Christians in the Balkans regard themselves as Westerners, this is true especially of the Romanians and Greeks. Indeed, every country in the Balkans bar Turkey, are either in the European Union or want to join it and have high levels of pro-European sentiment.

Therefore; I argue that they are no specific Orthodox Christian, Islamic, Hindu and Buddhist civilizations, rather civilizations more based on geographic and cultural boundaries, which are quite ancient. 

There is also what I have observed that movements wither cultural or political, spread across individual worlds, while not moving into neighboring 'worlds' . An example would be the Arab Spring, which spread into places on the other side of the Sahara Desert such as Mauritania, Sudan and Somalia. However, they did not spread into Kurdistan, Iran or Turkey, which in my opinion indicates these ‘worlds’ have their own individual saeculum’s. Other phenomenon include the Protests of 1968 in Europe, fall of the communist bloc in Eastern Europe in 1989, the wave of political activism and overthrow of a government in Indonesia throughout South-East Asia in the aftermath of the Asian Financial Crisis. The Russian Revolution is another, which while there were copycat attempts in other European countries, they were short lived and easily suppressed. While both Iran and Turkey at the same time underwent trans-formative political revolutions. I argue all these phenomenon often spread like wildfire throughout a particular world, however very often don't spread into the neighboring worlds.

The West - Europe (minus Russia), North America, Latin America, The Carribean and Oceania. This region is Currently in a 4T which started between 2005 and 2009. However Ireland, along with probably the Ukraine and Belraus are on a different saeculum, currently in a 2T having started in the mid 2010's The borders of the West in Europe conforms pretty much to where Latin Christianity has long had at least a significance presence.

Indian World - India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, along with maybe Myanmar, Tibet and the Pashtun population of Afghanistan. Currently in a 4T having started c.2009.

Chinese World - China, minus regions inhabited by Mongols, Uighurs and probably the Tibetans. Currently in a 4T having started c.2009.

Japanese World - Japan and maybe Korea, currently in a late 3T having started in the early 2000s.

"Steppe World" or Eurasia - Turkey, Caucasus states, Iran, Central Asia, Russia, Uyghur inhabited regions of China, Mongolia and Mongol inhabited regions of China, along with probably Non-Pashtun regions of Afghanistan, Ukraine and Belarus. Currently in an early 2T, which started in the middle to late 2010s. These regions were before the Turkic expansion, dominated by speakers of Iranian languages, also Iranian culture and civilization has long been dominant throughout the region.

'South-East Asia’ – Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Indonesia, Philippines, East Timor. This region despite the different religions of the peoples, have a Hindu-Buddhist foundation, which Malays, Indonesians and perhaps Filipinos acknowledge. I estimate they are currently in a 3T which started sometime in the 2010s, their last 4T was approximately in the 1950s and 1960s, while their last awakening was in the 1990s and 2000s. 

‘Arab World’ – Arab countries of the Middle East, Israel, North Africa, also likely at least Somalia. Conforming nicely with where Afro-Asiatic languages are spoken, also I would not be surprised if Ethiopia is in this world as well. They have just entered their 4T in the last two to four years. With the last 4T being in the 1940s and 1950s, and their last 2T lasting from the late 1970s to late 1990s. That would make the Arab Spring a 3T/4T transitional event, like the European revolutions of 1848 were like.

‘African World’ – Central and Southern Africa, Given what I have researched about South Africa, they are likely currently in a 2T which started in this decade. There is evidence from a old T4T forum poster, that Nigeria could very well be in a 2T having started in the 2010s as well, with the start of Boko Haram insurgency.
Reply
#2
This is an interesting analysis. Not sure about Japan - aren't they in the same cycle as the West, since at least 1945? And good parts of Africa went independent around 1960 - shouldn't that have been the end of their Crisis? If yes, they can't be in a 2T now.
Reply
#3
An interesting concept, Teejay. Huntington concentrated on civilizations as basic forms of organization and culture. He didn't really conceive of multi-cultural "worlds".
Reply
#4
(11-12-2019, 10:49 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: An interesting concept, Teejay.  Huntington concentrated on civilizations as basic forms of organization and culture.  He didn't really conceive of multi-cultural  "worlds".

All of our societies now are or will become multi-cultural, in that all peoples of all cultures will be located everywhere. We are living in the last days of separate genetic lines. As Joseph Campbell well noted, jet planes and ocean liners make this a one world civilization, and Planet Earth is what we will be loyal to, not nations and races and separate cultures, in the not so distant future. With communications now extending worldwide, and travels extending beyond the planet, we are now spaceship Earth, the one sphere of thought, the global village, the global brain. Commerce and tech is international, borders are fluid, and the arts and sciences are pursued regardless of boundaries. The world wars made us a world civilization, and there's no going back. The founding of the League of Nations was a starting point for world governance, which will increase even if it is not at all exclusive. When we looked back at the blue marble in Dec.1968 and with subsequent satellite pictures, we discovered that the Earth has no boundaries from that point of view.

Nations and peoples before the world wars were on different saeculum timelines, but these are all coming into synch now, and it's the Western timeline that is dominant. Just when that happened is a matter for discussion, but to think they won't come into synch is old-fashioned thinking. No doubt a lot of that is still around, and it is enshrined in the White House right now. But Drumpface's version of reality is dishonest and unpopular and will not hold. Nor will that of his imitators like Boris Johnson and Nigel whatshisface.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#5
(11-12-2019, 10:49 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: An interesting concept, Teejay.  Huntington concentrated on civilizations as basic forms of organization and culture.  He didn't really conceive of multi-cultural  "worlds".

In the term 'world' it means a civilization, also people in different civilizations often know who is and who is not part of their 'world'. For example; Turkic and Iranian people have a sense of affinity with each other, but not with the Arabs despite sharing the same religion. Also these peoples feel sometimes feel an affinity with the Russians as well, as evidenced in a Turkish television series set in Russia during WW1 called Kurt Seyit ve Şura.

Also the Russians especially feel some kind of kinship with the Turkic and Iranian peoples, not surprising since there are sizable Turkic minorities in Russia. Therefore; the ideology of Eurasianism which Aleksandar Dugin is not an attempt to restore the Russian Empire. Because Poland and the Baltic states are not included in 'Eurasia', while Turkey, Iran and Mongolia are included, rather I argue an attempt to reunite the people's of Eurasia who have had their civilizational identity suppressed by those who wanted to turn the peoples of Euriasia into Westerners or Arabs.
Reply
#6
(11-12-2019, 04:27 AM)Hintergrund Wrote: This is an interesting analysis. Not sure about Japan - aren't they in the same cycle as the West, since at least 1945? And good parts of Africa went independent around 1960 - shouldn't that have been the end of their Crisis? If yes, they can't be in a 2T now.

The evidence from Japanese politics and especially their culture, indicates that Japan cannot be on the same saeculum as ours. Also, I have known quite a number of Japanese people, generational wise they act like Australian people say 10-15 years their senior.
Reply
#7
(11-12-2019, 11:55 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: All of our societies now are or will become multi-cultural, in that all peoples of all cultures will be located everywhere. We are living in the last days of separate genetic lines.

Genetic lines and cultural lines are not the same thing.

Societies have always become more multicultural in periods of heavy immigration.  When immigration tapers off, the society becomes less multicultural through a combination of mixing or one culture becoming dominant.  In the 19th century, for example, there was mixing in Mexico while in the US, western culture largely took over.

There are large areas of the world today where there is emigration, but little immigration:  India, Latin America, Africa.  These areas are, if anything, getting more monocultural, not more multicultural.
Reply
#8
(11-13-2019, 03:06 AM)Teejay Wrote: Also the Russians especially feel some kind of kinship with the Turkic and Iranian peoples, not surprising since there are sizable Turkic minorities in Russia. Therefore; the ideology of Eurasianism which Aleksandar Dugin is not an attempt to restore the Russian Empire. Because Poland and the Baltic states are not included in 'Eurasia', while Turkey, Iran and Mongolia are included, rather I argue an attempt to reunite the people's of Eurasia who have had their civilizational identity suppressed by those who wanted to turn the peoples of Euriasia into Westerners or Arabs.

Depends on which part of Russia.  St. Petersburg is part of the West as the Baltic States are; even Moscow may be more Europe than Eurasia.
Reply
#9
Putin has ditched Duginism, so it's not likely to be influential for the future of Russia. And I don't think it's about geographically defined civilizations, we experience a clash between global democracy (Purple on my diagram) and global autocracy (Brown). Dugin simply defined a global autocracy which can accommodate Christianity, Islam or Paganism as a state religion. Theocracy is currently submerged even Islamists are mostly losing their influence. But in the far future there might be a new form of theocracy based on direct rule by AI "gods".

Warren Dew Wrote:Depends on which part of Russia. St. Petersburg is part of the West as the Baltic States are; even Moscow may be more Europe than Eurasia.

Russia used to call itself Third Rome, not Third Iran or something. Anyway, geography is less and less relevant with the Internet and air travel.
Reply
#10
(11-13-2019, 09:54 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote: Putin has ditched Duginism, so it's not likely to be influential for the future of Russia. And I don't think it's about geographically defined civilizations, we experience a clash between global democracy (Purple on my diagram) and global autocracy (Brown). Dugin simply defined a global autocracy which can accommodate Christianity, Islam or Paganism as a state religion. Theocracy is currently submerged even Islamists are mostly losing their influence. But in the far future there might be a new form of theocracy based on direct rule by AI "gods".

Not all of the former Soviet Union was part of 'Eurasia', the Baltic States, Moldvia, along with the Western part of the Urkaine and maybe Belarus are part of the "West". Indeed the fault line between 'Eurasia' and 'The West' runs right through the Urkaine itself. Also Russia was ruled by the Mongol Golden Horde for centuries, which Eurasianists argued shielded it from Western influence.  While the Western Urkaine and Belarus were part of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth for centuries.  It is quite notable that the Russian Empire was a Eastward's rather than Westward's orientated empire. This is despite the imposed from the top westernization process which was started by Peter the Great, which only affected the Aristocracy to some extent. Ataturk did the same sort of imposed westernization on the Turkish, along with Reza Shah and Reza Palhavi in Iran to a lesser extent.  Overall westernization in Eurasia has not changed the fundamental identity of the peoples. Because pretty much don't see themselves as being 'Westerners'. While the Poles, Baltic Peoples, Moldvians, along with some extent Urkanians and Belrrusians see themselves as 'Westerners'.

Anyway Dugin's version of Eurasianism I predict wont be the one, that eventually will be the dominant form. A parallel would be the fascist Oswald Mosley who argued for the integration of Europe into a single political entity back in 1947 Rather, Eurasianism is going to take the same form as contemporary Europeanism which is the 'Western Europe' equivalent of Eurasianism, Europeanism seeks to unite Europeans who consider themselves part of the 'West' in a single state. The region of 'Eurasia' has only recently started it's 2T in the last few years at most. Right now the Eurasian project is at the European Economic Community, namely the Eurasian Economic Union.

Already in Iran the young people have rejected Islam and starting to embrace more fully their Zoroastrianism heritage. Since Putin has done quite a bit to promote Eurasian ideology (even if he has ditched Dugin's version) and I can certainly see the Young Adult Prophet generation in Iran and elsewhere in 'Eurasia' to embrace Eurasianism, like some European Generation 68ers embraced Europeanism.  Unlike many commentators, I am not fearing Eurasianism, rather I am welcoming it, because it help immesenly with the democratication of Eurasia and eventually bring about the fall of the "Islamic Republic of Iran" once Khamenei dies.

In fact I argue that ideology of Europeanism, was a factor behind the Fall of the Berlin wall in 1989, which was definitely an end of the Awakening phenomenon for Eastern Europe, which resulted in the Counterculture which rallied against Communism winning. Notably the fall of the Communist regimes across Eastern Europe expect for Romania and especially Yugoslavia (for various reasons), were pretty peaceful.
Reply
#11
(11-14-2019, 12:44 AM)Teejay Wrote: Overall westernization in Eurasia has not changed the fundamental identity of the peoples. Because pretty much don't see themselves as being 'Westerners'. While the Poles, Baltic Peoples, Moldvians, along with some extent Urkanians and Belrrusians see themselves as 'Westerners'.

No, the connection is much older:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_o...f_Vladimir
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novgorod_Republic

I've read an essay by Tsiolkovsky, where he criticises his fellow Russians for admiring the West too much, of course he meant progressive and scientifically oriented ones. Iran or Persia? They weren't even mentioned.

You can have political connection without cultural connection, though. The America-Japan bond is a good example on the democracy side, just like the current Russia-Iran bond on the tyranny side. Culturally Japan is way closer to China, but politically they are opposed to each other because Japan is a democracy and China is a tyranny. Ukraine and Russia are currently enemies for this reason, not because of alleged Iranian influences in Russian culture.
Reply
#12
A good study on this topic:
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/upl...030328.pdf

Despite a growing popularity among Russian political elites of the idea of the Eurasian or even pure Asian character of Russia and the deepening disillusionment in Western policies and values, the population of the RFE, just like the population of the part of the country that abuts Europe, places its hopes for promoting a Russian economic revival in what is generally seen as “the developed West.” It also sees the West as much closer culturally. In general the Russian population sees its country as being culturally closer to the West but not sufficiently developed economically to identify with it
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)