posted
Niall Ferguson: why the West is now in decline
For 500 years Western civilisation was full of self-belief, but now, historian Niall Ferguson argues in his new Channel 4 series, its dominance is coming to an end. Niall Ferguson in his new Channel 4 series, Civilization: is the West History? Photo: Channel 4
By Niall Ferguson
7:00AM GMT 06 Mar 2011
Comments175 Comments
There was a time when we believed in Western civilisation. By “we”, I mean Europeans and their cousins in the colonies of European settlement, above all the United States.
You can chart the rise of that self-belief if you go to Google’s latest gizmo, Google labs, which allows you to search the huge number of books Google has scanned to date to see how frequently a word occurs in them.
In English, “civilisation” (from the French) was a term scarcely used until the later 18th century. Thereafter – not coincidentally, as European empires spread to rule more than half the world – the C word’s popularity with authors grew steadily, reaching a peak in the middle of the 20th century.
Interestingly, that peak came in the period of maximum conflict within Western civilisation, between 1914 and 1945, when writers in the English-speaking world insisted that their countries were defending civilisation against German “barbarism”.
During the Cold War, “Western civilisation” was a phrase that still resonated. In high schools and colleges all over the US, there were mandatory courses with titles like “From Plato to Nato”.
In Britain, public school boys and Oxbridge men (and it was mostly men) were expected not only to have read the classics of the ancient world (Western civilisation’s first incarnation) but also to have a good grasp of the West’s revival after the Dark Ages and subsequent rise to global dominance.
Renaissance, Reformation, Scientific Revolution, French and American Revolutions, Industrial Revolution, Electoral Reform – the big “Rs” of the West’s ascent – were noted, memorised and then “discussed” in innumerable essays.
When Kenneth Clark defined civilisation in his acclaimed 1969 television series of that name, he left viewers in no doubt that he meant the civilisation of the West – and primarily the art and architecture of Western Europe from the Middle Ages until the 19th century.
Clark’s hugely successful series defined civilisation for a generation in the English-speaking world. Civilisation was the chateaux of the Loire, the palazzi of Florence, the Sistine Chapel, Versailles.
And then something changed. After around 1960, the word “civilisation” slumped in popularity. Universities – beginning with Stanford in 1963 – ceased to offer the classic “Western Civ” history course. To the generation that came of age protesting against the Vietnam War, Mahatma Gandhi had been right when he implied that “Western civilisation” was a contradiction in terms. It was nothing more than a euphemism for a blood-steeped, bomb-dropping imperialism.
In British schools, too, the grand narrative of Western ascent fell out of fashion. Thanks to an educationalists’ fad that elevated “historical skills” above knowledge in the name of “New History” – combined with the unintended consequences of the curriculum-reform process – most British teenagers now leave secondary school knowing only unconnected fragments of Western history.
A survey of first-year history undergraduates at one leading British university revealed that only 34 per cent knew who was the English monarch at the time of the Armada, 31 per cent knew the location of the Boer War and 16 per cent knew who commanded the British forces at Waterloo. In a similar poll of English children aged between 11 and 18, 17 per cent thought Oliver Cromwell fought at the Battle of Hastings.
Throughout the English-speaking world, moreover, the argument has gained ground that it is other cultures we should study, not our own. The musical sampler sent into outer space with the Voyager spacecraft in 1977 featured 27 tracks, only 10 of them from Western composers, including not only Bach, Mozart and Beethoven but also Louis Armstrong, Chuck Berry and Blind Willie Johnson. A history of the world “in 100 objects”, published last year by the Director of the British Museum, included no more than 30 products of Western civilisation.
Yet any history of the world’s civilisations that underplays the degree of their gradual subordination to the West after 1500 is missing the essential point – the thing most in need of explanation. The rise of the West is, quite simply, the pre-eminent historical phenomenon of the second half of the second millennium after Christ. It is the story at the very heart of modern history. It is perhaps the most challenging riddle historians have to solve.
In my new book and series, I argue that what distinguished the West from the Rest – the mainsprings of global power – were six identifiably novel complexes of institutions and associated ideas and behaviours. For the sake of simplicity, I summarise them under six headings: 1. Competition 2. Science 3. Property rights 4. Medicine 5. The consumer society 6. The work ethic.
To use the language of today’s computerised, synchronised world, these were the six killer applications – the killer apps – that allowed a minority of mankind originating on the western edge of Eurasia to dominate the world for the better part of 500 years.
This is of more than purely historical interest. For it is only by identifying the causes of Western ascendancy that we can hope to estimate with any degree of accuracy the imminence of our fall.
My conclusion is that we are already living through the twilight of Western predominance. But that is not just because most of the Rest have now downloaded all or nearly all of our killer apps. It is also because we ourselves have lost faith in our own civilisation.
Posts: 1365 | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
All of this could be explained by this phrase let sleeping giants or dragons lay,you wanted world capitalism there you have it,who knew that commies,and socialist could make such good capitalist to the point where you owe them xxx$$.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually a better analogy is the dragon or serpent that eats its own tail. As long as the Western dragon was gobbling up natives from outside Europe everyone was happy and thought the feast was going to last forever. But they didn't expect that the dragon would soon turn on them as well. The system is destroying itself because of its own greed and corruption and taking everyone else along with it.
The west was build on murder, rape, theft and destruction. Willingness to kill and destroy was the real "killer app" that made the West what it is. Everything else is secondary. And if that is all that you have to keep your system afloat, then sooner or later you will see that this beast is simply out of control and will consume everyone.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
a good grasp of the West’s revival after the Dark Ages and subsequent rise to global dominance.
This is a Eurocentric myth. What did the west "revive" after the Dark Ages? There was no such thing as the "west", or anything resembling the "west" before or during the "Dark ages".
In my new book and series, I argue that what distinguished the West from the Rest – the mainsprings of global power – were six identifiably novel complexes of institutions and associated ideas and behaviours. For the sake of simplicity, I summarise them under six headings: 1. Competition 2. Science 3. Property rights 4. Medicine 5. The consumer society 6. The work ethic.
These "six headings" are not the primary reason for the ascendance of "western" imperialism; point blank, it is the ruthlessness of unleashing butchery and savagery that got the "west" where it is. So Doug got it right when he notes, that:
"The west was build on murder, rape, theft and destruction. Willingness to kill and destroy was the real "killer app" that made the West what it is. Everything else is secondary."
And the author too, when he observes that:
It was nothing more than a euphemism for a blood-steeped, bomb-dropping imperialism.
...in an earlier reference to what "Western Civilization" means.
The so-called "six headings", i.e. 1. Competition 2. Science 3. Property rights 4. Medicine 5. The consumer society 6. The work ethic.
None of these things are unique to "western" history; they can be found throughout history long before the "west", with perhaps the exceptions of "property rights" and "consumer society" in the sense they are understood under capitalism. There was another set of "property rights" and "consumerism" before capitalism.
As for Brada's comment, true socialists cannot be capitalists. The two concepts are essentially antonyms. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The West was able to dominate the world by using technology and superior weaponry. For example, large ships and guns, navigational methods, armour.
what factors make a civilization an "advanced civilization?:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: 1) Laws and Ethics based on rational thought not Religion.
2) Trade and Industry
3) Agriculture
4) Efficient control of Water supplies
5) Sound and sophisticated Infrastructure
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Marks of a great civilization: * Efficient agriculture, ideally producing a surplus * trade and industry * Literacy and literature * Central organization and bureaucracy * cities with monumental architecture and civic infrastructure * sophisticated art * intellectual curiosity
The West was able to dominate the world by using technology and superior weaponry. For example, large ships and guns, navigational methods, armour.
At the time "westerners" started their imperialist adventures, there wasn't that much of a technological disparity between them and some of their opponents. North Africans, for instance, had gun technology and most of the other stuff the Europeans used in their military.
The Romans, for one, were militarily more disadvantaged than Carthage, when they decided to militarily take them on.
Technological progress only increased in the advent of the industrial revolution, and mainly, after European imperialists had a hold of some foreign territories.
You need to brush on history, rather than going by your gut instincts. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The U.S., touted as the leader of the "western" world, is experiencing decline as we speak, even though its establishment may be in denial about it. When the U.S. goes down, so will the other so-called "western" nations. Air International magazine, for instance, expressed concern over this; it noted...
The symbolism is inescapable. "All these things occurring together--that's a mess", says Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the number two democrat of the House of representatives. A so-called superpower was in economic disarray and its costliest superfighters sitting inside, idle. The grounding of the F-35 is only brief, but all the USAF inventory of F-22 Raptors--the other American superfighter--has been grounded since May 3rd with more serious technical issues." - Air International, September 2011.
It goes on...
Some have argued for the continued use of the STOVL Harriers AV-8 aircraft, which they argue, is nowhere near the end of its productive service life. It's neither supersonic nor stealthy...
Officer Amos said that with the decrease in defense spending and maintaining the superfighers could "reduce the US's bidding overseas to 50 percent".
According Air International, September 2011, Amos was a defender of the F-35 (JSF F-35B (US Navy version)) program. Amos was concerned about the Debt-Spending agreement reached, that would cut funding in support of these superfighters.
All 20 F-35 (F-35A lightning) aircraft delivered to the USAF had been grounded recently, due to failure of the IPP, the Honeywell "Integrated Power Package". Frustrated Senator McCain made a case for putting these aircrafts on "probation" as well, as done with the F-22 Raptors, the production of which is nonetheless expected to continue until December of 2011, until the manufacturer of the crafts can demonstrate that they can put a cap on the costs, which seem to keep rising. McCain wasn't successful in his call for the move, but he is expected to appeal it again.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
The West was able to dominate the world by using technology and superior weaponry. For example, large ships and guns, navigational methods, armour.
At the time "westerners" started their imperialist adventures, there wasn't that much of a technological disparity between them and some of their opponents.
the Egyptians also had imperialist adventures into Nubia and Syria.
What is the time, in your opinion. that the "West" started their imperialist adventures and how were they able to be successful in these conquests?
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic