[Rich]

The Soviet client state in Afghanistan in the 1970s and 80s was the one chance Afghanistan had to westernise itself and enter modernity, but the West itself (rather ironically) threw a spanner into the works....

American aid to the Mujahedin was largely irrelevant. Sure the Wests backing of Pakistan allowed Pakistan to be a lot more aggressive in their backing but I don't think there can be any doubt that the Communist regime would have fallen perhaps a few years later. No the Mujahedin could say to the Communists at the end of the eighties:

You are pitiful, isolated individuals! You are bankrupts. Your role is played out. Go where you belong from now on – into the dustbin of history!

Of course the Islamists may be saying the same thing to us European Liberals in the not too distant future.

Don't expect me to go down with the Titanic though, I think you will find Sheik Richie al Streatham, quite adept at the ideological pivot.

[Potemkin]

They're even going to tear down the huge-ass Mao statue on Wuyi Square, and its one of only seven left in the whole damn country.

They should really have more respect for Chairman Mao. He made all of this western-style consumerism possible.

[mikema63]

Anti Westernism

That's a position not an ideology.

How should society be run?

[Mujahid_X]

That's a position not an ideology.

How should society be run?

In theory, anarchism. In practise, facism. Democracy is the tyranny of the majority.

[Hong Wu]

Democracy is telling people they understand what they are voting for.

[mikema63]

So your just a fascist then, well good to know I guess.

[Rich]

i support democracy, because I believe in struggle, kampf. The government needs the competitive struggle of the democratic and civic process. I disagree with Adolph Hitler because he believed in some Pollyannaish world where one man could take over, solve all our problems and we'd never have to worry our pretty little heads about an election again. Yes it was a nice idea Adolph, and I understand you were only acting from the noblest of motives in trying to protect the people from having to think about things that are beyond their full comprehension, trying to shield them from the responsibilities for which they lacked sufficient maturity, but the real world's a much nastier and more morally ambiguous place.

[Doomhammer]

Well thank you for that attentive update, third generation immigrant. Your perspective from the vantage point of a Western country really feels like an authentic reflection of 5 billion people.

A single terrorist however, represents all 3 billion muslims.

Interestingly enough, it's the Communists who have done much to westernise Asia - the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 represented the final victory of the westernisers over the slavophiles of 19th century Russia, and the Communist Revolution of 1949 represented the final victory of the westernisers over the traditionalists in China. The Soviet client state in Afghanistan in the 1970s and 80s was the one chance Afghanistan had to westernise itself and enter modernity, but the West itself (rather ironically) threw a spanner into the works....

I think many of these "non-Western" states, at least their elites and middle-classes, would have preferred to Westernize and Europeanize had they not been hindered by changing forms of imperialism. The rise of liberal hegemony, the international economic order, and norms about human rights went hand in hand to undue the efforts of authoritarian secular regimes around the world. Honestly, if the Cold War had lasted a bit longer, I think many of these states could have concluded their state-building processes, forge deeper civic identity and allowed states to become further embedded in society. Instead, we got the Washington Consensus which basically empowered every shoddy plutocrat in the third world to hijack their state, pursue populist policies to woe conservative lower-classes, use existing powerful state institutions to redistribute wealth to retrograde forces in society, and repress opposition groups. And all of it is done in the guise of democracy promotion and liberal capitalism. Nice.

[The Sabbaticus]

^ he meant to say the 30 billion Muslim minority. Or was it 300 billion? Who can keep up? Goddamn terrorists, breeding like rabbits.*


*This would be satire. Much like most of mikema's contributions on the subject. At least I hope they're satire, as his tiresome aspersions are probably the most vapid and unimaginative missives to read on this forum. Isn't there a standard of quality somewhere to uphold?

It's like reading someone who has ignored the last 200 pages of the discussion, and is now hysterically throwing temper tantrums and random accusations around, hoping to get noticed.

[mikema63]

Isn't there a standard of quality somewhere to uphold?

It's like reading someone who has ignored the last 200 pages of the discussion, and is now hysterically throwing temper tantrums and random accusations around, hoping to get noticed.

This from you?

1.6 billion Muslims, whatever, not really the point though.

[JohnRawls]

They should really have more respect for Chairman Mao. He made all of this western-style consumerism possible.

Perhaps but Westernisation of Asia and even China was done in several steps. The most important one was the Meiji reform that westernised Japan and let Japan conquer most of East Asia. The Westernisation of Japan, forced China to Westernise or to fall into full oblivion and this is where Mao came in. The 3rd step was the war in Korea and Vietnam during that cold war, which let other East Asian countries westernise. So putting all the positive sides of this on Mao is kinda overstreching since he had to do it simply under a gun point. If the Meiji reform didn't happen so would Maoist reform not happen or would be delayed by who knows how many decades if not centuries. (Sounds absurd nowadays, to think that Asia could have been something like Africa if certain events didn't happen).

[Potemkin]

(Sounds absurd nowadays, to think that Asia could have been something like Africa if certain events didn't happen).

It may sound absurd, but it's true. History matters.

[noemon]

Nice.

Nice, indeed.

[fuser]

Those certain events were not coincidence or historical accidents though, Asia was far more better positioned for those events than Africa.

I think many of these "non-Western" states, at least their elites and middle-classes, would have preferred to Westernize and Europeanize had they not been hindered by changing forms of imperialism.

Also, this.

[Rei Murasame]

Those certain events were not coincidence or historical accidents though, Asia was far more better positioned for those events than Africa.

This. The political history of Asian countries prior to that moment, made a difference.

[SuperBeaver]

Many people have argued that Japan is the LEAST westernized nation in East Asia because the Meiji Restoration allowed Japan to essentially pick-and-choose aspects of Western society to weld onto traditional Japanese society. In contrast, Mainland China pretty much threw everything out and started all over again - which may be why "Confucian" norms are generally considered far stronger in Japan/Korea than China.

Whether the Communist Revolution "westernized" China is something you can sort of test by comparing the Communist-developed Mainland with KMT-developed Taiwan and British-developed Hong Kong, though these comparisons only bring up more questions.

[Zamuel]

Democracy is the tyranny of the majority.

Beats the hell out of the tyranny of the minority ...

Zam

[QatzelOk]

Well obviously not. And the smart Westerners realise this.

It is not possible to "bring people democracy" or to teach them. They have to choose it themselves or have a tradition of it.

Anyone who thinks you can make the Middle East a democratic liberal paradise is an idiot.

The only countries that have ever "chosen" democracy are the ones who wanted colonies.

Canada, the USA, Australia, New Zealand and Israel were genocided, and dumb soldiers were brought in and TOLD they had a democracy going on. But the locals never "bought into" this system of pretending to be Ancient Greece while practicing Machiavellianism 24/7.

[Political Interest]

The only countries that have ever "chosen" democracy are the ones who wanted colonies.

Do you include France among them?

But India has never had colonies yet it is the world's largest democracy.

Canada, the USA, Australia, New Zealand and Israel were genocided, and dumb soldiers were brought in and TOLD they had a democracy going on. But the locals never "bought into" this system of pretending to be Ancient Greece while practicing Machiavellianism 24/7.

But Algeria was the same, was it not?

[JohnRawls]

Many people have argued that Japan is the LEAST westernized nation in East Asia because the Meiji Restoration allowed Japan to essentially pick-and-choose aspects of Western society to weld onto traditional Japanese society.

No it didn't. Most of traditional forces were butchered without regret. Rebellions of traditionalist were swiftly put down by pro-westernisation forces.(And any opposition suppressed) Westernisation doesn't really mean full collapse of local culture but implementation of western principles, philosophies and technologies into your own culture. In the same sense China, Russia, India and every European country didn't fully loose their own cultures although they became more similar.

Whether the Communist Revolution "westernized" China is something you can sort of test by comparing the Communist-developed Mainland with KMT-developed Taiwan and British-developed Hong Kong, though these comparisons only bring up more questions.

Not a valid example actually. The places you mention were ports that were used for trade in and out of those countries. Britain had no reason to westernise China because that would make it a competitor, instead of it being a free market where they can sell their goods. That's why for 200 years of colonial control (by the way that relates to most colonies of the west) there was little progress in industrialising the colonies. They were a simple raw resources exporter and industrialised production importer/buyer that enriched the metropolie and had no real benefits for the nation itself.

Taiwan always had the benefits of trading with the mainland while not suffering under sanctions/restrictions that mainland China had. Because it was not communist and was anti-communist. The real question is, could the exiled and defeated government westernise all of China is the same sense the Mao did. I don't think so. China was split between warlording semi-states before Mao, he unified the country under one banner, something that his predeccesors be they traditionalist, conservative etc weren't able to do.