Society/Culture Why I blame Islam for the fact it's raining today....

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oct 2, 2007
42,483
42,025
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
You cited the Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon cultures as leading lights for liberalism. Are these not Northern and Western Germanic cultures, respectively?

I'm pointing out the absurdity in lumping those cultures together as some kind of holistic grouping.

The Germans have been far from the leading light in liberalism (they remain the leading example of where it can all go wrong and descend into far right wing ultra-nationalist garbage, and a further example of where exactly far right wing ultra-nationalist garbage leads to). The British too have had their fair share of Imperialism and Colonialism (and all the crap that that entails).

Im happy to say the British and her colonies have possessed the most stable form of Liberalism over the centuries. But I'm not prepared (as you were) to hold 'Germanic peoples' (including Anglo-Saxons etc) as some kind of shining light for 'how people should treat other people'. Not only are European nations almost perpetually at war with each other (the past 65 or so years of peace in Europe has been one of the longest periods of peace on the European continent in all of recorded history), you can pluck out repeated examples of genocide, colonialism, imperialism, fascism, dictatorships, pogroms and worse on the European continent, and in most of those examples (World Wars, Nazis and the Holocaust, Colonialism etc) the Europeans are almost an outlier in just how bad they've been.
 

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
I'm pointing out the absurdity in lumping those cultures together as some kind of holistic grouping.

The Germans have been far from the leading light in liberalism (they remain the leading example of where it can all go wrong and descend into far right wing ultra-nationalist garbage, and a further example of where exactly far right wing ultra-nationalist garbage leads to). The British too have had their fair share of Imperialism and Colonialism (and all the crap that that entails).

Im happy to say the British and her colonies have possessed the most stable form of Liberalism over the centuries. But I'm not prepared (as you were) to hold 'Germanic peoples' (including Anglo-Saxons etc) as some kind of shining light for 'how people should treat other people'. Not only are European nations almost perpetually at war with each other (the past 65 or so years of peace in Europe has been one of the longest periods of peace on the European continent in all of recorded history), you can pluck out repeated examples of genocide, colonialism, imperialism, fascism, dictatorships, pogroms and worse on the European continent, and in most of those examples (World Wars, Nazis and the Holocaust, Colonialism etc) the Europeans are almost an outlier in just how bad they've been.
You’re the one who espouses liberalism as the best form of politics. Politics is the formalisation of culture.

Where does liberalism come from? Why is it readily accepted and practiced in some cultures, while violently rejected by others? Why is liberalism strongest in the region of Europe that comprises the Low Countries, Scandanavia and the British Isles, and worldwide, the former colonies of these countries?

Perhaps because they’re all culturally related?
 
I'm pointing out the absurdity in lumping those cultures together as some kind of holistic grouping.

The Germans have been far from the leading light in liberalism (they remain the leading example of where it can all go wrong and descend into far right wing ultra-nationalist garbage, and a further example of where exactly far right wing ultra-nationalist garbage leads to). The British too have had their fair share of Imperialism and Colonialism (and all the crap that that entails).

Im happy to say the British and her colonies have possessed the most stable form of Liberalism over the centuries. But I'm not prepared (as you were) to hold 'Germanic peoples' (including Anglo-Saxons etc) as some kind of shining light for 'how people should treat other people'. Not only are European nations almost perpetually at war with each other (the past 65 or so years of peace in Europe has been one of the longest periods of peace on the European continent in all of recorded history), you can pluck out repeated examples of genocide, colonialism, imperialism, fascism, dictatorships, pogroms and worse on the European continent, and in most of those examples (World Wars, Nazis and the Holocaust, Colonialism etc) the Europeans are almost an outlier in just how bad they've been.
This is almost like everywhere though, and we have designed a pathway to mix everybody together. There is much to do.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Oct 2, 2007
42,483
42,025
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
You’re the one who espouses liberalism as the best form of politics. Politics is the formalisation of culture.

And yet a few posts above you tried to disassociate or play down the common political and legal institutions of the UK and her colonies (Representative Westminster style government, Separation of the powers, Common law, the formation of the Commonwealth under the Crown, independent judiciary who are empowered to make law outside of populism etc).

Which is it? Does the shared polity, language, history and political and legal institutions of the UK and her colonies make them Culturally unique from the rest of Europe, or doesnt it?

Where does liberalism come from? Why is it readily accepted and practiced in some cultures, while violently rejected by others?

Liberalism has been violently rejected in Europe also, in virtually every European country other than the UK and her colonies. You keep ignoring this rather inconvenient truth that counts against your central premise that 'European' should count as some kind of unique mono-culture that rejects violence, treats others with respect and kindness, and adheres to liberal ideals.

Liberalism is always at risk from within. In particular from conservatives and nationalists. Every liberal State that has ever fallen from Liberalism, has fallen due to a combination of those two factors (Franco, Hitler, Salizar, Petain, Napoleon etc).

It's why I oppose fascists, nationalists, conservatives and right wingers. I've seen what happens when you guys get your way, and it's never good.
 

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
It’s not the institutions, Malifice, it’s the culture. The first parliament in the world was in Iceland. The City of London has ancient freedoms that even the Norman invaders observed, and further freedoms and restraints on power were instituted by the Magna Carta. These notions of personal freedom as a means to do politics all have roots in the seafaring cultures of North Western Europe.

Democracy is even older, dating back to the Greeks. The lineage of what you so dearly love as the best political system in the world is entirely European.

As a Whig historian, you think it is the natural end state of humanity, when it is anything but. It is a peculiar innovation unique to a specific group of people.

Pakistan, for example, will never be a successful liberal democracy, not until things like the practice of consanguineous marriage ends.
 
Oct 2, 2007
42,483
42,025
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
It’s not the institutions, Malifice, it’s the culture. The first parliament in the world was in Iceland. The City of London has ancient freedoms that even the Norman invaders observed, and further freedoms and restraints on power were instituted by the Magna Carta. These notions of personal freedom as a means to do politics all have roots in the seafaring cultures of North Western Europe.

Democracy is even older, dating back to the Greeks. The lineage of what you so dearly love as the best political system in the world is entirely European.

As a Whig historian, you think it is the natural end state of humanity, when it is anything but. It is a peculiar innovation unique to a specific group of people.

And I wholly disagree for reasons already stated.
 

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
And I wholly disagree for reasons already stated.
But your disagreement is immaterial: the Germans were Nazis. So what? Cao Cao, Timur, Genghis Khan were all as bad. The history, and prehistory, is filled with people killing people en masse.

Nazis aren’t the first and won’t be the last mass murderers.

It is ignorance of non-Western history that makes you think Europe is particularly bad.
 

Proud SJW

Cancelled
Aug 27, 2011
3,147
3,357
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Malifice is a Whig historian.
I don't regard Malefice as any kind of historian, really, western or otherwise. An understanding of cause and effect isn't his strong point.
Reading what he's written above, I'm getting a distinct impression he believes nazism arose because... they were German, and prone to that sort of thing?

I'd never heard of Whig historians. interesting little concept... and yes, apt.
 
Sep 21, 2004
46,428
52,584
AFL Club
GWS
But your disagreement is immaterial: the Germans were Nazis. So what? Cao Cao, Timur, Genghis Khan were all as bad. The history, and prehistory, is filled with people killing people en masse.

Nazis aren’t the first and won’t be the last mass murderers.

It is ignorance of non-Western history that makes you think Europe is particularly bad.
I can't see one good counter argument to the premise that liberal democracies with mixed economies (anywhere from Reagan to Sanders/Whitlam) are the best forms of organisation we've developed.

But you're smart enough to know that we've been implementing it piecemeal for the last few centuries. And notions of 'we' are fairly loose; and almost irrelevant.

Do you see there are pockets with liberal democracies which want to take us back to the blood and honour and race stuff?
 
The issue with people like Malifice is that they will talk at length about the rise of nationalist and populist right wing movements contributing to world instability without ever once really and honestly looking into how those movement arise and gain traction to begin with.
To understand that everything is a reaction to something else is not something they'll ever consider too deeply, because it requires an honest self-analysis.
The bigots and Nazis latch onto small issues, stoke fear, and ride the wave to power as a solution to the problem. The problem they invented.
 
I can't see one good counter argument to the premise that liberal democracies with mixed economies (anywhere from Reagan to Sanders/Whitlam) are the best forms of organisation we've developed.

But you're smart enough to know that we've been implementing it piecemeal for the last few centuries. And notions of 'we' are fairly loose; and almost irrelevant.

Do you see there are pockets with liberal democracies which want to take us back to the blood and honour and race stuff?

The counter argument is with the economies , which rely on growth.
Growth is not sustainable. Its slowing and will need to continue to slow.
Stuffed if i know a good non-growth system, maybe Stalin was right.
 

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
I can't see one good counter argument to the premise that liberal democracies with mixed economies (anywhere from Reagan to Sanders/Whitlam) are the best forms of organisation we've developed.

But you're smart enough to know that we've been implementing it piecemeal for the last few centuries. And notions of 'we' are fairly loose; and almost irrelevant.

Do you see there are pockets with liberal democracies which want to take us back to the blood and honour and race stuff?
Liberal democracies may be the best form of political organisation and equally wholly undesirable for a large number of people on the planet. That’s the problem.

There have been three political projects of the past 40 ish years that have asserted liberal democracy as the natural end state for all cultures: neoconservatism, which asserts people can be made liberal through political reconstruction after regime change; neoliberalism, which asserts that people can be made liberal through trade, and multiculturalism, which asserts people can be made more liberal via absorption into a host liberal culture.

The first two have had notable failures, Iraq War and trade liberalisation with China, the consequences of each have led to a more illiberal world. Multiculturalism is more successful, but only for some immigrated cultures.

The question is, what if liberalism is only suited to a few cultures in the world, who happened upon it due to a series of path dependencies in history? And what if by assuming that liberalism is the natural end state for all cultures, it creates the conditions for its own destruction?
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sep 21, 2004
46,428
52,584
AFL Club
GWS
There have been three political projects of the past 40 ish years that have asserted liberal democracy as the natural end state for all cultures: neoconservatism, which asserts people can be made liberal through political reconstruction after regime change; neoliberalism, which asserts that people can be made liberal through trade, and multiculturalism, which asserts cultures can be made more liberal via absorption into a host liberal culture.

The first two have had notable failures, Iraq War and trade liberalisation with China, the consequences of each have led to a more illiberal world. Multiculturalism is more successful, but only for some immigrated cultures.
I partially agree with you here. Although I often divorce liberal democracy from capitalism. I think Iraq, NAFTA, opening up China were successful for many, and less positive for many more. Im sure you'd agree Gordon Gecko capitalism benefits those at the top more than anyone else.

IMO movements along the lines of the anti-segregation movement in the US has more explicitly sought liberal democracy as an endpoint.

The question is, what if liberalism is only suited to a few cultures in the world, who happened upon it due to a series of path dependencies in history? And what if by assuming that liberalism is the natural end state for all cultures, it creates the conditions for its own destruction?
The soft power of liberalism is always stronger.

There's lots of structural reasons preventing it from emerging in these parts of the world. Dictators, cultural influences that think Mohammed/Jesus are always watching. You'd agree that Western commerce would often hate if liberal democracy emerged in the developing world (Iran- 1953, Chile 1970). These are the roadblocks many western lib dems overcame centuries ago, and there is still some resistance.
 

medusala

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts
Aug 14, 2004
37,209
8,423
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I wholly refute any premise that Europe is the shining light of liberalism.

lol

Who is then, Africa? Asia? South America?

.
Ultra nationalism is on the rise, and with it comes right wing populism and the usual results..

Step away from The Guardian.

.
Seriously. The UK, Ireland, and former British colonies (Canada, the USA, NZ and OZ, plus South Africa and so forth) have never slipped into out and out Fascism or similar, which I put down to a unique aspect of the Common Law and a strong independent Judiciary that supervise the Executive arm of government.

UK had Cromwell
South Africa had apartheid
Ireland was run by the Poms

NB you seem to have overlooked that those countries are predominantly comprised (ex SA but see above) of those with European ancestry.

Scandinavian nations are probably the other exception.

Those good old liberal Vikings
 
lol

Who is then, Africa? Asia? South America?

.

Step away from The Guardian.

.

UK had Cromwell
South Africa had apartheid
Ireland was run by the Poms

NB you seem to have overlooked that those countries are predominantly comprised (ex SA but see above) of those with European ancestry.



Those good old liberal Vikings

The Irish got to Vote.
South Africa? Surely a country that was settled the way South Africa was, would have been foolish to offer those conquered a vote in an election. ( it was disastrous enough, and not just to the whites , when apartheid ended ).
I don't think the existence of Apartheid detracts from the statement Malifice made.
 
Aug 19, 2004
34,420
14,194
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
lol

Who is then, Africa? Asia? South America?

.

No one is. But Europe being a shining light? really? do you have any idea what France is doing to Africa (or has done) till today? The British atleast colonised countries and gave something back to the colonies, France did nothing of that sort. Views like these are I believe the problem. Unless you acknowledge the things that happened, you won't be able to move on. The way the empire treated the colonized would NOT be considered humane today. So let me repeat what I said in my comment, let us read our histories, acknowledge the s**t that happened and apologize wherever apologies are necessary. The would definitely help.

I find it bizarre that the proceeds of 400 years of free labour is never mentioned as a contributing factor to the wealth of the uk. When it comes to slavery all I hear is "we stopped it". Get your hand off it.

The knowledge of our past is essential for human progress. It applies to personal and collective behaviour. It is not about guilt or accountability but rather the simple understanding of historical events and facts, glorious or shameful. You can deny their existence as much as you might find it convenient but these events are deeply rooted in our collective subconscious and we can hopefully move on and grow into better people.
 
Last edited:

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
No one is. But Europe being a shining light? really? do you have any idea what France is doing to Africa (or has done) till today? The British atleast colonised countries and gave something back to the colonies, France did nothing of that sort. Views like these are I believe the problem. Unless you acknowledge the things that happened, you won't be able to move on. The way the empire treated the colonized would NOT be considered humane today. So let me repeat what I said in my comment, let us read our histories, acknowledge the s**t that happened and apologize wherever apologies are necessary. The would definitely help.

I find it bizarre that the proceeds of 400 years of free labour is never mentioned as a contributing factor to the wealth of the uk. When it comes to slavery all I hear is "we stopped it". Get your hand off it.

The knowledge of our past is essential for human progress. It applies to personal and collective behaviour. It is not about guilt or accountability but rather the simple understanding of historical events and facts, glorious or shameful. You can deny their existence as much as you might find it convenient but these events are deeply rooted in our collective subconscious and we can hopefully move on and grow into better people.
Slavery has been a feature of civilisation since it was created. Europeans did not invent slavery, and slavery still exists in many nations. The first civilisation to ban slavery was Catholic Europe.
 
Aug 19, 2004
34,420
14,194
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Slavery has been a feature of civilisation since it was created. Europeans did not invent slavery, and slavery still exists in many nations. The first civilisation to ban slavery was Catholic Europe.

Where have i argued any of that? You are right but thr West, and particularly Anglos made it industrial. For instance, a Spanish slave could legally become free in their lifetime. And their children would be born free. People of all races could end up slaves. Or free. In American and Caribbean Anglo colonies, a slave would die a slave, and over the course of their lifetime they would be, along with their other slave duties, breeding machines for more slaves. And they were all black.

My point being no civilisation built on slavery is a shining light, hence i said "no one" is a shining light above like meds claimed it is.
 

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
Where have i argued any of that? You are right but thr West, and particularly Anglos made it industrial. For instance, a Spanish slave could legally become free in their lifetime. And their children would be born free. People of all races could end up slaves. Or free. In American and Caribbean Anglo colonies, a slave would die a slave, and over the course of their lifetime they would be, along with their other slave duties, breeding machines for more slaves. And they were all black.
Manumission existed in the US prior to slavery’s abolition. The problem was you could be kidnapped back into slavery on account of being black, but being kidnapped into slavery is an eternal problem.
 
Aug 19, 2004
34,420
14,194
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Manumission existed in the US prior to slavery’s abolition. The problem was you could be kidnapped back into slavery on account of being black, but being kidnapped into slavery is an eternal problem.

The Catholic Europeans did it first was simply untrue. The Japanese hegemon Hideyoshi banned slavery in a set of laws between 1587 and 1590, about 250 years before "Anglos" banned it in Britain in 1833 and a full 301 years before "the West", in the form of the Brazil, finally banned it in 1888. We talk stuff that is sumple untrue in blatantly slanted British schoolbooks to deflect any "Anglo" blame for a European slavery that was considerably more severe than any that had preceded it.

Yes, the Brits were the first major European power to ban slavery, but they were also perhaps the major player in setting it as a systemic element in a global trade from which it profited like no other country, and came to ban it only when it was reaching the nadir of it's economic usefulness. It also compensated slave owners, giving some sense of legitimacy to their nefarious parasitism, as if it were merely a different point of view.

When people say slavery was universal and far from specific to European colonial societies, they ignore the historical record. When Cicero or Claudius are recorded as having secretaries who were loyal slaves, we are plainly talking about an entirely different kind of unpaid work. The fact that slaves could at that time contain among their number educated men is something of a hint that the kind of racialised chattel slavery practised by the European Empires, as well as the U.S., was an entirely different beast.

Additionally, it is worth noting that Hideyoshi's decision was a direct response to "Christian" Portuguese slave drivers selling his subjects into foreign and lifelong servitude, with Japanese women sold into sexual slavery as far away as Lisbon itself. Japan had slavery priorly and a caste system in the Edo period that followed but something about the European form of slavery appalled this otherwise very violent, and controlling man.

Shamefully, slavery reappeared in Japan in its period of fascist militarism, with POWs and colonial subjects used as slave labour to drive the Imperial war machine.
 

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
The Catholic Europeans did it first was simply untrue. The Japanese hegemon Hideyoshi banned slavery in a set of laws between 1587 and 1590, about 250 years before "Anglos" banned it in Britain in 1833 and a full 301 years before "the West", in the form of the Brazil, finally banned it in 1888. We talk stuff that is sumple untrue in blatantly slanted British schoolbooks to deflect any "Anglo" blame for a European slavery that was considerably more severe than any that had preceded it.

Yes, the Brits were the first major European power to ban slavery, but they were also perhaps the major player in setting it as a systemic element in a global trade from which it profited like no other country, and came to ban it only when it was reaching the nadir of it's economic usefulness. It also compensated slave owners, giving some sense of legitimacy to their nefarious parasitism, as if it were merely a different point of view.

When people say slavery was universal and far from specific to European colonial societies, they ignore the historical record. When Cicero or Claudius are recorded as having secretaries who were loyal slaves, we are plainly talking about an entirely different kind of unpaid work. The fact that slaves could at that time contain among their number educated men is something of a hint that the kind of racialised chattel slavery practised by the European Empires, as well as the U.S., was an entirely different beast.

Additionally, it is worth noting that Hideyoshi's decision was a direct response to "Christian" Portuguese slave drivers selling his subjects into foreign and lifelong servitude, with Japanese women sold into sexual slavery as far away as Lisbon itself. Japan had slavery priorly and a caste system in the Edo period that followed but something about the European form of slavery appalled this otherwise very violent, and controlling man.

Shamefully, slavery reappeared in Japan in its period of fascist militarism, with POWs and colonial subjects used as slave labour to drive the Imperial war machine.
Slavery had disappeared on the European continent before then, by around the time of William the Conqueror.
 
Aug 19, 2004
34,420
14,194
Grand Finals
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Team Rafael Nadal
Slavery had disappeared on the European continent before then, by around the time of William the Conqueror.

I am not responsible for your intellectual laziness. A two second internet search brought up this article. Do some research before you speak of concocting history from thin air. That might be something your imperialist history books did. You aare being plainly disrespectful and wilfully ignorant on a public forum. Under your own name. Consider that for a moment.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/cultur...as-slaves-by-portuguese-traders/#.WxznYtUvwy4
 

its free real estate

it's free real estate
Jul 30, 2018
11,782
15,176
AFL Club
Fremantle
I am not responsible for your intellectual laziness. A two second internet search brought up this article. Do some research before you speak of concocting history from thin air. That might be something your imperialist history books did. You aare being plainly disrespectful and wilfully ignorant on a public forum. Under your own name. Consider that for a moment.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/cultur...as-slaves-by-portuguese-traders/#.WxznYtUvwy4
Oh sweet Total Power, I have done my research. Not frantic googling in response to a discussion, but years of reading on the subject.

Slavery was abolished in Europe around the turn of the first millennium, and it was the first place in the world to abolish slavery.

It was only reintroduced on the discovery of the New World, and aided by the long running Islamic Slave Trade, which sold sub Saharan Africans to the Europeans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back