And yet many see the West in decline.
And yet many see the West in decline.
Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler
MisterVeritis (04-09-2019)
It is not merely the (geographical) West that has been successful, but all who have embraced Western-style economies. South Korea and post-WWII Japan (though not exactly friends with each other) are two examples of this.
I'll tell you what has not made the west successful, and that is little dweebs like Ben Shapiro.
Anyway, to answer the question, probably the biggest reason "the west" has been successful is its republican/democratic character. Specifically, its emphasis on political decentralization and civil liberty. Such emphasis could be seen even in western countries that had monarchies. Britain, for example.
Unfortunately, much of what made "the west" so successful is being subverted, destroyed, and abandoned by the insouciant, listless westerners who inherited the legacy of western civilization.
Power always thinks it has a great soul, and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak. And that it is doing God service when it is violating all His laws.
--John Adams
Ransom (04-14-2019)
Power always thinks it has a great soul, and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak. And that it is doing God service when it is violating all His laws.
--John Adams
Power always thinks it has a great soul, and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak. And that it is doing God service when it is violating all His laws.
--John Adams
Uhm, that is what he said.
Originally Posted by Private Pickle The west has been successful for much longer than the emphasis on civil liberty which really only occurred a couple hundred years ago.
But you disagreed because, agreeing would have been to simple like, Right? You may now say.....Duh. Maybe it will sink in!
History does not long Entrust the care of Freedom, to the Weak or Timid!!!!! Dwight D. Eisenhower ~
Captdon (04-09-2019),Sergeant Gleed (04-09-2019)
Yes, I'm aware of that. Yet the European monarchs were generally more limited in their powers than the monarchs of Asia and Northern Africa. Why do you suppose that is?
I agree. Yet they were relatively more decentralized than virtually all other monarchies that existed prior or contemporaneously to them.That is the antithesis of political decentralization.
You said the emphasis on civil liberty in the west started a couple of hundred years ago. Yet a couple hundred years ago, westerners were enslaving Africans who were not even their enemies. So how do you reconcile that?And slavery =\= an emphasis on civil liberties.
Power always thinks it has a great soul, and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak. And that it is doing God service when it is violating all His laws.
--John Adams