The Worth of The West


This is just unreal. Not that there are people in America who think this way, but that there are highly educated college professors who think this way. Why? Is it because far too many Americans ever leave the borders of their own country? That America is a 'world apart?' Is it some kind of sick provincialism? What is it that prevents us, in a country of immigrants, to be so intolerant of other people(s) making different choices? The real irony is that a self-described conservative--in the best sense of the word, I hasten to add--would write something so culturally relativisitc. (I'm sure Col. Lang is aware of this irony, as well.) This is the kind of writing that comes with a deep, committed relationship with the world, ideas and other peoples, and the value of real liberty and real choice.


Sean-Paul Kelley May 9, 2008 - 1:21pm
( categories: Analysis | Histories )

I met a guy who was in his 50's and the furthest that he'd been from Los Angles was Las Vegas (no Mexico either). It still boggles my mind. With a life experience that alien, voting for Bush II twice... might actually make sense.

NateTG May 9, 2008 - 2:12pm

This faculty member has a low self esteem and/or a fragile belief (yeah, belief) in America. I can't think of a better explanation for their disbelief that the rest of the world doesn't want to be/act/think like us. Such uneasiness needs to be shored up with guns and bombs.

Lesly May 9, 2008 - 2:44pm

de Tocqueville, Twain, Lawrence, missionaries, heathens, contests of civilizations, le Big Mac...

"Yankee Go Home"

http://librivox.org/the-innocents-abroad-by-mark-twain/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocents_Abroad

American democracy was seen to have its potential downside: the despotism of public opinion, the tyranny of majority, the absence of intellectual freedom which he saw to degrade administration and bring statesmanship, learning, and literature to the level of the lowest. Democracy in America predicted the violence of party spirit and the judgment of the wise subordinated to the prejudices of the ignorant.

Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_in_America

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._E._Lawrence

Battle For The Arab World: Lawrence of Arabia

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZhCXCzCtnw

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americanization

and finally us.
we are an occupied country, fit to be americanized further ourselves.

(i really should reply later, i'm hungry for one thing, but wife has a honeydo list...)

http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/farewell/text.html

washington spoke of parties and national unity in his farewell address but i submit americanization was born here, from britainization, and on to westernization.

(i've deleted tons already, so hush.)

The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

carried further upon our entitled sense of owning the earth, coupled with this very lack of difference between the parties now
scheer-nader.mp3

http://www.prorev.com/

well, you get my gist, ain't new
& i gotta eat

Zuma May 9, 2008 - 3:32pm

Democracy in America predicted the violence of party spirit and the judgment of the populace subordinated to the prejudices of the elected

Synoia May 9, 2008 - 7:15pm
Zuma May 9, 2008 - 7:45pm

I'm with Zuma, and nice "linkage" btw.

The ongoing delocalization of the world began in the US and continues to spread from there. From a materialist perspective, the US has never been "a country of immigrants."

It must seem "logical" to the Colonel's professor to see the rest of the world through the lens of Western (corporate) triumphalism. But none of this is inevitable. It just feels that way.

stuart noble May 9, 2008 - 5:41pm

This kind of world/life perception is not specific to Americans, even to Westerners. It is a by product of Modernism. I can confirm that most of the educated people in my country see the world as the same way. That's because they had a western education in a non-western country longing to be like the West. This education entrenched ideas of Modernism into their minds such a way that as Col Lang describes when they are faced with an alternative world view they feel like they lived all their lives in error and pyschologically inclined to deny transform their thinking.

To be more specific, modernism tells us that there is a Truth out there independent of us. It is very Platonic in this sense. Because of scientific achievements and enlightment West has discovered the path going to the one and only good life for any society. Their wealth, technological superiority, and international power proves that. Evolution is also understood very linear in this frame. For instance, most of us believed or still believe that evolution always results in progress and the end result is our species. In reality, of course, there is no hierarchy of species and evolution is about co-dependency. But when you applied these two ideas to societies, it is natural to believe that every society would sooner or later evolve into an ideal state and Western societies and their leader America are closer to this ideal state. So every society should follow their footsteps since there is no need to rediscover America. Just copy what they have done with minor modifications for your own culture.

Second half of the 20th century taught us that there are deep flaws in this world view and actually life doesn't work that way. We make up our reality ourselves, we don't just discover an ideal Reality out there somewhere. Younger generations who grew up in a more postmodern world are more eager to embrace this kind of world view, i.e. cultural relativism. It is much harder for the older generations whether be American, European, or western educated Eastern.

pembeci May 9, 2008 - 7:07pm

what you describe: "To be more specific, modernism tells us that there is a Truth out there independent of us. It is very Platonic in this sense. Because of scientific achievements and enlightment West has discovered the path going to the one and only good life for any society."

Isn't modernism but enlightenment values? I've never heard of a strand of modernist thought that sees a "specific truth" and I've never equated modernism with the idea of Platonic "forms."

I've always seen modernism, or post-modernism as more a reaction against the specific truth and much more relativistic.

Care to elaborate?

“Is not our first thought to go on the road? The road is our source, our vault of treasures, our wealth. Only on the road does the ‘traveller’ feel like himself, at home.”
Ryszard Kapuscinski

Sean-Paul Kelley May 9, 2008 - 9:46pm

I found the following characterization of modernism (or what I call modernism) by googling 15 minutes. I am sure you can catch the phrases that remind us Platonic forms.

source

1. There is a stable, coherent, knowable self. This self is conscious, rational, autonomous, and universal--no physical conditions or differences substantially affect how this self operates.

2. This self knows itself and the world through reason, or rationality, posited as the highest form of mental functioning, and the only objective form.

3. The mode of knowing produced by the objective rational self is "science," which can provide universal truths about the world, regardless of the individual status of the knower.

4. The knowledge produced by science is "truth," and is eternal.

5. The knowledge/truth produced by science (by the rational objective knowing self) will always lead toward progress and perfection. All human institutions and practices can be analyzed by science (reason/objectivity) and improved.

6. Reason is the ultimate judge of what is true, and therefore of what is right, and what is good (what is legal and what is ethical). Freedom consists of obedience to the laws that conform to the knowledge discovered by reason.

7. In a world governed by reason, the true will always be the same as the good and the right (and the beautiful); there can be no conflict between what is true and what is right (etc.).

8. Science thus stands as the paradigm for any and all socially useful forms of knowledge. Science is neutral and objective; scientists, those who produce scientific knowledge through their unbiased rational capacities, must be free to follow the laws of reason, and not be motivated by other concerns (such as money or power).

9. Language, or the mode of expression used in producing and disseminating knowledge, must be rational also. To be rational, language must be transparent; it must function only to represent the real/perceivable world which the rational mind observes. There must be a firm and objective connection between the objects of perception and the words used to name them (between signifier and signified).

These are some of the fundamental premises of humanism, or of modernism. They serve--as you can probably tell--to justify and explain virtually all of our social structures and institutions, including democracy, law, science, ethics, and aesthetics.

The rest of the article also talks about grand narratives. If we come back to your post, there is a belief that every society should be like Western societies. When you look closer, this belief or the grand narrative that stems from it (namely, other societies should follow the footsteps of the West since they are much closer to being the ideal society and there can be only one path to the ideal society) is only possible if you employ the assumptions above.

Sorry, I don't have much time these days. I know there are still gaps but I hope these would help for the time being.

pembeci May 12, 2008 - 5:09pm

Let me also put this long excerpt here so the connection may become, hopefully, more obvious:

"Just remember, inside every zip there's an American trying to get out." The crazy cavalry colonel spoke this line on the beach in "Apocalypse Now. A marine DI said much the same thing in "Full Metal Jacket." The attitude was so sadly typical of our entrance on the scene in Vietnam. Maybe one was quoting the other... In any event, I used to joke about this attitude. I no longer think it is funny. In the last year or so I have wandered the country a lot giving talks to college and other audiences. In doing that it has become more and more clear that many, if not most Americans still, (not the right word) as always (better) have a deeply embedded reflexive belief that mankind is evolving socially toward a unified world culture and that this culture is the culture of the West, more specifically of Anglo North America.

After a recent talk at a small college, a faculty member in the business sciences asked me if I had really meant to say that the Iraqis and other Middle Easterners did not want to be "us." When assured that I had meant it, he said that this was most disturbing and that the thought had not occurred to him before. He continued that such a notion was threatening because, if believed, it would require a re-appraisal of the worth of Western culture. He said that he had always assumed that people who lived in significantly different ways did so either from ignorance or because the structure of their societies functioned to hold them in subservience to a primitive way of life. He said that if that were not true and in fact most non-Western people wanted a better life in material terms without adopting the values of the West, then much of his life had been lived in error. "I think of all the foreign students whom I assumed were just waiting for enlightenment."

pembeci May 12, 2008 - 5:21pm

Not really sure that the way we live is that good for us in the US either...

creativelcro May 9, 2008 - 10:07pm

Perhaps it is exactly because we are a nation of immigrants that makes us so provincial. After all those who came here from elsewhere came here because in fact they believed that for them this version of the west is special if not inevitable - and by extension for everyone they left behind. Some are from outside western culture altogether but even those within the culture came here for the specific instance of that culture that the US offers.

While this doesn't make such an attitude desirable and even at that it remains arguably dangerous, I suppose one should be surprised that given our provenance if it were otherwise.

porsillo May 11, 2008 - 8:32pm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.