| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Westernised Global society: when it started?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Westernised Global society: when it started?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Westernised Global society: when it started?
    Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 14:14
When did the global society really started?
I don't agree that it is a recent phenomena because the following reasons:

(1) Since the 1920s movies American made has been exported all over the world, and a large percentage of people worldwide saw them.

(2) Fashions, French style, were widespread during the 19th century. You can see old pictures of "natives" and peoples of other "civilisations" dressing like westerners.

(3) Musical styles during colonial America were mainly European rooted. Baroque was as popular in the New World as it was in the Old.

(4) Indoeuropean languages has been spreading since the 16th century, worldwide, and that tendency accelerated during the 19th century.

(5) Authors like Cervantes, Shakespeare and Verne, and creators like Da Vinci, Newton or Einstein are known by the vast majority of the educated population worldwide.

(6) Tecnical and scientific education, in its modern form, it is basically a western creation, and it has spread western names and cultures worldwide. For instance, you can't study Calculus or Physics without knowing Newton, you can't study mechanics forgetting Watts, or accounting without Pacioli, etc.

(7) It is quite easy to detect Western influences in any culture. For instance

Spagetti sounds  in Japanese the same as in English, although it is written: スパゲッティ

And Coffee in Chinese sounds the same as in English too, no matter they write it like this:
咖啡

So, when Globalizing really started?


Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 14:26
With the development of ocean-going shipping in the late 15th and 16th centuries.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 14:34
Globalisation truly began in the 15th century with the Portugese, was accelerated by the Spanish, reached its maximum territorial spread with the British, and was further developed by the Americans.

During the past 5 centuries the bulk of invention and innovation has come from either Europe or Europe along with its North American offspring. Along with that invention sprung dynamism in many other areas: political development, naval and military power, trade. "West" was at first a geographic term, but later evolved into a cultural/economic one.

"West" was a term used as much by Europeans as non-Europeans. Occidentalis was a term commonly employed in European maps as far back as the late medieval period. Before Columbus, they were as far west as one could go according to conventional knowledge.

So it was only natural that once the centre of innovation and growth shifted to their own part of the world, their traditional use of Occidentalis to describe themselves collectively would likewise be employed.

Edit: the term Christendom had earlier been employed. But with the increasingly secular nature of the world in the Age of Discovery and also the denomenational fragmentation of Europe due to the rise of Protestantism - a geographic rather than theological flavour may have seemed more appropriate to them when describing themselves.


Edited by Constantine XI - 18 Jun 2011 at 14:37
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 14:46
The term West is ambiguous. Modern people believe "West" it is N.A.T.O.
Let's clarify it. Are when we say west are we talking about the Anglosaxon alliance? Or are we talking about the Western Civilisation, that's something widely spread that the Cold War age of the West.
I use Western in the sense of Western Civilisation, and in that sense covers a lot more than N.A.T.O.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 14:50
I am using it in the sense of Western Civilisation, the part founded from the Roman Empire which had a Christian transformation in the medieval period and has more or less been connected to the political and economic developments within Europe over the past 5 centuries and been strongly influenced by the ideas of the European intelligentsia.

But its your thread, so define "West" however you like.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 14:59
OK. We agree then. I see two phases of globalization. In the first phase, from the 15th to the 16th centuries, the Iberian societies were dominant and spread a form of Medioeval and backwards West to many regions worldwide: the Americas, Goa, Phillipines, etc. The feudal system, a fervent Catholicism, an emphasis in class and the lack of "illumination" was typical of that form of societies.
These societies could perfectly be considered a copy of Middle Ages' Europe in the Americas and Asia, and only a very small elite was in contact with modernity.

Afterwards, Britain and other more dynamic countries spread a second type of Industrial and more advanced West, from the 17th to the 19th century. In this case, industrial societies copied every technology and institution to the colonies, so the development there was something less shocking. Just imagine: Ben Franklin was a contributing member of the British Royal society Confused, and Thomas Jefferson knew how to use calculus like the most informed mathematicians of the time. Local universities, institutions and manufacturing plants were copied from England as well and reproduced fully, That shows how close the colony developed from the metropolis.

Today, most countries that were colonized during the first wave are still underdeveloped, although most are at the edge of development already. The countries that were colonized during the 17th to the 19th century, and settled by Europeans, are all developed countries by now.

A different history followed other countries that were conquered but not settled by Europeans, like it is the case of Arabian countries, East Asian like Vietnam, African countries and India. In those cases development still is under way with different degrees of success.




Edited by pinguin - 18 Jun 2011 at 15:06
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 15:14
It really is hard to generalise. The British were colonising North America from the late 16th century and both Canada and the USA have developed well compared with most of the non-European world.

Latin America is diverse. El conosur deserves respect for its level of development by world standards, but next door Bolivia does not.

I do agree that the Spanish attitudes to governance, which included the master-client feudal relationship, probably limited Latin America compared with the more dynamic colonists in today's United States.

Another factor is that colonies which became heavily dominated by colonists and influences from the home country became more developed than those which did not. Australians are today wealthier than their British counterparts (which I hear no end of from my own relatives), but the same cannot be said for the people of Guyana.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 15:44
But Guyana is not settled by British descendants. Britain had many colonies worldwide, but it is easy to see that the colonies were it imported large number of British people are prosperous, while those that were simply controlled, aren't.
The same can be seen if you compare the former French colonies of Quebec and Haiti.

In Latin America, still the largest chunk of the genetic pool is Iberian, no matter other influences are important. The culture is mainly Iberian as well. But the mentality of the region was, up to recent times, stucked in the Middle Ages. It was western, but not the west from the modernity, but that of Saint Thomas Aquinas, King Arthur and the Cid.

Do you know that while Franklin was publishing papers in the Royal Society, in my country the schools were still teaching the Trivium and the Quadrivium? Unhappy And that was for the very few that went to school, to study law or theology, anyways. In the generation of my father, analphabetism was still widespread. Reading the books of the Spanish engineers of colonial times, for instance, one realizes they were very skillful in classic mathematics from the Ancient world, but they had no idea about modern physics or calculus! They were centuries behind the Brits. Just imagine as the colonial subjects were.

In fact, the biggest challenge for Hispanic colonies and Brazil, after independence was to fix widespread analphabetism, alcoholism and ignorance. The description of those times could pretty well make the argument for an horror movie.




Edited by pinguin - 18 Jun 2011 at 15:56
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 16:11
Quote But Guyana is not settled by British descendants. Britain had many colonies worldwide, but it is easy to see that the colonies were it imported large number of British people are prosperous, while those that were simply controlled, aren't.
The same can be seen if you compare the former French colonies of Quebec and Haiti.


Correct. This is exactly the point I am making.

Quote In Latin America, still the largest chunk of the genetic pool is Iberian, no matter other influences are important. The culture is mainly Iberian as well. But the mentality of the region was, up to recent times, stucked in the Middle Ages. It was western, but not the west from the modernity, but that of Saint Thomas Aquinas, King Arthur and the Cid.

Do you know that while Franklin was publishing papers in the Royal Society, in my country the schools were still teaching the Trivium and the Quadrivium? Unhappy And that was for the very few that went to school, to study law or theology, anyways. In the generation of my father, analphabetism was still widespread. Reading the books of the Spanish engineers of colonial times, for instance, one realizes they were very skillful in classic mathematics from the Ancient world, but they had no idea about modern physics or calculus! They were centuries behind the Brits. Just imagine as the colonial subjects were.

In fact, the biggest challenge for Hispanic colonies and Brazil, after independence was to fix widespread analphabetism, alcoholism and ignorance. The description of those times could pretty well make the argument for an horror movie.


To say that there was no illiteracy and alcoholism in the British white colonies would be wrong. But the Industrial Revolution did allow the British to concentrate larger numbers of people in urban areas and to provide children with at least elementary level education. Most ordinary Brits had no idea about Newton or physics, but they were ahead of other commoners around the world because their level of literacy was higher. So an intelligent and well motived poor person could better himself with a great deal of effort. increased literacy, combined with the British adoption of the 'examination' method when selecting scholars and public servants, helped create a more meitocratic society, which in turn ensured that talent was supplied to areas which needed it.

Examinations and elementary education may seem common place to us, but in the 18th and 19th centuries they were signs of an advanced society indeed.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 17:33
Though there may be different opinion about under what cirkumstances we can say something like this "globalised society" excisted, the period from a bit later than 1400 to the first part of the 16.th century seems to be a very important early phase. In some ways the internal expansion of a common Western European "Latin Christendom" may be seen as part of its prehistory. But if we should see one type of item as "embodiment" of the later "modern" or global civilisation I think some sort of ocean going ship must be it - the most necessary thing  so to speak. As in the sentence "Navigare Necesse est ..."
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 17:41
Originally posted by Constantine XI Constantine XI wrote:


... But the Industrial Revolution did allow the British to concentrate larger numbers of people in urban areas and to provide children with at least elementary level education. Most ordinary Brits had no idea about Newton or physics, but they were ahead of other commoners around the world because their level of literacy was higher. So an intelligent and well motived poor person could better himself with a great deal of effort. increased literacy, combined with the British adoption of the 'examination' method when selecting scholars and public servants, helped create a more meitocratic society, which in turn ensured that talent was supplied to areas which needed it.


Absolutely.

Originally posted by Constantine XI Constantine XI wrote:


Examinations and elementary education may seem common place to us, but in the 18th and 19th centuries they were signs of an advanced society indeed.


Yes, indeed. But it wasn't only the percentage of educated people what matters, but in what they were educated as well. For instance, how come a society that educated its elites to be lawyers and theologists could compite with other societies that trained theirs leaders in physics, mechanics and technology.


Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 17:43
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Though there may be different opinion about under what cirkumstances we can say something like this "globalised society" excisted, the period from a bit later than 1400 to the first part of the 16.th century seems to be a very important early phase. In some ways the internal expansion of a common Western European "Latin Christendom" may be seen as part of its prehistory. But if we should see one type of item as "embodiment" of the later "modern" or global civilisation I think some sort of ocean going ship must be it - the most necessary thing  so to speak. As in the sentence "Navigare Necesse est ..."


Yes, that was the important first step. Sailing ships opened the spaces to globalization. In the 19th century, steam accelerated it with theirs steamboats and railroads, and with the telegraph. And in the 20th movies, jets, radios, satellites and Internet finished the job.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 20:32
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Though there may be different opinion about under what cirkumstances we can say something like this "globalised society" excisted, the period from a bit later than 1400 to the first part of the 16.th century seems to be a very important early phase. In some ways the internal expansion of a common Western European "Latin Christendom" may be seen as part of its prehistory. But if we should see one type of item as "embodiment" of the later "modern" or global civilisation I think some sort of ocean going ship must be it - the most necessary thing  so to speak. As in the sentence "Navigare Necesse est ..."


Yes, that was the important first step. Sailing ships opened the spaces to globalization. In the 19th century, steam accelerated it with theirs steamboats and railroads, and with the telegraph. And in the 20th movies, jets, radios, satellites and Internet finished the job.
And then we may ask, if the fact that ships was the initial, and most important tool,  was "accidental". I think it was not.The surface of this planet is mainly ocean water, separating the great landmasses and smaller islands, and in addition transportation upon ships gives some advantages relative to transportation on carriages drawn by animals. A "Coastal" part of the world were definately "logical" to be the initial region(now of course I risk being accused of being a hard core determinist, though I do not agree).
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 20:39
Hmm I see that all the pitfalls of "comparative history" are on display in this thread!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 20:49
Are you sure that the global society is westernised?
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Panther View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 4577
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Panther Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2011 at 23:46
Good point Al Jassas. Perhaps it may be better in saying, when did the influence of western society begin it's expansion globally?
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 00:02
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Hmm I see that all the pitfalls of "comparative history" are on display in this thread!


Here comes the "expert" with his usual strategy:

(1) Saying nothing.

(2) Pretending his judgement is the word of authority. What a huge ego.

Doc: give us a break
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 00:07
Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

Are you sure that the global society is westernised?
 
Al-Jassas


So some regions are more westernized than others. Look at the Huntington map. For him, in blue is the absolutely western region, in variations of blue (light blue and violet) are related societies, that has theirs roots in the Roman Empire and Christianism as well, although with variants, and in other colors are the rest of civilisations, or western "influenced" regions.



But certainly, half of the world (in territories) is western today.


Edited by pinguin - 19 Jun 2011 at 00:11
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 00:11
Originally posted by Panther Panther wrote:

Good point Al Jassas. Perhaps it may be better in saying, when did the influence of western society begin it's expansion globally?


True, but there was an european expansion that carried the European civilisation to overseas. Not all the colonies were colonies of settlement, though. That's why some former colonial territories are western now and others aren't.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 13:36
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Hmm I see that all the pitfalls of "comparative history" are on display in this thread!


Here comes the "expert" with his usual strategy:

(1) Saying nothing.

(2) Pretending his judgement is the word of authority. What a huge ego.

Doc: give us a break
 
I did give you a break...by not mentioning that all of this gobbledygook is heavily laced with the imposition of contemporary exigencies and values being thrust willy-nilly upon the past. It is not History but economists and sociologist playing at being historians. All I need mention are two names: Andre Gunder Frank and Immanuel Wallerstein! Had you read either The World Systems: Five Hundred Years or Five Thousand (Frank) or The Modern World System (Wallerstein), you would have noted that we're are in the realm of "pet theories" either Dependency Theory or Core/Periphery Theory. And honest title to this thread would have been Do Sociologists and Economists Make Good Historians!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 13:49
Addendum: "Globalizing", globalism, globalization (Eng. globalisation) is essentially jargon and whether you wish to blame English Education of the 1930s (e.g. M. K. Gandhi. Towards New Education [1937]) or policy wonks of the Cold War period, its meaning is purely within Wonderland and which Humpty Dumpty is delivering the speech. Cross-cultural interaction is as old as Man's historical record and their conception of the "globe"!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 13:55
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


I did give you a break...by not mentioning that all of this gobbledygook is heavily laced with the imposition of contemporary exigencies and values being thrust willy-nilly upon the past.


What do you mean by that! Why can't you make simple phrases like normal people do.

Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:


 It is not History but economists and sociologist playing at being historians. All I need mention are two names: Andre Gunder Frank and Immanuel Wallerstein! Had you read either The World Systems: Five Hundred Years or Five Thousand (Frank) or The Modern World System (Wallerstein), you would have noted that we're are in the realm of "pet theories" either Dependency Theory or Core/Periphery Theory. And honest title to this thread would have been Do Sociologists and Economists Make Good Historians!


I see now clear. You don't want to lose your job.

Sorry doc, history is not a property of historians, in the same way that books aren't property of librarians, or Internet of computer scientists.

Everybody has the right to gives its oppinion on history.

With respect to globalisation, that's a real thing. The integration of all civilisations and cultures into a single one is nothing new. It has been observed in certain degree since the 15th century, it only that after jets, radio, satellites and Internet the tendency has accelerated.

This is not a conspiration. It is something happening at daylight. So bad some historians haven't noticed as yet Confused




Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 14:38
You want a simple phrase, Penguin? You are an idiot whose forgotten the relationship between opinions and arses, everyone's got one. Your turn over "spaghetti" as a sign of globalization was a classic example of "noodle" logic with respect to "modern Western globalization" and the 16th century. Perhaps you've never heard of Abu Abdullah Muhammad al Idrisi and his description of Sicily 1131! Your fancies as well as your inadequate definition of culture should more aptly be termed vulgarization rather than globalization. Al Jassas with his reservation was spot on.
 
By the way, I noticed you are still hard at work at finding absurd maps that are ludicrous in their contentions and fully absurd with respect to the term "civilization". Anyway, it is now more than obvious that you are intent on an exercise in pettifogging.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 14:54
Obviously, doc, you are an uneducated, ordinary man, that got your degrees by mail. It seems that not only you lack knowledge on math and physics, but also that you have a very bad reading comprehension. It amazes me you never seems to understand what people is talking about, but give us our oppinion, anyways.

I am not talking about fantasies or a phantom. I am talking about the merging of civilisations. Something you aren't aware, it seems, no matter you can quote "Al Idrisi" to impress. LOL
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 16:01
No you are not talking about fantasies or phantoms but simply muttering gibberish that forever call for the requisite call-to-order: Define your terms!
 
Gadzooks, "merging of civilizations", is that something that takes place after the requisite meetings undertaken by respective boards-of-directors? Cross-cultural adaptations and adoptions hardly define what constitutes a civilization, specially with respect to technology, and the fact that someone in Riyadh has a refrigerator does not mean he has been "Westernized". The premise is absurd. That you fail to realize that on separate threads you posit antagonistic premises from what you are contending here, is apt illustration of your fuzziness and inablity to properly define your terminology.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 16:15
If somebody in Riyadh read english and can follow the manual of the refrigerator, of course it is westernized. For him, the fridge is not "cargo" anymore.
OK. Let's define terms then.

In the Middle Ages civilisations were relatively isolated. I say relatively, because there was contact among them, particularly among the Eurasian civilisations connected through the Silk Road and the coastal sea routes. An invention could last centuries to reach from the West to China and viceversa. It is known, for instance, that the Codex travelled west to east, while paper make the route the other way around. And with respect to the Americas, the isolation was full.

At those times you could talk about separated civilisations, more or less well defined. Of course, the architects that build the Alhambra came from the Middle East, Constantinople and the West, and also some of the architects that build the Taj Majal were Italians. There were also Arab merchants in Tang China, but more or less globalisation was minor in comparison to the whole society. There were external influences, but large societies had theirs own caracteristics, more or less preserved during centuries or milenia.

Today, that's not true anymore. People all over the world consumes the same products, watch the same TV programs and connect to the same Internet. Even more, as time passes, more people is learning the same global language: english, and incresigly are following the same religions, and the same customs. Even laws and rules are being standarized by the presure of international agencies.
Add to this the mobility of people, with millions fooling around and moving all over the word, in search of new opportunities, and abandoning theirs roots.

The question is then, how much different is today a Chinese from a German or a Japanese from an American, beside the fact they come from different countries with some folk traditions?

And the question for this thread was: when globalisation started? Of couse, understanding globalisation as the erosion of barriers. When we could say this process started now? That was the debate.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 17:23
A question of numbers does not relegate the identical phenomenon in the past as irrelevant. And the assumption that existing differences in weltanschauung can de dismissed as little else than "folk traditions" is an untenable assumption. In a way you are committing the identical error constantly iterated in the MSM with respect to social turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East: "democratic" longings are the source of present conflict.
 
 


Edited by drgonzaga - 19 Jun 2011 at 17:24
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2011 at 17:51
Well, folk traditions are very persistent, indeed. But I wouldn't say the esence of Germany is dancing polka or whisteling the Ride of Valkiries Confused, and less I would believe the call to the pray defines Turkey. For me it is interesting that in both countries people dresses with T-shirts, blue jeans and runners, that in both countries people watch Dr. House and Dr. Who, and an enless stream of Japanese anime, that in both countries peoples know Pink Floyd and rock with Methalica. More important, in both countries play soccer. Wink

As an example, never seen the turkish Superman? What a better proof we live in a global society.






Edited by pinguin - 19 Jun 2011 at 18:31
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jun 2011 at 01:40
The equivalent of "kiddy porn" as the markers of culture and civilization! Boy have you flipped out on this one...Penguin.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jun 2011 at 04:09
You lack arguments, doc. Please stop your pretensions to be a comedian. Ha ha, very funny... Unhappy
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.