"Modernisation, yes; Westernisation, no."

[Treks]

G'day

So @The Neo Nerd and I were watching Cenk Uygur vs Dinesh D'Souza on Youtube. They had a discussion starting just after this marker: https://youtu.be/v4sULDNpvqs?t=47m25s where Dinesh talks about Muslim extremists in 3rd world countries using the projection of American culture as an effective recruiting tool. Dinesh says that people in traditional cultures say "Modernisation, yes; Westernisation, no."

My question is, what is it about Western culture that other cultures are getting from the "projection of American culture" that is so offensive to them? What is it about "Westernisation" that is so threatening?

 

[MD]

My question is, what is it about Western culture that other cultures are getting from the "projection of American culture" that is so offensive to them? What is it about "Westernisation" that is so threatening?

Can't speak for all countries, but South Asians see the spectacular collapse of the family unit and marriage in general as deeply troubling. The loss of tradition, ritual and what are seen as traditional values. It's a very collectivist culture, so individualism is very alien. Although they can go the other extreme on this aspect but things are changing

All ex colonies view anything Western with suspicion. Doesn't help that Western intelligence agencies have created epic chaos in many countries under the guise of regime change for decades. Middle Easterners are suspicious of democracy and Western forms of governance due to that. Also the whole atheism/secularism really bugs them. Plus all the stuff that bugs South Asians bugs them as well, since they're as collectivist and much more conservative.

 

[Desert Snake]

Can't speak for all countries, but South Asians see the spectacular collapse of the family unit and marriage in general as deeply troubling. The loss of tradition and what are seen as traditional values. It's a very collectivist culture, so individualism is very alien. Although they can go the other extreme on this aspect but things are changing

All ex colonies view anything Western with suspicion. Doesn't help that Western intelligence agencies have created epic chaos in many countries under the guise of regime change for decades. Middle Easterners are suspicious of democracy and Western forms of governance due to that. Also the whole atheism/secularism really bugs them. Plus all the stuff that bugs South Asians.

How do you know that middle easterners are suspicious of democracy? the polls? lol

 

[MD]

How do you know that middle easterners are suspicious of democracy? the polls? lol

Have some family and friends from there. I've lived there. Am part Middle Eastern. Have read a a lot and spoken to many people from the region over a couple of decades. How bout yourself?

 

[Desert Snake]

Have some family and friends from there. I've lived there. Am part Middle Eastern. Have read a a lot and spoken to many people from the region over a couple of decades. How bout yourself?

Myself what?

 

[MD]

Myself what?

Oh I thought you were Middle Eastern.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Because they tend to view the West as chaotic and decadent. I don't know how they would define "modernization" since that tends to be conflated with Western culture and globalization. What, do they want advanced technologies but still have things like honor killings, child marriage, FGM, stoning people, witch hunts, etc.?

 

[Laika]

Westernisation implies that there is one path to achieve modernisation, but many would challenge that. The idea that the west is better and therefore everyone else should emulate it still has strongly imperialist tendencies in which it is the "white mans burden" to engage in a "civilising mission" by compelling all the "inferior" cultures/races to conform to their own standards. I guess they want science and technology without the disruptive socio-economic effects.

 

[YmirGF]

Can't speak for all countries, but South Asians see the spectacular collapse of the family unit and marriage in general as deeply troubling. The loss of tradition, ritual and what are seen as traditional values. It's a very collectivist culture, so individualism is very alien. Although they can go the other extreme on this aspect but things are changing

All ex colonies view anything Western with suspicion. Doesn't help that Western intelligence agencies have created epic chaos in many countries under the guise of regime change for decades. Middle Easterners are suspicious of democracy and Western forms of governance due to that. Also the whole atheism/secularism really bugs them. Plus all the stuff that bugs South Asians bugs them as well, since they're as collectivist and much more conservative.

A very astute analysis. So, in essence, they want their cake and eat it too.

 

[Subhankar Zac]

Modernization is inevitable and is mandatory.
In my opinion, the western nations have contributed the most to some of the worst atrocities thay still bares its scars to this day.

Britain and France's greed causing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, British raj causing the division and conflict in India and Pakistan, America's war mongering and backstabbing other nations to get more money, Portuguese and Islamic regimes in India, making Hinduism and Sikhism into radical forms (Buddhism in Burma).
The west even imported their worst prejudices to the world. America is still importing homophobia to Africa.
(Granted every culture had barbaric laws and rituals at some point).

So, that's what most find threatening and also to mention the large chunks of money being taken by the west from other parts of the world.

So, though in the past, I was in strong support of westernization, today I only prefer in modernization and reviving individualization.
Westernization shouldnt simply be given the untouchable treatment, but just put an eye on it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

A very astute analysis. So, in essence, they want their cake and eat it too.

Who would not like that?

Nice posts from MD and Laika, and Shubhankar too. I will point out we generally mean by 'decadence' - bars, loud music, drinking, dancing, revealing clothes in case of women, remaining out at late hours, sex without marriage, marriages outside the social norm, etc.

 

[Treks]

Modernization is inevitable and is mandatory.
In my opinion, the western nations have contributed the most to some of the worst atrocities thay still bares its scars to this day.

Britain and France's greed causing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, British raj causing the division and conflict in India and Pakistan, America's war mongering and backstabbing other nations to get more money, Portuguese and Islamic regimes in India, making Hinduism and Sikhism into radical forms (Buddhism in Burma).
The west even imported their worst prejudices to the world. America is still importing homophobia to Africa.
(Granted every culture had barbaric laws and rituals at some point).

So, that's what most find threatening and also to mention the large chunks of money being taken by the west from other parts of the world.

So, though in the past, I was in strong support of westernization, today I only prefer in modernization and reviving individualization.
Westernization shouldnt simply be given the untouchable treatment, but just put an eye on it.

Can you give examples of what it is about western culture that is threatening to India?

 

[Subhankar Zac]

Can you give examples of what it is about western culture that is threatening to India?

The past is a relevant example. Portuguese and British laws moulding India into a conservative nation with Islam making most Hindu religions and Sikhism into taking up weapons for the sake of religion.
Also the west is either this or that, it has topick one or tge other sides while indian, Chinese, south Asian traditions keep an open option.

 

[LuisDantas]

Modernization is inevitable and is mandatory.
In my opinion, the western nations have contributed the most to some of the worst atrocities thay still bares its scars to this day.

Britain and France's greed causing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, British raj causing the division and conflict in India and Pakistan,

Considering that those conflicts date back to the 1940s or even earlier, one must ask how is it possible for the people actually involved in the issues to have such a hard time in overcoming that pesky corrupting foreign influence after seventy years.

Not that I agree with your attribution of guilt, mind you. And if I did, the logical consequence would be to decide that the British should never have let go of India nor of the Palestinian Mandate.

America's war mongering and backstabbing other nations to get more money, Portuguese and Islamic regimes in India, making Hinduism and Sikhism into radical forms (Buddhism in Burma).
The west even imported their worst prejudices to the world. America is still importing homophobia to Africa.
(Granted every culture had barbaric laws and rituals at some point).

So, that's what most find threatening and also to mention the large chunks of money being taken by the west from other parts of the world.

So, though in the past, I was in strong support of westernization, today I only prefer in modernization and reviving individualization.
Westernization shouldnt simply be given the untouchable treatment, but just put an eye on it.

How do you differentiate Westernization from Modernization?

 

[LuisDantas]

G'day

So @The Neo Nerd and I were watching Cenk Uygur vs Dinesh D'Souza on Youtube. They had a discussion starting just after this marker: https://youtu.be/v4sULDNpvqs?t=47m25s where Dinesh talks about Muslim extremists in 3rd world countries using the projection of American culture as an effective recruiting tool.

Thanks for the video. This part you indicate is interesting in that it lampshades the challenges of dealing with cultural change even when it is necessary and constructive. There is a sort of wiplash that may easily become destructive, even suicidal.

Reminds me of the 2008 controversy over California's Proposition 8. People polarized over the issue, basicaly because they feel urged to take a stance and to deal with the degree of internal disagreement on the issue. It is all but inhuman not to feel tempted to hope that once the political decision is made the "other side" will accept it and become quieter - but that also means that if the decision is unpleasant, we become that other side and may feel betrayed for decades. It even becomes a distraction from actually considering the issue, because we are so busy deciding how to deal with those rotten people who surround me and dare to challenge my ever so reasonable stance on the matter. It almost seems like they personally want to despise me.

Also reminds me a lot of Trump's campaign, come to thnk of it.

Both groups capitalize from a sort of culture shock. It just turns out that Trump's voters are a domestic population as opposed to foreign.

The true difficulty may well be in dealing with the clash of expectations and ideals, even when no practical issues are involved. Even fictional shows such as Game of Thrones may lead to rather incensed feelings.

Far as solutions go, I don't think there are any that do not involve learning better than to disregard the "defeated". We must strive to earn the trust and cooperation of those who disagree with us, if for no other reason because as the variety of subject matters piles up we will have a hard time being consistently on the "winning" side.

Dinesh says that people in traditional cultures say "Modernisation, yes; Westernisation, no."

My question is, what is it about Western culture that other cultures are getting from the "projection of American culture" that is so offensive to them? What is it about "Westernisation" that is so threatening?

Westernisation as a word has barely any meaning, which is why it is so tempting as a scapegoat. It will become short form for various projections of things to blame and create an appearance of agreement even when there is none. Globalization is another word suffering from similar abuse problems.

 

[Subhankar Zac]

Considering that those conflicts date back to the 1940s or even earlier, one must ask how is it possible for the people actually involved in the issues to have such a hard time in overcoming that pesky corrupting foreign influence after seventy years.

Not that I agree with your attribution of guilt, mind you. And if I did, the logical consequence would be to decide that the British should never have let go of India nor of the Palestinian Mandate.


How do you differentiate Westernization from Modernization?

Firstly, the British didn't let go of India, people got furious over their brutality and bloodshed and they were forced to leave, though they still managed to steal, divide and at times did help India too for their own benefit.

Westernization is about the west, be it good or wicked.
Modernization is about progressive ideals that even the Mahabharata shows around 3000 BCE.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Oh no, Shubhankar. Not only India, they let go of the whole empire because it was proving to be a burden. Gandhi, Subhash or Nehru did not get us our independence. It was Clement Attlee, may his soul rest in peace.

 

[LuisDantas]

I basically agree, @Aupmanyav , although I suppose @Subhankar Zac is somewhat correct regarding the retreat from India as well.

Of course, Gandhi and Badshah Khan (and, let's not forget, their many supporters) did a whole lot to give the British reason to reconsider their presence in India.

Nor do I need to remind you of how complex Indian politics can be, then or now.

 

[MD]

A very astute analysis. So, in essence, they want their cake and eat it too.

Actually I would argue that it's Westerners who want that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What I said holds for Hindus, Muslims as well as Sikhs which is nearly 95% of India. We are a bit conservative.