Justin Moore
Member
History is replete with the downfall of hegemons.
Like Rome?
History is replete with the downfall of hegemons.
I remember that there was a time when the Japanese were launching wars of naked aggression and the Finns had no (independent) country. How times change.
The GDP per capita of several Gulf states are quite high, but that doesn't make them successful civilizations now, does it?
The losers always blame the winner. That's been the case since the Hittites kicked everyone's behind with iron weapons, and likely long before that.
But don't think that such a thing is preordained or somehow specially set aside for certain people by fate.
My fear now is that they will become impatient with us when democracy and properity don't materialize in short order, and that will will then look ljust like an oppressor
Originally posted by Tamara
I was enjoying watching those folks in Baghdad partying like it was 1999... er, again, while eating lunch at a restaurant yesterday.
The young couple at the next table over seemed stunned. Where was the blood in the streets? The jihad? Weren't we "pausing"? They were genuinely baffled.
Me? I just raised my beer in toast to a bunch of really happy people.
How do you sing "Ding, Dong, The Witch Is Dead" in Arabic?
So what? My point is simple. That "national culture" is not a fixed, limited thing. It changes, fluctuates and adapts (or fails).So what? Imperial Japanese society was a failure, too. Hint: they thought a short, inbred guy with glasses was God. Also, they tried to take over most of the Earth. And Czarist Russia was the dumbass of Europe.
You mean "Slovenia," not "Solvenia." Slovenia was a highly developed part of the Austro-Hungarian sphere of influence at one point. It is misleading to suggest that it is a "leftover chunks of Yugoslavia." In fact, you picked a rather unique case in Eastern Europe. According to the CIA, "Slovenia, with its historical ties to Western Europe, enjoys a GDP per capita substantially higher than that of the other transitioning economies of Central Europe."You'd be surprised, actually. Even with most of the petroleum in the universe, Saudi Arabia somehow manages to only have a per capita GDP of $10,000... Finland has ice, and theirs is $26,000. Hell, Solvenia has a per capita GDP of $18,000, and they barely exist at all! Leftover chunks of Yugoslavia are economically kicking the *** of the biggest oil empire on Earth. All indications are that Solvenia will improve, and Saudia Arabia won't.
Well, that's because the defeat did not result in colonialization and humiliation by the victor. They retained or rebuilt their infrastructure and received massive aid from the US.You cant lose much worse than the Germans and Japanese did in 1945, yet somehow the Germans and Japanese got over it and got a job.
Maybe they would be if their lands were confiscated and they were made to serve colonial masters for 50 years as coolies.You don't see guys in Lederhosen driving Volkswagen car bombs into military checkpoints, do you?
Fair enough. But it isn't so cut and dry as you put it. Certain countries do not have failed societies merely because they are blaming their ills on the USA (though there is A LOT of that going on) and merely because they are not "getting on to a job."Don't put words in my mouth. It is dishonest. I actually think the opposite... any society CAN succeed, if it is willing to adapt to modern reality and not place blame for its failings everywhere in the Cosmos but on itself.
I've got news flash for you. When Saddam was in power, people did not burn American symbols out of a spontaneous celebration. They did so due to coercion of a police state in staged rallies. I think what we saw the other day of the Baghdadis celebrating had that spontaneous quality more akin to the fall of the Berlin Wall than the Ba'athist staged rallies.Do you seriously think for a second that if Saddam was suddenly swept back into power that those same cheering crowds would not be bowing down to his image and burning American symbols.
Gawd, there is so much to say in regard to this. First of all, you do realize that not all Iraqis are Arabs (many are Kurds or Turkmen). Secondly, what does that mean? Other nationalities are stupid and obstinate?The Arabs are both smart and fickle.
And ultimately lead to a economic collapse of rather substantial proportion. As a veteran of the economic wars for the last several decades, I well remember the global predictions in the late '80's that Japan was destined to be the economic power for the coming decade. Of course, the Japanese mindset [i.e., inherently followers, not leaders] dictated the adoption of several nasty American economic habits:With an infusion of Americanism, much of the positive traits of the so-called traditional Japanese culture turned it into the second wealthiest nation in the world in only a handful of decades.
My point is simple. That "national culture" is not a fixed, limited thing. It changes, fluctuates and adapts (or fails).
For example, the Imperial Japanese society was hardly a "total" failure.
The "national cultures" that we seem to think in geographic or fixed terms do not exist. That's my point.
You mean "Slovenia," not "Solvenia."
And there was a time when these states had GDP per capita that substantially exceeded most countries in the world and equaled the most industrialized nations.
In fact there is a myriad of factors to look at before one can make even hasty judgment on whether a society is "healthy" or not.
Well, that's because the defeat did not result in colonialization and humiliation by the victor. They retained or rebuilt their infrastructure and received massive aid from the US.
It is unfair to then brand this culture "a failure" as if the people were just not diligent enough to advance their society.
Japan's economy is in a serious recession, but it is hardly "collapsed." It is still the SECOND wealthiest country in the world. Let's get a sense of proportions here, and not get swept up by the news. There are some serious structural problems in Japan (about which I can speak a long, long time), but it is still a mighty prosperous nation.And ultimately lead to a economic collapse of rather substantial proportion.
Sigh... I do not deny that Japan did monstrous things during the time (I actually have family members who suffered terribly at the hands of the Japanese military - I need no lectures on the brutality of those years).You are joking, right? Do you actually know what Japan DID from, say, 1920-1945? How many millions do they have to kill off to cross the failure line?
Well, once is a typo, but... In any case, I note that you fail to address my more substantial point about cherry-picking an unusually successful Eastern European nation with a relatively unique industrial history in the region.Oooh, you found a typo! Have a cookie.
Actually, you missed the point. If they had higher GDP per capita before, does that mean their civilization was of "higher plane" then, but not today? What I am getting at is your odd attempt to correlate GDP per capita with the success as a civilization. I contend that it is only one element - one that can often be deceiving (as GDP per capita was for much of this region in the 1970s when it seemed as if the socities were very successful according to YOUR measurement).So the fact that they are in decilne DISPROVES my point?
They are humiliation indeed, but much less of one than experiencing colonization by foreigners on top of occupation. You again missed my earlier point. When many of the Arab nations were defeated and occupied by European powers previously, they were not just occupied and given aid - they were colonized. That is a "bigger" humiliation - when you are not only defeated, but must live as officially inferior human beings and coolies while your country's resources are raided to benefit the conqueror. That is quite different from what the US did to Japan and Germany, isn't it?Are you insane? Total defeat and unconditional surrender aren't "humiliation"?
A relatively educated and literate population for one thing - often called "human capital" or "human infrastructure" - something that the American occupiers further encouraged and aided.And what "infrastructure" did they have to "retain" after we turned their cities into rubble and ash with YEARS of area bombing?