World Order Driven by Culture

It is challenging as to what is the next logical step to discuss. So far, the discussion pieces have been presented with the framework for thought which implies existence and survival. Story led to ever bigger groups of humans banding together based on communication and motivation. One could simply follow a timeline. I think it more interesting to jump around time as topics must be meaningful to you the reader. 

There are concepts that we have yet to discuss including, Power, Politics, Leadership. War, Peace, Economics, Death, concepts like Good versus Evil, and many others that may make this easier or a more logical progression but so far, I have been working in a vacuum, without followers or comments other than folks trying to get free advertising via comments. 

There have been backgrounds to world order over the millennia. Most recently the “Cold War” world order, which was effectively a communist versus (mostly) capitalistic (mostly) democratic government situation. In late 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union that morphed. “Global politics began to be reconfigured along cultural lines.” (Huntington) Consider our “Contemporary Story” of the invasion of Ukraine. It is based on that shifted paradigm. Russia’s Putin claimed the Ukrainians and the Russians were one people. Putin’s interpretation of cultural lines was the justification for his invasion. It is a story. Whether accurate or not it has defined recent world history. 

I believe Huntington is correct. Most of the following is from his book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Spoiler alert, we are shifting to the 1990’s but I think he does a good job of defining cultural lines. It really suggests that religion is the major basis for moral order and how cultures define their traditions. 

To summarize: he believes  

Part 1 ”For the first time in history, global politics is multipolar and multicivilizational, and modernization is distinct from Westernization…” 

Part 2 “the balance of power is shifting; the West is declining in relative influence and Asia is expanding with consequences for Muslim countries and their neighbors…” 

Part 3 “A civilization-based world order is emerging, societies sharing cultural affinities cooperate…” There are not perfect lines but some cohesion to core states. 

Part 4 “The West’s universalist pretentions bring it into conflict with other civilizations, most seriously with Islam and China.”

Part 5 “The survival of the West depends on Americans reaffirming their Western identity and Westerners accepting their civilization as unique and not universal…maintain the multicivilizational character of global politics.” 

To summarize 

1)    From about 1500 on to the Cold War Western powers dominated and fought war (mostly) with the nation states of the West. 

2)    After World War II the “Cold War” made global war one of mutual destruction assured if the countries of the world fought to the death and end of civilization, so proxy wars continued in the so called third world which were not as closely aligned to the Democracy/Capitalism versus Communism concept. Some care not to escalate these conflicts into World War III were taken and worked until the fall of the Soviet Union. 

3)     New paradigm is defining by “cultural lines”. This is a work in progress. 

Huntington states, “People define themselves in terms of ancestry, religion, language, history, values customs, and institutions… People use politics not just to advance their interests but also to define their identity. We know who we are only when we know who we are not and often only when we know whom we are against.” 

If you were looking for a clue to what is going on in the world, READ THAT LAST PARAGRAPH AGAIN!!! That is a major reason for a rise of nationalism, a backlash to the multicivilizational character of toleration of other ideas and ways, the willingness to trade democracy for autocracy (if someone just like us rules!), the rise of genocide and a bunch more. 

Huntington divides the present grouping approximately as follows: 

1)     Western (US, Canada, Western & Central Europe and Australia and New Zealand)

2)     Latin America (most countries south of Mexican US border)

3)     Orthodox (Eastern Europe, Russia)

4)     African (South or sub-Saharan)

5)     Islamic (North Africa to Turkey to Pakistan, Indonesia)

6)     Hindu (India)

7)     Sinic (China, Vietnam and Korea)

8)     Buddhist (from India’s eastern border to Vietnam, except Indonesia)

9)     Japanese 

Are these divisions perfect? NO! They are also not stable. Where does a multicultural Singapore fit? An excellent example is most would have thought Ukraine and Russia were culturally similar up to about 10 years ago. Not so much anymore.  Is China using a similar logic with respect to Taiwan as Russia did with Ukraine? A big question is there still room for proxy wars? ? Also, moral choices have divided these groups. (for example. consider COVID vaxxers versus non vaxxers.) However, creating a model one can get an idea as to organize one's thoughts . 

As a partial disclaimer there are a whole bunch of “norms” (what people commonly believe as a group) within these so called distinct cultural groups. Just to name a few there is: Collectivism versus Individualism, Hierarchy and inequalities, Risk attitudes, Time orientation, gender equality, assertiveness, Humane orientation, and many more.   

Further comments on the timelines presented. Prior to the Enlightenment (about 1500 AD or CE beginning) what was known as the “West” was dominated by Catholic religious beliefs that included that the Bible was the word of God and infallible. It was widely believed that God revealed everything humans needed to know at the time of creation, determined at one time to be 4004 BC (or BCE). Hence, scientific exploration took a back seat to history because it was all known at Creation. In some ways the Classic Greek Philosophic view that all knowledge came from within is a sort of corollary.  Interestingly, Catholic orthodoxy seemed to almost deify Aristotle’s ideas. Aristotle wasn’t a Christian and predated Christ. Modern science has evidence that the Universe is over 13 billion years old. Religion and science have not been that compatible historically. The point again is stories don’t have to make sense; they must appeal to emotion to stick. That is a problem all of us must be aware to deal with the results.

©

https://www.islamabadscene.com/national-college-of-arts-celebrates-cultural-diversity-to-promote-inclusive-society/