How can basic human rights be put into the constitution of Russia while keeping western culture out? That is the question. What societies in the world are not western societies, but still has the same human rights as western culture takes for granted?
The question is basically, if Russia were to fix their problems of corruption, if they give their own people human rights, freedom of speech, free media, and the ability to choose their own path as a person, then what type of culture exists with all that, but at the same time isn't western in nature? — Christoffer
My question is if there are societies in the world that have strong human rights and emphasis on freedom of the people, things we often associate with western culture. But that they don't at the same time have the consumerism and capitalism that many say will "creep into" Russia if they get these rights and freedoms? — Christoffer
. Create a system which exploits workers to put enormous economic and militarily power in the hands of a narrow elite.
2. Use this power to ruthlessly destroy any alternative systems.
3. Point to the absence/destruction of alternative systems as evidence that no other system works. — Isaac
Yes, but what about the question of a society in the world right now that functions as an example of being good for the people without being a western country or culture?
My question is if there are societies in the world that have strong human rights and emphasis on freedom of the people, things we often associate with western culture. But that they don't at the same time have the consumerism and capitalism that many say will "creep into" Russia if they get these rights and freedoms? — Christoffer
All leftists everywhere need to shut up and think about that. — frank
If your opponent crashes your head into a brick wall, you might stop and wonder if you could have represented yourself a little better. — frank
I think a lot of hunter gatherer societies fit the bill. — Olivier5
Is there any nation in the world that has millions of citizens with all these positive human rights and functions that still aren't western in cultural form? — Christoffer
I meant that their greatest imperialistic efforts look more like an injection of western values than something home grown. Is that wrong? — frank
I thought we were all trying to be more civil... — Isaac
I agree entirely, but it doesn't have any bearing on the fact that the absence of a viable alternative cannot be used as evidence in a system which deliberately destroys alternatives. — Isaac
Unless, of course, you agree with ruthless competition, in which case, yes, Western capitalism seems currently to be the winner. Not sure that's anything to crow about, but it might just be an uncomfortable fact. For now... — Isaac
This might be unfair, but I have a sneaking suspicion that your idea amounts to a kind of orientalism, sometimes found in popular histories of Russia. — jamalrob
leftists would do well to spend a little time in silence reflecting on how much power they once had and how that was squandered. — frank
Ruthless competition is good is some cases. Monopoly works well in others. There are a number of aspects of your environment that originated in Western monopolies. Your phone is one of them. — frank
There's India, Senegal and other democratic states in the 'southern hemisphere'. Of course, their democratic 'form' and processes are originally western (representative democracies with parliaments). — Olivier5
Ruthless competition certainly lead to the development of my phone — Isaac
One thing I kept coming back to with Russia was the way it's surprisingly similar to the US. They both have a strong apocalyptic streaks and that sometimes influences events. — frank
they tend to move towards what we define as western cultures. — Christoffer
And this seems to be the crux of the problem. When we see nation's who's transitioning to have better quality for their citizens, their well-being, their rights, their freedom in society etc. they tend to move towards what we define as western cultures. — Christoffer
It's mainly the exceptionalism, I think, and the assumption that they lead the world or should be doing so. (Obviously this is a gross generalization) — jamalrob
Notice how Marxists think of themselves as special — frank
I think the problem is a logical one: if one defines 'western' as a society enjoying 'their rights, their freedom in society' then by definition all such societies are 'western'.
Historically, the notion of human rights 'appeared' in certain places: the US and France, during two near simultaneous revolutions. Other places back then did not have them and rejected them. Pretty much all Western European kingdoms rejected them. So the idea was not 'western' then. It was just progressive, and stronger here and weaker there by historical accident.
Then a number if things happened which led to all sorts of things including two world wars. At some point Germany, one of the most modern European society, opted (?) for Nazism, following Italy for fascism 10 years before. Again, these modern, industrialized western states did not accept human rights.
It is tempting to subsume history within geography. 'Western' is a geographic notion. But human rights are a cultural concept or practice. They appeared somewhere, as these things usually do, and then they spread elsewhere, as good ideas generally do.
Agriculture appeared historically in the Middle East (and a few other places independently, but the 'West' got it from the Middle East. Does that make agricultural European societies 'Middle-Eastern'? — Olivier5
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.