“The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do.”
Samuel P. Huntington
(used as a header on Salam Pax’s blog)
In Friday’s CAP Global Citizens Political Science lecture, Doctor Erickson examined the nature of Neoconservatism. He emphasized that one of its characteristics is the belief that an effective balance of political, economic and social systems has been reached. The next step, and seemingly a moral obligation, is to help other nations achieve this same status.
Having been reading Salam Pax’s blog Where is Raed over the past week, this description immediately made me think of the United States’ role in the Iraq War, which Salam often criticizes for being invasive and manipulative. In a post from December 2002, Salam points out the blatant control by the US and the assumption that Iraq is unable to resolve conflict without western direction.
Why is this idea of Western supremacy so prevalent? It is evidently deep rooted, even if its source seems to have shifted slightly. One of the driving forces behind the European conquest of the world (15th-19th century) was religion. The belief that native people were inferior and needed salvation entitled the white man to take over their land and “civilize” them. In more contemporary cases, seemingly superior moral values entitle westerners to interfere in foreign issues. Those include the ideas of freedom and democracy, usually tied to capitalism.
But does the West really know best? Are these ideas of superiority still present at the individual level, despite growing education about different cultures? In a post on his blog, A Voice from the Margins, human rights defender Ajamu Baraka describes the ease with which the American government convinced its people that Iraq was a “backward, undeveloped nation”, later commenting on the belief held by many Americans: they have the right to intervene in foreign issues as a way of spreading superior western ideas. How does this way of thinking impact society?
The greater implications can be on a macro scale, in the form of destruction and radical change as a result of imposed “progress.” If a nation is not the source of its own evolution, the establishment of a functional system may be messy, flawed, or may never even take place. On the other hand, in Soft Weapons: Autobiography in Transit, Gillian Whitlock explores the issue on a micro scale, suggesting that the feeling of western superiority can create boundaries between a western reader and a life narrative writer from a non-western country (Whitlock, 7). Does the attempt to spread western culture actually deepen the gap between the West and the Rest?
Adèle Therias
I really enjoyed the questions you placed throughout this blog, specifically “Are these ideas of superiority still present at the individual level, despite growing education about different cultures?”
To answer your question I unfortunately have to say, in my opinion, yes– individuals in the west still feel a sense of superiority. Of course, not everyone and I believe with more education and awareness we will continue to see less.
What do you think impacts people on an individual level to give them that sense of superiority? The first thing that came to my mind was Fox News and the blatant lack of factual, unbiased news. Fox News also has tens of thousands, if not millions of viewers tuning in regularly and in turn educating them with non-factual, and biased information.
Do you think is a type of censorship or propaganda that could partly explain some of your question?
Thanks for your comment, Jenn.
I expect that much more education and early exposure to different world views would help individuals become less biased. As well as the evident propaganda in the media that you mentioned, one of the main areas of issue seem to be the gaps in history education.
The common experience in middle and high school is to learn “Canadian” history (usually involving the settlers from Europe arriving in Canada at the turn of the 20th century, and Canadian involvement in European events) and/or “European” history (how Europe developed and conquered the world), while leaving out other world history, or addressing it from a Western perspective.
Such focus prevents students from appreciating the origins of non-western culture and in turn shapes their one-sided understanding of the world. As an example, a criticism of Canadian education for neglecting to teach the Aboriginal perspective of History can be read here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/canadians-need-an-aboriginal-history-lesson/article549808/
Of course, I realize that limited time prevents curricula from addressing all of history from all perspectives, but I think sensitizing students to the fact that there IS another existing point of view would be a good start.
A new thought that occurred to me: I predict that future generations’ task of understanding history will be much more complex given the increasing overlaps between various parts of the world, how do you imagine this could be addressed?
Adéle,
Your question at the end of the post made me wonder about the potential negatives of globalization and the ever-increasing contact of very culturally different societies. While diversity is something to celebrate, the intersection of these seemingly incompatible cultures has led to conflict and strife. Looking back into history (and even on the front page of the newspaper every morning), there’s a little voice in my head whispering, “maybe these different sides simply don’t fit together and we’re all better off separate?” Does that idea directly contradict the meaning of a “global citizen?” I’m all for the interconnected flow of information and ideas to allow us to work together for a better world, but seeking some kind of global uniformity or ultimate answer starts to sound a lot like Western supremacy. What are we striving for then?
Hello Adèle, after reading your post, I must say I agree with you! Because of the Moral Obligation of some western counties, they always believe that the developing countries are unable to solve their own problems and want to weigh in. For example, regard itself as the “world police”, the U.S. attacked Iraq in 2003 because Americans believed Iraq government could control the whole country and what they did was to help them stabilize. As a result, many people, especially from the Middle East, joined the group of “anti-Americanism” and this deepened the gap between the West and the Rest. However, there is another way to share western cultures by using such “Moral Obligation”. When I was in high school, I was been a volunteer in a local orphanage called the Swallow Nest which was established by an American couple. They two help get jobs in a university and do everything they can to help the homeless children. Consequently, more and more local people want to join them and it has become the biggest orphanage in that city. Through such “Moral Obligation”, I believe that instead of repelling the Westerners, the Rest will embrace them.
Miao Dong ( Mason)