Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Josh Munn barnack2@*****.com
Subject: OT Spirit of the land and it's people
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 08:19:36 -0400 (EDT)
--- Arcady <arcady@***.net> wrote:
> > civilizational
> > disagreement. A civilization, in this class, was defined as "the
> largest
> > grouping of people which can be termed without saying 'the entire
> human
> > race'." There were 7 civilizations, based mainly upon religion
> > and language:
> > Western, Orthodox, Hindu, African, Latin American, Japanese, and
> Sinic.
> > You will notice that race does not factor into it. I don't
> remember
> where I
> > heard this, but anthropologists have identified 3 racial groupings
> which
> are
> > VERY different: White, African, and Sinic. The other races around
> (Native
> > American, Slavic, etc) are just "mixings" of those three races.
>
> I would cut this down a bit.
> Japanese and 'Sinic' are the same groups if as I believe Sinic
> refers to
> east Asians like the Chinese.
> Japanese culture is more borrowed from Chinese than Italian is from
> Roman.
> They've had very high level trade between them for thousands of years
> and it
> shows. Add in Korea and the similarities become extreme. They share
> the same
> folk legends, similar dress, and similar languages (Korean for
> instance is
> Chinese vocabulary with Japanese Grammar in about 60% of the
> language. And
> all three have the same base for their number names). Many foods and
> entertainments items are also shared with minor variations.
>
>
> Western and Orthodox shouldn't qualify either. They're more similar
> than
> many of the 'Sinic' groups... Such as Samoans and Mongolians...
>
> I agree with the basic principle of there being a few 'greater'
> civilizations; but the breakdown given is to Euro centric in it's
> definitions.
>
> As for there being 3 races, I disagree. Aborigines have been shown to
> be
> genetically very different than any other group. Though if you must
> say
> there are three races and not 4 they might come under white, but
> certainly
> not under African or Sinic.
>
>
Actually, according to Samuel P. Huntington in his book "The Clash of
Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order", which is the
diffinitive work in this area, there are seven to nine civilizations.
These being Western, Latin American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu,
Orthodoxy, Buddhist, and Japanese. Orthodox being seperated from
Western during the great schizm between the Catholic Church, based in
Roman and headed by the pope, and the Orthodox Church, based currently
in Russia and headed by I believe an Archbishop, which caused both
sides to see the other as different than themselves. Japanese culture
is also seperated from Sinic culture because of the way each sees the
other. Civilizational definitions are based on what is percieved as
being different not on what is the same.
==
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 2
From: Quindrael d.n.m.vannederveen@****.warande.ruu.nl
Subject: OT Spirit of the land and it's people
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 14:34:28 +0200
>Actually, according to Samuel P. Huntington in his book "The Clash of
>Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order", which is the
>diffinitive work in this area, there are seven to nine civilizations.
>These being Western, Latin American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu,
>Orthodoxy, Buddhist, and Japanese.

OK, I'm absolutely no expert on this subject, but to me it seems this is
just a distinction made from a _western_ view.
For example, to differentiate between western and orthodox and put all
African culture under one wing, might raise some African eyebrows. "You
mean they say me and my completely different neighbour form the same
culture, while they differentiate between these two exactly the same
cultures?"

VrGr David

"Shapes of angels the night casts lie dead but dreaming in my past and
they're here, they want to meet you, they want to play with you, so take
the dream."
(Fields of the Nephilim - "Sumerland (what dreams may come)")
Message no. 3
From: Josh Munn barnack2@*****.com
Subject: OT Spirit of the land and it's people
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 08:54:46 -0400 (EDT)
--- Quindrael <d.n.m.vannederveen@****.warande.ruu.nl> wrote:
> >Actually, according to Samuel P. Huntington in his book "The Clash
> of
> >Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order", which is the
> >diffinitive work in this area, there are seven to nine
> civilizations.
> >These being Western, Latin American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu,
> >Orthodoxy, Buddhist, and Japanese.
>
> OK, I'm absolutely no expert on this subject, but to me it seems this
> is
> just a distinction made from a _western_ view.
> For example, to differentiate between western and orthodox and put
> all
> African culture under one wing, might raise some African eyebrows.
> "You
> mean they say me and my completely different neighbour form the same
> culture, while they differentiate between these two exactly the same
> cultures?"
>
Huntington actually addresses this point, he make a distition between
culture and civilization. Cultures are a small groups of people within
an overall civilization. So yes Hutu and Tusi are different cultures
and yes they are different but they are also part of the same
civilization. Affrica is also a very hard place to clasify
civilizationally. Huntington acknowleges that Africa is closer to
civilizational anarcy that it is to a unified civilization, and yes
Huntington is a Western writer, therefore his writing and thought are
western slanted.

My main reason for quoting Huntington was to make the point that while
Western and Orthodow, or Japanese and Sinic share a lot of
characteristics they are distinct civilizations. The distinction is in
the way they think.

==
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 4
From: Arcady0 arcady0@*********.com
Subject: OT Spirit of the land and it's people
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 10:07:48 -0700
> sides to see the other as different than themselves. Japanese culture
> is also seperated from Sinic culture because of the way each sees the
> other. Civilizational definitions are based on what is percieved as
> being different not on what is the same.

But this is again a fallacy as Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans all
readily admit their extreme similarities. They only time they don't is
when the war drums are being pounded.

They like to highlight what's different; but they know they're very
similar. As an insider to two of these groups who has friends on the
third I know this. It's a fact of the cultures that they are very
similar and know it.

And why is 'Buddhist' in there? It's a part of all three of these and
several other civilizations. It's half the fuel that makes the Sinic
groups and the Japanese the same.

And if the Somoans, Balians, Indoneseans, and Hawiians are not Sinic,
what are they? It seems Polynesean is missing from the list.

If I were to make this list I'd do it like this:

(For Modern late 20th century Civilizations)
African, Islamic, Polynesian, Hindu, East-Asian, Latin American, North
American, West Europe, East Europe.

There are a few cross civilizations. Like South Africa which comes under
African and West Europe in it's influences. And Thailand which comes
under East Asia and Hindu influences.
And North American may or may not be groupable with West Europe.

If I went back 150 years I'd add in Meseo-American, Amazonian, Inuit and
related groups, Plains Indians,
and South American non-Amazonian. These groups all were very distinct
with nearly no contact between them.
Also Aboriginee-Oceania. And I'm not sure if Africa needs a further
subdivision. North Africa is still Islamic and the rest of Africa is
groups that still have the same intercontact they've for the most part
always had. I'd also move the boundries of East and West Europe and
change them to 'Western Civilization' and "Orthodoxy". The 20th
centuries divide here has been mostly defined by the cold war as opposed
to religion. The cold war pushed some previously 'western' places into
the 'east' and put some 'Orthodox' places into the west (like Greece).

Although I'm a little hesitant about having a divide in Europe at all.
The same with the Plains Indians and Meseo-America. Both have more
intermingling than I'm confortable with to let them be different under
this classing.
Message no. 5
From: Arcady0 arcady0@*********.com
Subject: OT Spirit of the land and it's people
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 10:13:21 -0700
> My main reason for quoting Huntington was to make the point that while
> Western and Orthodow, or Japanese and Sinic share a lot of
> characteristics they are distinct civilizations. The distinction is in
> the way they think.

It is only outsiders who see the Sinic and Japanese as different
civilizations. They themselves do not do this. They see themselves as
different cultures in the same civilization while a few racists in the
different cultures claims the others our outside the civilization to
justify their racism. But it is not the normal view.
The outside world (read: The West) has merely picked up on this cultural
competition and exagerated their perceptions of it.

It would be letting the French and English claim they are completely
different civilizations. Everyone knows it's just racist banter between
the two and that they are linked. Even they know this.
Message no. 6
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: OT Spirit of the land and it's people
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 22:04:55 -0400
Josh Munn wrote:

> <SNIP>
> Actually, according to Samuel P. Huntington in his book "The Clash of
> Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order", which is the
> diffinitive work in this area, there are seven to nine civilizations.
> These being Western, Latin American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu,
> Orthodoxy, Buddhist, and Japanese. Orthodox being seperated from
> Western during the great schizm between the Catholic Church, based in
> Roman and headed by the pope, and the Orthodox Church, based currently
> in Russia and headed by I believe an Archbishop, which caused both
> sides to see the other as different than themselves. Japanese culture
> is also seperated from Sinic culture because of the way each sees the
> other. Civilizational definitions are based on what is percieved as
> being different not on what is the same.
>

That's the one! It was a while since I read it.

> ==>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



--
--Strago

The gene pool in the 21st century needs a deep cleaning. I am the chlorine.

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2++ !SR3 h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN++ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+) gm+
M-
Message no. 7
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: OT Spirit of the land and it's people
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 00:09:05 +0100
In article <19990721121936.6447.rocketmail@******.mail.yahoo.com>,
Josh Munn <barnack2@*****.com> writes
>Actually, according to Samuel P. Huntington in his book "The Clash of
>Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order", which is the
>diffinitive work in this area, there are seven to nine civilizations.
>These being Western, Latin American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu,
>Orthodoxy, Buddhist, and Japanese.

There are at least two distinct African civilisations. I'd ask where the
Polynesians went, too.


--
Paul J. Adam

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about OT Spirit of the land and it's people, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!