Re: Ethnic Hegemony and World-System

A modest corrective to Mr. Wagar's rather broad assertion about the Western
European generating a rational/empirical tradition (which leads to all the
other things he mentioned) might be REORIENT...in which some recognition is
given to the rational foundations of the Confucian intellectual tradition,
including the emergence of a tradition of empirical science.  Certainly, the
rationality of the Confucian tradition leads to a different kind of
society...but, I rather doubt it is possible to claim this sort of
accomplishment is exclusively located in Western Europe.  Saying this in no
way seeks to diminsh the importance of such ideas as human rights, etc. that
might derive from the rational intellectual tradition of the modern era in
Western Europe.  Rather, it might be important to recognise that other
intellectual traditions pointed in a similar direction and made possible
societies with remarkably similar value patterns...and, sometimes all this
emerges EARLIER than in Western Europe.

-----Original Message-----
From: wwagar@binghamton.edu [mailto:wwagar@binghamton.edu]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 5:39 PM
To: g kohler
Cc: wsn@csf.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: Ethnic Hegemony and World-System



        On the surface, this is a fairly stupid question.  It could not be
more obvious that persons of European descent, and chiefly northwestern
European descent, by virtue of their dominant position in the hegemonic
nations of Western Europe and North America and Australasia, enjoy a sort
of ethnic hegemony in the modern world-system.  They are joined only by a
handful of East Asian nations that have managed to emulate their 
technologies and business practices.

        But at the next level down, this is a fascinating question.
Since, in Nazi terms, Aryans and "honorary Aryans" rule the world, should
"progressive" people therefore unite to depose and crush these hegemons,
putting in their place people of color (except for Japanese, South
Koreans, Taiwanese, etc.)?  

        No.  That would be blatant racism.  But what is the alternative?
This brings me to the next level down, where I am bound to be attacked and
damned by almost everybody on our list.  I venture to assert that Western
Europe sired not only capitalism, the early modern slave-trade, and
Western imperialism, colonialism, and neo-colonialism, but also the values
to which most of us adhere:  human rights, civil liberties, secularism,
democracy, socialism, and the belief in reason and empirical science that
has given us the natural and social sciences.  Did Western Europe sire all
this because of its racial superiority?  Absolutely not.  It happened to
be, in the 17th to 20th centuries, in a position to advance the human
agenda, paradoxically at the same time that it was in a position to commit
all the usual atrocities and injustices of previous hegemonic peoples.
Some of the same advantages that gave it the opportunity to wreak evil,
gave it the opportunity to do some world-historical good.

        So I would argue that ethnic hegemony need not be an unmixed
evil.  And to the extent that the cultures of Europe and its descendants
were anticipated by other cultures who also promoted notions of human
rights, civil liberties, secularism, democracy, socialism, and the belief
in reason and empirical science, their labors were all the more enriched.
There is nothing in modern European culture that Asians, Africans, and
Native Americans could not have foreshadowed or helped to further.  But as
a historian, I stoutly maintain that the various movements of 
enlightenment in the 17th to 20th Centuries in Europe and in 
European-based countries did advance the human agenda and do belong to all
peoples everywhere.  Every continent takes its turn in advancing that
agenda.  The stupendous achievements (and equally stupendous failings) of
Africa, Asia, and the Americas are acknowledged.  We are all one species.
Being categorically ashamed of Europe is yet another example of racism in
its most self-defeating guise.

        Warren


On Tues, 22 Mar 2001, g kohler wrote:

> Ethnic Hegemony and World-System
> 
> "Ethnic hegemony", as I understand it [those who know this better, please
correct], is the hegemony of an ethno-cultural group over other
ethno-cultural groups. The question may then be posed: Is there an ethnic
hegemony in the contemporary world-system?
> 
> This questions requires two answers - (a) can such a group be identified?
(b) does such a group have hegemony?
> 
> The most likely candidate for being an "ethnic hegemon" in the present
world-system is "Western people" (Europeans and their descendants in other
parts of the world). [The short-hand expression "whites" is not precise
enough.] [ Note that (global) "ethnic hegemon" refers to a group of people,
rather than to a country like USA-hegemon.]
> 
> 
> A. Group Description
> From the CIA Factbook 2000 I collected data on ethnic composition of 118
countries and used them to code each of the 118 countries as a country with
either a "European-type majority" or "No European-type majority". [Some
countries can be coded either way, but most countries are relatively clear
in this respect. In the following, Arab countries are coded as "No
European-type majority". Some Latin American countries have very large
Mestizo or Creole populations, who are here classified as "Not
European-type", but the other alternative is also justifiable.] As a result,
my 118 countries include 82 countries with "No European-type majority" and
36 with "European-type majority". 
> 
> 
> B. Is the "European-type majority" group of countries a "global ethnic
hegemon"?
> Probably, yes. Reasons:
> (1) What world-system scholars describe as the "core" of the world system
is mostly populated by countries with European-type majorities. (The
organizations OECD and NATO are mostly organizations of countries with
European-type majority.)
> (2) The "five [sc. global] monopolies" of the "West" described Samir Amin
are monopoly positions of the group of countries with a European-type
majority.
> (3) Global income is highly concentrated in this group, as follows:
> 
> (3A) average GDP per capita (in PPP values, 1995):
> $5,085 for group "Not European-type majority" (82 countries, population =
3.9 billion)
> $13,787 for group "European-type majority" (36 countries, population = 1.2
billion)
> 
> (3B) percent of "Not European-type" population per country income class
(PPP values of GDP per capita, 1995):
> (a) GDP/cap = $ 0 to 4,999 ---- population=3.5 billion ---- 93% "Not
European-type"
> (b) GDP/cap = $ 5,000  to 14,999 ---- pop= 0.7 billion ---- 58% "Not
European-type"
> (c) GDP/cap = $ 15,000 to 30,000 --- pop= 0.8 billion ---- 18% "Not
European-type"
> 
> (4) How the concept of "global ethnic hegemony" relates to the concept of
"global capitalism" is an interesting theoretical question. Some historical
empires and historical world-systems had "ethnic hegemony" without
capitalism (e.g., the Roman Empire).
> 
> With greetings from Canada,
> Gernot Kohler
> Email: gkohler@accglobal.net
> 
>