Re: Ethnic Hegemony and World-System

        I agree that the Confucian intellectual tradition manifested
rationality and created a climate of opinion favorable to the emergence of
empirical science in China.  In this respect it ran along lines somewhat
parallel to those of ancient Greek philosophy, which helped create a
climate of opinion favorable to the emergence of empirical science in
Hellenistic antiquity, which in turn strongly influenced Islamic
civilization in what Westerners call the Middle Ages.  But Confucianism
did not support the evolution of the progressive values associated with
the left wing of the European Enlightenment, although it might have
conceivably done so, nor did the Aristotelianism of Western antiquity.  As
I said in my original post, some cultures outside the West did anticipate
to some extent what the left wing of the European Enlightenment went on to
achieve in the 18th Century and beyond--but only to a limited extent, and
in nothing like the form such achievements have assumed in our time.

        Warren


On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, FRISCH_DENNIS wrote:

> 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
> > 
> > 
>