Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|4706

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Civilizations_map.png
This Huntington's map of world civilizations based of his book Clash of civilizations. He made the argument that future conflict after the end of the cold war will be along the lines of cultural and civilization. It is often used by amateur political scientist and history channel historians when debating social, economic, and other trends in the world. I hate Huntington and his map.

To Sam Hunt, dark blue is the western world. Light blue the Eastern/Orthodox world. Purple Latin American. Green Islamic. Brown sub Saharan/African. Orange Hindu. Dark red Chinese. Light red Japanese. Yellow Buddhist. He reaches these conclusions by looking at the religious, economic, and political makeup. Also by pulling some out of his ass.

Assuming this isn't a complete crock of shit and playing along how would you redraw the map and why?

I would make a ton of changes.
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|3375
this part of (human) geography is actually always changing. of course, all of these categories and regions are total constructions - social, political, and ultimately ideological. there is definitely a lot of pseudo-science, quasi-empiricism, and ultimately "pulling [stuff] out of ass[es]" going on in these convenient labels (which is all they are; they only have a use-value in a pragmatic, shared-assumptive mode).

i read a review in a journal a few years back, i think it was by some stanford historian or political scientist, that basically makes the case that even the continents themselves are empty, fairly arbitrary constructions. our notions of 'continents' as human regions, of course, doesn't correspond to any tectonic or geological reality: where does europe end and asia (minor) begin? sure isn't along the same line as the plate boundaries. i think he's called this little niche area of study and consideration 'meta-geography'. it's quite a postmodern bent, really: deconstructing and unpacking previously-held assumptions, in order to basically just expose them as arbitrary social significations (ultimately all predicated in fancy sorts of language games, but that's an extra turn of the screw that isn't really relevant here). it's the mapping equivalent of historiography - the history of history. it's good to have this self-awareness, because at the end of the day it shows us that all these divisions are meaningless, and even at best are only a little bit ideologically slanted. we're all just, like, one people, maaan, and there's only one earth - one gaia.

not to mention that these rigidly drawn lines and models/schemas only serve to calcify and retard human progress and collaboration. what is the point in breaking up the world into little segments, when we have all been atomized already under the indiscriminate fluid exchange of commerce? the global market doesn't care which direction you pray in, or what your culinary culture is like, compared to your neighbours.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-03-10 05:19:01)

RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|5835|US

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

not to mention that these rigidly drawn lines and models/schemas only serve to calcify and retard human progress and collaboration. what is the point in breaking up the world into little segments, when we have all been atomized already under the indiscriminate fluid exchange of commerce? the global market doesn't care which direction you pray in, or what your culinary culture is like, compared to your neighbours.
If commerce is ALL you care about, yeah the divisions are pretty meaningless.  Most people care about other stuff, as well.  Thus, cultural divides exist in reality.
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+768|5805|United States of America
My first thought was not a journal review, obviously, but this video from a while back.

That said, the map in OP is nothing too shocking. If you asked a high schooler to divy up the world, I expect you'd get something similar, and the status quo isn't an especially novel idea.
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|3375

RAIMIUS wrote:

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

not to mention that these rigidly drawn lines and models/schemas only serve to calcify and retard human progress and collaboration. what is the point in breaking up the world into little segments, when we have all been atomized already under the indiscriminate fluid exchange of commerce? the global market doesn't care which direction you pray in, or what your culinary culture is like, compared to your neighbours.
If commerce is ALL you care about, yeah the divisions are pretty meaningless.  Most people care about other stuff, as well.  Thus, cultural divides exist in reality.
cultural differences exist, of course, i'm not denying that at all. but convenient constructions/dichotomies/oppositions like 'east' and 'west' are just flattening, and pointless.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|5811|Tampa Bay Florida
Seems to be a pretty good map, if you are emphasizing cultural differences on a global as opposed to regional scale.  Religion seems to influence culture quite a bit.

Last edited by Spearhead (2013-03-10 12:21:21)

Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|5811|Tampa Bay Florida
What would I change?  Probably more emphasis on protestant/catholic and shiite/sunni differences.  It would also make more sense to divide cultures linguistically, as well.  So Brazil would get their own color.  So would Iran.
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|3375
do you think it's really pertinent to classify countries/regions based on specific religious denominations? are there really any characteristically 'protestant' and 'catholic' countries nowadays, in the age of secularisation and modernity? it seems pointless to me to divide countries up by whether they are subscribers of arianism or some such esoteric wankery.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|4706

I don't think South America and the west should be two separate things. European religion, language, and race are all 3 checks in favor of the south being part of western society. I am not too schooled up on South Africa to make a determination on it. Isn't it like 10% European white? I am uncertain of the status of the Philippians in the west. Other than region how much are Filipinos like westerners? It is something I am going to ponder when I move there.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|4299|Sydney

Macbeth wrote:

Other than region how much are Filipinos like westerners?
I could ask a mate, as his wife is half Filipino and they spent part of their honeymoon there a couple months ago.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|4706

It was a typo I meant religion. But this is interesting. Keep me updated. I don't mean that sarcastically. Your friend made a good move by the way.
https://i.imgur.com/9uwnCpE.jpg
A wonderful place and people. They tend to have oversized heads though.
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|5120|...
Huntington... Lol. To quote Said, "the clash of civilizations" book is pretty much a bloated version of his earlier essay of the same name.

Don't even try to draw a map like this. His thesis is shit and so is the map.
inane little opines
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|4299|Sydney
Mac, his brief reply just now via FB:

Filipinos are very much Westernised, they even speak with american accents when speaking in English.

In terms of religion they are very Catholic. Divorce is still illegal but human rights activists are trying to change that and are making some inroads.

Last edited by Jaekus (2013-03-10 18:25:15)

Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|5811|Tampa Bay Florida

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

do you think it's really pertinent to classify countries/regions based on specific religious denominations? are there really any characteristically 'protestant' and 'catholic' countries nowadays, in the age of secularisation and modernity? it seems pointless to me to divide countries up by whether they are subscribers of arianism or some such esoteric wankery.
Yes, I do.  Tracing back a countries/regions specific (and dominant) religious denomination to other historical/cultural influences can explain a lot.  Not that there's any difference on the surface, but, like macbeth said, he considers all of the America's to be one culture/cultural group.  I say thats hogwash.  First comes language, then come religion, and after that, religious denomination.  Catholic/protestant is a pretty big split, signifying the split between Northern and Southern Europe.  Which I think you will agree, exists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_languages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_languages

I'd say that those two right there are pretty good changes you could make to the map.

Last edited by Spearhead (2013-03-11 09:06:17)

Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|3375
yes that split exists, but it has nothing to do with germanic and romance languages. romance languages predate the reformation by many centuries. there are two different temperaments and broad philosophical outlooks in europe, yes, between north and south - roughly summed up as the north's will to power (schopenhauer) and the south-meds solar fatalism. this has nothing to do with philology though, or how the languages developed. and religion, i maintain, is still not that important in defining the two regions. most of northern europe is entirely secular now.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-03-11 10:26:35)

BVC
Member
+325|5816
"West" in a geopolitical sense is regarded by many as meaning western europe plus non-european countries with an english-speaking white majority (Canada, USA, Australia, NZ).  Some people include countries with strong western influences as well.  I would say religion is slipping as a defining factor, at least in the "West".
globefish23
sophisticated slacker
+334|5444|Graz, Austria
I hate the Mercator projection.
Too "Western-centric".
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|4706

I was going to make a thread about that but I already knew the reactions of some members so I didn't even bother
Cheeky_Ninja06
Member
+52|5853|Cambridge, England
Anywhere that holds an F1 gp can be added to the west. Almost. Well it would be fair to say they dont mind being associated with the west which is half way there.

I think the map splits eastern europe / asia into too many different groups. I think you could just about put Russia and China together, they tend to side "against the west" whenever there's a big UN vote. The arab league is too split and subject to influence to be its own bloc. I guess really as it is very arbitary anyway you could split the countries into pro-western, anti-western and indifferent. This would pick up the countries where Russia and China hold more influence than the west.

I dont think I would support catholic/protestant split. Even looking at Ireland the difference between northern and southern ireland cant be compared to north and south korea.

Last edited by Cheeky_Ninja06 (2013-03-12 14:23:30)

Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|5811|Tampa Bay Florida
Thats not what I was saying.....
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|4819

Macbeth wrote:

I was going to make a thread about that but I already knew the reactions of some members so I didn't even bother
Now is the perfect time to make a thread about world maps.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|5811|Tampa Bay Florida

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

I think the map splits eastern europe / asia into too many different groups.
You do know that India and China make up 2.5 billion people?  And you think its split into too many groups?  lol

Thats almost 10 ten times the size of the united states.
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|5837

Spearhead wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

I think the map splits eastern europe / asia into too many different groups.
You do know that India and China make up 2.5 billion people?  And you think its split into too many groups?  lol

Thats almost 10 ten times the size of the united states.
and the fact that East Asian, Indian, South East Asian culture are completely different.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|5837
btw i find it funny how papua new guinea is somehow "western" because it used to be part of Australia.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,003|4479|London, England

Cybargs wrote:

btw i find it funny how papua new guinea is somehow "western" because it used to be part of Australia.
I think that has more to do with religion. Lots of Christian missionaries have gone there over the years.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2021 Jeff Minard