Absolutely Fascinating
This is right up my alley.
I love the study of history and one of the central questions to be settled in my mind is what attributes cause civilizations to rise and, conversely, to fall.
Why and how do some succeed while others fail to achieve global (relatively speaking) hegemony where others, by necessity, become (or remain) marginal or subservient?
In the past there were different mixtures of hegemonic civilizations and marginalized/subservient ones. Can the answer to my central question be the same for all civilizations in all cases, or is there something about the times in which they appear on the stage that is unique to those times? My hunch is that certain ideas and attributes that contribute to the rise and fall of hegemonic civilizations are timeless. But what are they?
My hunch is that technological advantage is a big part of it, but not necessarily the whole thing. I've got a whole bunch of books that may shed light on this question for me, but I haven't found time to read them yet. Damn internet! Be gone, damned blog! But one of my favourite historians, William McNeill may have the answer.
If I wasn't such a compulsive book buyer, I might have time to read more.
BTW, I hate the word "hegemony". Just like "raaacism" or "raaacist" or "colonialism", it's one of those favourite overused and misused words employed by the left to the point where it has become boring and ineffective.
The colonial era, BTW, is one of those eras in history were the rise and fall question is very easy to track. But there has to be something under-girding European culture that lead to the continent's dominance of the entire planet, and not only that, but why did some European empires do "better" than the others as far as building and keeping empires was concerned?
And what about America? There's no empire there, in the classical sense, but there is certainly nearly unchallenged and unchallengable influence, which, under the current administration, they no longer seem willing to use. Is that what causes rises and declines: The willingness to use the tools in your kit?
I love the study of history and one of the central questions to be settled in my mind is what attributes cause civilizations to rise and, conversely, to fall.
Why and how do some succeed while others fail to achieve global (relatively speaking) hegemony where others, by necessity, become (or remain) marginal or subservient?
In the past there were different mixtures of hegemonic civilizations and marginalized/subservient ones. Can the answer to my central question be the same for all civilizations in all cases, or is there something about the times in which they appear on the stage that is unique to those times? My hunch is that certain ideas and attributes that contribute to the rise and fall of hegemonic civilizations are timeless. But what are they?
My hunch is that technological advantage is a big part of it, but not necessarily the whole thing. I've got a whole bunch of books that may shed light on this question for me, but I haven't found time to read them yet. Damn internet! Be gone, damned blog! But one of my favourite historians, William McNeill may have the answer.
If I wasn't such a compulsive book buyer, I might have time to read more.
BTW, I hate the word "hegemony". Just like "raaacism" or "raaacist" or "colonialism", it's one of those favourite overused and misused words employed by the left to the point where it has become boring and ineffective.
The colonial era, BTW, is one of those eras in history were the rise and fall question is very easy to track. But there has to be something under-girding European culture that lead to the continent's dominance of the entire planet, and not only that, but why did some European empires do "better" than the others as far as building and keeping empires was concerned?
And what about America? There's no empire there, in the classical sense, but there is certainly nearly unchallenged and unchallengable influence, which, under the current administration, they no longer seem willing to use. Is that what causes rises and declines: The willingness to use the tools in your kit?
Labels: books, history, personal, Western Civilization
posted by Louise at 2:45 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home