So here's a less controversial post. I think.

Is Anglo-American-Australian-Kiwi-Canadian humanism now the defacto ideology of the Commonwealth+Americasphere? Is it also the dominant ideological force in the world today? I suppose internal threats from Christianity remain.

I think the answer is yes, humanism despite some troubles is more and more at the center of ideological life. Does East Asia have an ideology besides each country's specific ethno-nationalism? Buddhism appears dead there or ethnically fractured (ie Japanese offshoot for Japanese). The Middle East is in flames. Hinduism is a living museum.

Perhaps Roman Catholic Brazil? The old latin-anglo rivalry will rise again? But does the remains of the spanish empire have a plausible ideological alternative to Anglo humanism?

You make Star Trek technobabble writers blush.

(December 30, 2013 at 8:33 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: You make Star Trek technobabble writers blush.

Thank you.


Further reading on the term Anglosphere -- and the state of said sphere: http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_1_anglosphere.html

"A little-noted fact these days is that the Anglosphere is still far and away the world’s largest economic bloc. Overall, it accounts for more than one-quarter of the world’s GDP—more than $18 trillion. In contrast, what we can refer to as the Sinosphere—China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Macau—accounts for only 15.1 percent of global GDP, while India generates 5.4 percent (see Chart 1). The Anglosphere’s per-capita GDP of nearly $45,000 is more than five times that of the Sinosphere and 13 times that of India (see Chart 2). This condition is unlikely to change radically any time soon, since the Anglosphere retains important advantages in virtually every critical economic sector, along with abundant natural resources and a robust food supply."

(December 30, 2013 at 8:25 pm)theyear12013 Wrote: Is Anglo-American-Australian-Kiwi-Canadian humanism now the defacto ideology of the Commonwealth+Americasphere? Is it also the dominant ideological force in the world today?

What are the dominant policies/ideologies/factors of the Western world today?

1. Consumerism
2. Diversity
3. Globalisation
4. Government Incompetence
5. Crime, riots, terrorism etc.

Something like that. Western nations are being radically transformed from being Anglocentric, into borderless cosmopolitan shopping malls occupied by multinational corporations. Meanwhile our governments can't balance their budgets, and we have periodic outbreaks of inter-racial/religious crime, riots and terrorism.

So what is your question: is humanism the dominant force in the West, and the world?

That's an interesting question. I'd break it down further:
1. Is the transformation of Western nations desirable? I vote: hell no!
2. Is the transformation sustainable? Hmm, my head is starting to hurt.

So let's step back and take an evolutionary look at the world. In evolutionary terms, group fitness is the determining factor of success. It's not individuals which hold power, but the group most fit in a world of competing groups.

And on those terms, you'd have to think the Western world is at the end of its life cycle, and China is at the beginning of theirs.

What has this got to do with humanism? Well, humanism is a part of the fracturing of Western nations. And that fracturing (or diversity) is debilitating to group psychology. Ergo, the Western world is being pulled apart by various interests groups (business, ethnic, ideological) and is not acting as a cohesive group. In a world with groups like China that are acting aggressively in their own interests, the West seems like a lame duck.

What's the moral to the story? I think Professor Jonathan Haidt hit the nail on the head:

"Religions are moral exoskeletons... Societies that forgo the exoskeleton of religion should reflect carefully on what will happen to them over several generations. We don’t really know, because the first atheistic societies have only emerged in Europe in the last decades. They are the least efficient societies ever known at turning resources (of which they have a lot) into offspring (of which they have few)."

Does that mean we need religion for the West to survive? Hell no. But it does mean that humanism (being rather formless, normless, diverse, and open) has failed to retain a vital ingredient of group fitness: namely, unity or cohesiveness, and acting in our own interests.

Happy New Year? No such thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynmLdLwlgLI

(December 30, 2013 at 9:38 pm)mralstoner Wrote: Does that mean we need religion for the West to survive? Hell no. But it does mean that humanism (being rather formless, normless, diverse, and open) has failed to retain a vital ingredient of group fitness: namely, unity or cohesiveness, and acting in our own interests.

Precisely. I think the norms are fairly well established if you check out any human rights group or the UN human rights charter, but as you say it is formless with no semblance of ritual. And the older religious and ethnic attachments continue to bubble beneath the surface.

But the advantage we have always had is all of us live on islands or quasi islands ( North America is effectively an island for the US and Canada. Mexico is too poor still to matter). I think China continues to be overpopulated so we have some time to figure it all out.

I think there is a possibility to form a strong and robust humanistic ideology to compete with even the most ancient and robust sub-identities of the new comers. Americaness is fairly robust -- but in its proudest form is too easily equated with being Christian -- and many of those who are secular tend towards nihilism even though the verifiable roots of America are Anglo tinted secular humanism.

It is a conundrum, but I'm optimistic.

(December 30, 2013 at 8:25 pm)theyear12013 Wrote: So here's a less controversial post. I think.

Is Anglo-American-Australian-Kiwi-Canadian humanism now the defacto ideology of the Commonwealth+Americasphere? Is it also the dominant ideological force in the world today? I suppose internal threats from Christianity remain.

Christianity is waning in the angloshere and is a real force only in the USA

Quote:I think the answer is yes, humanism despite some troubles is more and more at the center of ideological life. Does East Asia have an ideology besides each country's specific ethno-nationalism? Buddhism appears dead there or ethnically fractured (ie Japanese offshoot for Japanese). The Middle East is in flames.

Buddhism is growing very rapidly in China due the rapid explosion of the middle class. I have no idea what this Japanese offshoot of Buddhism is. The Japanese are Orthodox Mahayanists. The only national variant I can think of is the Vajrayana of Tibet.
Hinduism is a living museum.

Quote:Perhaps Roman Catholic Brazil? The old latin-anglo rivalry will rise again? But does the remains of the spanish empire have a plausible ideological alternative to Anglo humanism?

Actually Brazil has a massive and growing evangelical protestant movement

---

Quote:What are the dominant policies/ideologies/factors of the Western world today?

1. Consumerism

Where in the world is consumerism NOT a dominant ideology?

Quote:2. Diversity
3. Globalisation

4. Government Incompetence

This is absurd. Western governments are the LEAST incompetant governments.

Quote:5. Crime, riots, terrorism etc.

Which countries DON't Have these?

(December 31, 2013 at 5:25 am)là bạn điên Wrote: Buddhism is growing very rapidly in China due the rapid explosion of the middle class. I have no idea what this Japanese offshoot of Buddhism is. The Japanese are Orthodox Mahayanists. The only national variant I can think of is the Vajrayana of Tibet.

I'm being imprecise in language but don't agree. Han Chinese Nationalism is much more the dominant 'religion' than Buddhism imho. 80% of Japanese prefer no religion and if they do its likely closely related to Shinto Buddhism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_in_Japan -- whose war shrines are deeply offensive to the Chinese. The latest tensions with China illustrate this. As anyone will tell you who visits Japan -- their culture definitely still has nationalistic tendencies -- and is extremely anti-immigrant and would not be considered tolerant of multiple cultures operating in its sphere.

Neither of them is promoting any kind of universal ideology that is welcoming to non-genetically / non-ethnically linked people. I'm happy to argue that point in great detail if forced to.

---

Quote:Where in the world is consumerism NOT a dominant ideology?

Consumerism is dominant BECAUSE of the West but it is not a truly robust ideology in the end alone. It does not challenge ethnic-geopolitical-religious loyalties of the people who practice consumerism. It is not equivalent to Islam for example.

Anglo derived Humanism is the equivalent of Islam -- but it lacks contour at the moment with the descent of Christianity.

(January 1, 2014 at 5:07 am)theyear12013 Wrote: I'm being imprecise in language but don't agree. Han Chinese Nationalism is much more the dominant 'religion' than Buddhism imho. .

How does this demonstrate that buddhism is not on the rise?

Quote:80% of Japanese prefer no religion and if they do its likely closely related to Shinto Buddhism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_in_Japan -- whose war shrines are deeply offensive to the Chinese.

Shinto and Buddhism are two entirely separate religions

Quote: The latest tensions with China illustrate this. As anyone will tell you who visits Japan -- their culture definitely still has nationalistic tendencies -- and is extremely anti-immigrant and would not be considered tolerant of multiple cultures operating in its sphere

.

Like Korea, Vietnam and China you mean?

Quote:Consumerism is dominant BECAUSE of the West but it is not a truly robust ideology in the end alone. It does not challenge ethnic-geopolitical-religious loyalties of the people who practice consumerism. It is not equivalent to Islam for example.

Which is not what you wrote. you claimed that it was a special facet of western culture- its universal

Welcome to atheist forums, where everyone is a masterdebator who debates about masterdebating while masterbaiting for the whole intent of undebating their debatable urges, which are masterly debated through an entire course of masterbation.

(January 1, 2014 at 7:40 am)Belac Enrobso Wrote: Welcome to atheist forums, where everyone is a masterdebator who debates about masterdebating while masterbaiting for the whole intent of undebating their debatable urges, which are masterly debated through an entire course of masterbation.

I'm a cunning linguist myself