I am reading Dinesh D'Souza's "What's So Great About America," which has actually been very timely for my international politics class- I read his summary of Huntington's theory of the clash of civilization's the same day a classmate presented on it (though D'Souza and I feel differently about its ability to describe reality). I am working on articulating my thought on it. It has, at the least, pushed me to put my thoughts on my own American-ness as someone who has spent time in Germany, Egypt, and especially China into words.
I am reading another excellent article by a scholar (John Lewis Gaddis) which is tugging at similar strings of my identity. And a historian from the State University of New York at Buffalo was here last week and gave an excellent presentation on his current quest to understand world history and China's place in it. I am hoping to write a coherent post on my American identity when all of these things have percolated in my mind a bit longer, but I am thinking I will probably wait until I get to Korea after my semester ends and post then. I have started writing it three times now and am still struggling.
The essence of what I want to say is this: America has been the center of world civilization for at least half a century, and it's Western predecessors for centuries before that. D'Souza spends a lot of time on why this is justified, and makes a number of important points. However, a central civilization, a model nation, are not what the world community is looking for. As far as the principles of science, democracy, and capitalism (the three principles that D'Souza argues are Western civilization's greatest contributions, and justifications for their leadership) are concerned, they have found a model. What we are trying to find is not the country that everyone wants to live in, but a way for all of the countries in the world to work together.
I know that my voice is a very recent addition to the academic conversation on these topics, but I simply do not believe we are living in the same world as we were two centuries ago, and I don't think that my perspective can be dismissed entirely as naive. We are not living in a world where any one civilization or nation will be The Source of learning and progress- D'Souza is right in saying that in many ways that is the role the West has been playing. Humanity is developing to the point where we are learning how to function as a whole.
... I'm definitely gonna post on this again when I am not painfully aware that I have a lot of other homework to do.
In other updates: I am loving my International Politics class. I am learning so much. I am loving the many perspectives and the deep thinking in our readings and after every lecture I feel like my brain is on fire with thinking. Shi Bin is a fantastic professor. My other classes are all decent.
My Chinese is improving, but slowly. My vocabulary is still frustratingly limited but in my conversations, especially with Xiaoxuan and Rong Fan, I am finding myself more and more able to at least describe a word or concept, even if I don't know the translation.
I am going to Shanghai with Shirin tomorrow (so yes, I should really be doing homework). I love train rides. I'm very excited.
I have had a lot of lovely conversations, in English, in Chinese, through Skype, through email, and in person, this week. It has been really good.
Today's title brought to you by The Nurse Who Loved Me by Failure
Countdown to landing in Korea and seeing Christian Yetter: 29 days.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I feel like most academic discussion of "development" is inherently eurocentric. When we talk about GDP or economic growth, we're talking (to oversimplify) about capitalist success, which other cultures (particularly asia, if I might oversimplify) might not share; for example, what if we measure countries based on social cohesion? In that case, Japan would probably be the "greatest" country, and the US far distant. I feel like because we're westerners and we've been taught that capitalism and democracy are Good Things, we never question the social values behind them, which is crucial when determining the dominant social values of a global culture. Most modern nations consider stoning barbaric, but is laissez-faire economics any less callous?
ReplyDeleteI wish my countrymen would question everything and not rely on the status quo!
Ahem!
ReplyDeleteOne of the suggestions for achieving world peace that T. H. White made in The Once and Future King was to do away with national borders entirely. But, I think, his secret dream may've been that in so doing, the world would be making a bigger England... ;P
Indeed, both of you!
ReplyDeleteD'Souza would completely agree with you, Austin, that current discussion of 'development' is eurocentric, and I believe argue that that is justified.
I think that D'Souza is right, though, that we in the US may be too quick to dismiss the value of capitalism (he is an immigrant from India) and not see how highly the influence of the West is valued in much of the rest of the world.
I think he is wrong in saying that proving the West's value makes it okay for its to be the only voice, or the main voice, discussing how the world should move forward.
Though I also haven't finished his book yet, so I'll definitely be posting on this subject again.
ReplyDelete