EB and the West

[SigniferOne]

Since the thread on Romans in EB became closed, I didn't have a chance to participate in it further. Having much respect for Shigawire I lamented his participation in it, at which point he demanded I define what Westernism is, and what qualities, in what way, would be classified in EB as anti-Western. Please note, this is not a diminution of the time and efforts put into the mod, which command from me nothing but the greatest respect and attention. This is an observation of EB since its earliest beginnings in 2004, since my ancient arguments with Psycho V and debates with Khelvan and Urnamma. I don't know what I could hope to achieve in this sub-forum, preaching to a highly hostile crowd, except that paullus wrote a highly intelligent post in the Romans thread, and I regretted not having a chance to respond to him; I still harbor hope of convincing Shigawire also.

In response to what follows, I would like to hear a more substantive response than "we put the most time into the Romans, so your argument is moot". If you spit on the Roman values and achievements, and spend 17 months researching proper lists of cognomens, that is not in any way better than despising the very core of Nazi Germany, and devotedly researching the minutae staff of the Waffen SS and proper structure of the Hitlejungend. The responses in the Roman thread (celebrations on Cannae etc) show beyond any doubt that Roman culture and values hold a dismal place in the EB team, no matter what a more well-intentioned member of that team would want to believe. The only remaining question is why.

------

Westernism, briefly, constitutes a set of characteristics, some which are merely normative, and some of which are qualitative; namely, some Western qualities are simply Western heritage without a judgment of better or worse, and others are characteristics of quality you can use to determine worth in relation to other nations.

I'll stick to the ancient times, since that is more appropriate to our debate. The following characteristics define the ancient (classical) west --

in literature:
-formalized philosophy
-formalized oratory
-formalized grammar
-formalized architecture
-formalized algebra and geometry
-formalized engineering
-formalized medicine

in art:
-fully formed ideal of man
-fully formed sculptural technique

in government:
-fully formed free government
-a fully developed bureaucracy and compendious administration
-national hatred for self-submission
-distrust and constant replacement of politicians
-politicians, people administering by choice and subject to check

in philosophy:
-fully formed notion of virtue
-fully formed view of reason and emotion
-fully formed view of pleasure
-fully formed view of personal happiness
-fully formed guide to life



Here's what's not a qualitative difference of the ancient West: music. If you've ever heard reproductions of ancient music, they sound hardly different from oriental music or from egyptian music, or semitic music. So that music is not specifically Western; nor is it anti-Western; it's just music simply, not a degree of comparison in those times and in that state of development. It is completely different and primitive compared to the Western music, as brought to bear by J.S. Bach in 1600s. Similarly ancient painting; it is only in some parts fully Western, and mainly only proto-Western, Pompeii and Apelles included; Western painting only first springs in full form with the perspective and vanishing point of Donatello and Masaccio.

Now, a note about non-classical societies in the West: race does not determine culture. Just because people lived in the same area where a typically Western culture later flourished, does not mean they themselves were Western or had qualities of that kind.

Celtic societies, were not Western. Just like Mycenean Greeks were not Western. They did not possess anywhere near the number of qualities for comparison (being a more primitive society), and the qualities they did possess were not Western, but otherwise. At best, you could say that some Celtic properties were proto-Western, whether that be from constant interchange with Romans/Greeks, or from some internal driving force for change, it doesn't matter. Germanic societies were plainly non Western. In fact, Germanic societies were anti-Western, which is shown in what happens to Western qualities when Germanics take over -- those qualities have no value, are quickly destroyed or forgotten.

The pro-Celtic movement and pro-Germanic movements that EB is so proud and so full of are the result of the 19th century racist movements that were no longer satisfied with the Western culture in the West. Prior to the 19th century, no one would even think of having Celtic pride. Classical (western) heritage was the only thing that mattered. Celtic and Germanic myths were swiftly overturned and destroyed by the Classical Prometheus and Jupiter. As late as 1950s, a character in a movie without even thinking it exclaimed, "By Jove! I don't know what you mean!" Romans, even not Greeks, were the profound teachers of the West prior to the 19th century. Seneca, not Plato, was judged by Joseph Addison as the greater philosopher, whatever you may think of that. But still, Greeks were highly respected, and Romans revered beyond measure; all other peoples in Western lands were despised and looked down on; descendants of Celtic people despised Celtic culture. Now the race is on to overturn this value hierarchy, to bring racial qualities above cultural qualities, under the banner of cynicism and skepticism. And EB is in many ways the herald, and on the forefront of that.

[abou]

The crux of your argument rests on the thought that the Celts and Germans lacked the qualities you mention above. Recent scholarly work has shown that not to be the case. Because of that, your whole argument (as harsh as this may sound) is null, regardless of how long you make it.

[SigniferOne]

I don't think you've read my post properly:

Celtic societies, were not Western. Just like Mycenean Greeks were not Western. [..] At best, you could say that some Celtic properties were proto-Western, whether that be from constant interchange with Romans/Greeks, or from some internal driving force for change, it doesn't matter. Germanic societies were plainly non Western. In fact, Germanic societies were anti-Western, which is shown in what happens to Western qualities when Germanics take over -- those qualities have no value, are quickly destroyed or forgotten.

[Urnamma]

Since the thread on Romans in EB became closed, I didn't have a chance to participate in it further. Having much respect for Shigawire I lamented his participation in it, at which point he demanded I define what Westernism is, and what qualities, in what way, would be classified in EB as anti-Western. Please note, this is not a diminution of the time and efforts put into the mod, which command from me nothing but the greatest respect and attention. This is an observation of EB since its earliest beginnings in 2004, since my ancient arguments with Psycho V and debates with Khelvan and Urnamma. I don't know what I could hope to achieve in this sub-forum, preaching to a highly hostile crowd, except that paullus wrote a highly intelligent post in the Romans thread, and I regretted not having a chance to respond to him; I still harbor hope of convincing Shigawire also.

It's actually rather interesting to be thought of as anti-western, considering that I am often considered the opposite in professional circles (at least as regards philosophy).

In response to what follows, I would like to hear more substantive responses than "we put the most time into the Romans, so your argument is moot". If you spit on the Roman values and achievements, and spend 17 months researching proper lists of cognomens, that is not in any way better than despising the very core of Nazi Germany, and devotedly researching the minutae staff of the Waffen SS and proper structure of the Hitlejungend. The responses in the Roman thread (celebrations on Cannae etc) show beyond any doubt that Roman culture and values hold a dismal place in the EB team, no matter what a more well-intentioned member of that team would want to believe. The only remaining question is why.

Granted, some things are over the top, and some posters can be as well. However, what is generally objected to is the theory that romans are somehow superior to everyone culturally and militarily. This is the opinion of many, and it is a rather unfortunate and dim one. I am no cultural relativist, but the Romans and Greeks do not need 95% of all things attributed to them, their cultural achievements stand out enough.

Westernism, briefly, constitutes a set of characteristics, some which are merely normative, and some of which are qualitative; namely, some Western qualities are simply Western heritage without a judgment of better or worse, and others are characteristics of quality you can use to determine worth in relation to other nations.

I am not quite sure why it has to be an -ism, but I digress.

I'll stick to the ancient times, since that is more appropriate to our debate. The following characteristics define the ancient (classical) west --

Alright.

in literature:
-formalized philosophy
-formalized oratory
-formalized grammar
-formalized architecture
-formalized algebra and geometry
-formalized engineering
-formalized medicine

Grammar should not be up there, as it is a unique characteristic to every formal language. Semites had formalized grammar long before Romans or Greeks. Note that these languages based their alphabet on the Phoenician.

I suppose the Architectural styles of the Near East and Egypt (formalized and updated for thousands of years) are not formal enough for you?

Medicine, likewise, could more accurately be considered a Greek/Phoenician development, as each built off the achievements of the other.

in art:
-fully formed ideal of man
-fully formed sculptural technique

Wrong again on the second. Note that early Greek styles were borrowed from the established Egyptian technique.

in government:
-fully formed free government
-a fully developed bureaucracy and compendious administration
-national hatred for self-submission
-distrust and constant replacement of politicians
-politicians, people administering by choice and subject to check

The first is certainly untrue, and begs the question 'what is free government?' Is it a government in which 51% can vote themselves the property and liberty of the other 49%? A national hatred of self-submission existed among Celts too.

in philosophy:
-fully formed notion of virtue
-fully formed view of reason and emotion
-fully formed view of pleasure
-fully formed view of personal happiness
-fully formed guide to life

No real argument here, as I am fond of saying: 'the Greeks invented rational thought'.

Here's what's not a qualitative difference of the ancient West: music. If you've ever heard reproductions of ancient music, they sound hardly different from oriental music or from egyptian music, or semitic music. So that music is not specifically Western; nor is it anti-Western; it's just music simply, not a degree of comparison in those times and in that state of development. It is completely different and primitive compared to the Western music, as brought to bear by J.S. Bach in 1600s. Similarly ancient painting; it is only in some parts fully Western, and mainly only proto-Western, Pompeii and Apelles included; Western painting only first springs in full form with the perspective and vanishing point of Donatello and Masaccio.

Ok... Have you ever seen frescoes and funerary portraits?

Now, a note about non-classical societies in the West: race does not determine culture. Just because people lived in the same area where a typically Western culture later flourished, does not mean they themselves were Western or had qualities of that kind.

I don't think anyone has said this.

Celtic societies, were not Western. Just like Mycenean Greeks were not Western. They did not possess anywhere near the number of qualities for comparison (being a more primitive society), and the qualities they did possess were not Western, but otherwise. At best, you could say that some Celtic properties were proto-Western, whether that be from constant interchange with Romans/Greeks, or from some internal driving force for change, it doesn't matter. Germanic societies were plainly non Western. In fact, Germanic societies were anti-Western, which is shown in what happens to Western qualities when Germanics take over -- those qualities have no value, are quickly destroyed or forgotten.

Which is why the legal systems of the United States and Great Britain (among others) are based on Germanic laws?

The pro-Celtic movement and pro-Germanic movements that EB is so proud and so full of are the result of the 19th century racist movements that were no longer satisfied with the Western culture in the West. Prior to the 19th century, no one would even think of having Celtic pride. Classical (western) heritage was the only thing that mattered. Celtic and Germanic myths were swiftly overturned and destroyed by the Classical Prometheus and Jupiter. As late as 1950s, a character in a movie without even thinking it exclaimed, "By Jove! I don't know what you mean!" Romans, even not Greeks, were the profound teachers of the West prior to the 19th century. Seneca, not Plato, was judged by Joseph Addison as the greater philosopher, whatever you may think of that. But still, Greeks were highly respected, and Romans revered beyond measure; all other peoples in Western lands were despised and looked down on; descendants of Celtic people despised Celtic culture. Now the race is on to overturn this value hierarchy, to bring racial qualities above cultural qualities, under the banner of cynicism and skepticism. And EB is in many ways the herald, and on the forefront of that.

This is asinine to me. We're not pro-germanic, we're pro-'not making them into stereotypical slathering cavemen'. Note that being 'proud' of celtic culture was a good way to get yourself killed during the Norman and English rule in Ireland.

Being obsessed with everything western is interesting, and largely missing the point. One cannot be Aristotelean and Platonic at the same time (Despite Boethius' attempt). You've ignored the Judaic and Christian elements in Western culture as well, which I find rather fascinating. I think that perhaps we ought to discuss singular facets of what makes the Romans and Greeks so superior to everyone else in every way, rather than painting with broad brush strokes. I'm willing to discuss it with you, if we keep it civil.

[Urnamma]

The crux of your argument rests on the thought that the Celts and Germans lacked the qualities you mention above. Recent scholarly work has shown that not to be the case. Because of that, your whole argument (as harsh as this may sound) is null, regardless of how long you make it.

That's not entirely correct (his argument being null). You're building a strawman here, in all reality.

[abou]

My bad.

[Urnamma]

A note to potential posters... please do not make inflammatory comments on this thread, nor attack anyone with silly arguments. Perhaps we can learn something from a reasoned debate and conversation on EB's depictions and goals.

[Tellos Athenaios]

in literature:
-formalized philosophy
-formalized oratory
-formalized grammar
-formalized architecture
-formalized algebra and geometry
-formalized engineering
-formalized medicine

in art:
-fully formed ideal of man
-fully formed sculptural technique

in government:
-fully formed free government
-a fully developed bureaucracy and compendious administration
-national hatred for self-submission
-distrust and constant replacement of politicians
-politicians, people administering by choice and subject to check

in philosophy:
-fully formed notion of virtue
-fully formed view of reason and emotion
-fully formed view of pleasure
-fully formed view of personal happiness
-fully formed guide to life

And we have a winner! ...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ancient China

.

Oh, before you start aguing against it, all of philosophy, all of government, all of lterature and all of art applies just as much, or even more to China in those days than to any state whatsoever in 'Europe'.

There's just one exception, and that is the brief Ch'in dynasty - and then we're mostly talking about the first and only real Emperor. Granted Chinese kings or emperors didn't really submit to the judge or people like some Celtic kings appear to have done - but neither did the Roman emperors, or the Diadochi kings / emperors, now did they?

[dezzerx]

Signiferone, you make it sound to me that if you value Germanic or Celtic culture and if you are proud of what your Germanic or Celtic ancestors achieved that you are a racist.

And yes, I am proud of my ancestors and their culture. I do not however hate other peoples or races.

You talk about the qualities of a culture as if a people with a culture with some lesser qualities should just toss aside their culture and accept the one with the "better" qualities? If they don't do so, theyare just being racist and blind to the truth?

I am proud, tho not overly proud so I become blinded from the truth, of my Germanic roots and will remain to be so.

[oudysseos]

Although Signifer's post is long and detailed, I have to agree with Abou. I am going to try and be rational, but I found much of what Signifer had to say deeply offensive and full of cultural prejudice.

The whole argument is ( by the standards of Western Classical Philosophy and Logical Thinking ) poorly structured and full of weird assertions not supported by scholarship. The argument fails totally if it can be demonstrated that Signifer's list is not original or unique to Western Culture, and Urnamma has already done an excellent job in doing just that. Not much to add there, but I do have to say that I had a huge laugh at algebra being attributed to the ancient classical west. Look it up. Even wikipedia gets that one right.

And that bit about music is pure ignorance and personal prejudice. He thinks music prior to JS Bach sounds 'semitic', 'oriental' or 'egyptian' (what is semitic music supposed to sound like? How do you objectively define something as sounding 'semitic'?), therefore it can't be 'westernism'. Never mind the huge importance of their own music to people like Socrates, Plato, Euclid. Never mind the pivotal role the investigation of musical phenomena played in developing geometry (but not algebra ) Never mind that the 'oriental' sounding music of ancient greece was an integral and inalienable part of the 'western' drama of ancient greece that contributed so much to philosophy and those 'fully formed' notions of virtue, pleasure, and personal happiness. Purely circular reasoning through and through.

Actually, Signifer's ignorance about algebra is a perfect illustration of the wishful thinking that informs his definition of what it means to be western: he has picked out the things that he thinks are admirable or impressive and claims them for western culture, regardless of their actual origin. Anything else is non-western, regardless of where the Celts (f'r instance) actually lived and followed their highly developed material culture, or how much of that 'non-western' culture influenced the development of 'westernism'. But hey, don't believe me- ask Herodotus, who often attributes much of greek culture and science with oriental origins. And he was born in Turkey.

Which is a good segue to what is really the main thing wrong with Signifer's post. Most of what he values as 'westernism' (political and ethical philosophy, science, law, art, engineering etc etc) was transmitted to the west through eastern sources (as latin translations of arabic or persian translations of latin or greek originals) (does he even know who Abu Musa Jabir or Ibn Rushd or al-Farabi or Ibn Sina were?), so who is now to say what is western and what is eastern? Hell, for a long time if you wanted to read the defining works of 'westernism' first you had to learn ARABIC. Without the availability of 400,000 books captured from the Moors at Cordoba, or the works plundered by crusaders from Constantinople and the mid-EAST, there would have been no Renaissance, and no 'westernism'.

Gaah. Trying to keep calm. Trying not to resort to adhominem attacks. Would be so satisfying. Must resist.

Ahem. Sorry. Dude, Signifer, with all due respect, your concept of western culture is terribly outdated. Thankfully, serious scholarship and popular history have moved on. To everyone else, try

Barbarians, Terry Jones
Black Athena volume One: The Fabrication of Ancient Greece 1785-1985, Martin Bernal
Empires of the Word:A language History of the World Nicholas Ostler
Babylon, Memphis, Persepolis: Eastern Contexts of Greek Culture, Walter Burkett (this one really upsets Signifer's apple cart)
The Ancient Celts , Barry Cunliffe

Obviously don't take any of these books as the whole truth and nothing but the truth: everyone has a perspective of their own that informs their work. Make your own judgments, just try to base them on the facts, and not on what you wish the facts had been.

[Bootsiuv]

What is "fully formed free government"? I live in America in the 21st century, and we don't even have a fully formed free government. I don't think such a thing has ever existed, to be honest. Many of the things you speak of as "fully formed" have been constantly evolving over the course of time. Even today, many of the things you speak of continue to evolve.

Do you have a "fully formed" concept of happiness? Or reason and logic? These things simply do not exist. Happiness is relative to many things, one being personal opinion. How it can be fully formed is beyond me. The same can be applied to almost all of the other things you speak of. If these ideas were fully formed, we would still be using them exactly as the ancients did.

Your argument also indirectly implies that easterners did not have "fully formed" concepts and thoughts. As far as I can tell, the Mesopotamian cultures (Sumeria, Babylon, etc.) and Egypt are considered more eastern than western in those times. Those civilizations were writing, conducting the business of rather centralized gov't (some times more than others), and building great monuments and art 2000 years before the Mycenaen Greeks. I can't help but think you're seriously underestimating the contributions these and other ancient eastern civilizations gave to the Greeks, who in turn gave them to the Romans.

Westernization in ancient times was mostly eastern ideas and logic which had been adapted to western life.

[Shigawire]

My wish to have SigniferOne define to me what Western-ism is started when he PM'ed me and called most of EB's - and "even" some of my own - comments as "anti-Western." (though he conveniently did not cite quotations)

Being a student of propaganda, my radar went up on the word "anti-Western", as a word identical to those used in totalitarian societies to quell dissent.
That is why the definition was very interesting to me.

Now, with public discussion, the truth can be gleaned.

[oudysseos]

"Romans, even not Greeks, were the profound teachers of the West prior to the 19th century. Seneca, not Plato, was judged by Joseph Addison as the greater philosopher, whatever you may think of that. But still, Greeks were highly respected, and Romans revered beyond measure; all other peoples in Western lands were despised and looked down on; descendants of Celtic people despised Celtic culture"

I've been trying to make sense of this statement for half an hour but it's just meaningless, unparseable drivel. It's so disjointed that the term 'non-sequitur' seems totally inadequate. I'm not trying to be insulting, I just can't make heads nor tails of the words. Why does the opinion of an obscure English whig politician and society flibbertigibbet from the late seventeenth century have any bearing on anything? Can I have some of what you're smoking?



"A man must be both stupid and uncharitable who believes there is no virtue or truth but on his own side."

"There are three sides to every story -- your side, my side and the right side."

-J. Addison

[Urnamma]

Although Signifer's post is long and detailed, I have to agree with Abou. I am going to try and be rational, but I found much of what Signifer had to say deeply offensive and full of cultural prejudice.

The whole argument is ( by the standards of Western Classical Philosophy and Logical Thinking ) poorly structured and full of weird assertions not supported by scholarship. The argument fails totally if it can be demonstrated that Signifer's list is not original or unique to Western Culture, and Urnamma has already done an excellent job in doing just that. Not much to add there, but I do have to say that I had a huge laugh at algebra being attributed to the ancient classical west. Look it up. Even wikipedia gets that one right.

And that bit about music is pure ignorance and personal prejudice. He thinks music prior to JS Bach sounds 'semitic', 'oriental' or 'egyptian' (what is semitic music supposed to sound like? How do you objectively define something as sounding 'semitic'?), therefore it can't be 'westernism'. Never mind the huge importance of their own music to people like Socrates, Plato, Euclid. Never mind the pivotal role the investigation of musical phenomena played in developing geometry (but not algebra ) Never mind that the 'oriental' sounding music of ancient greece was an integral and inalienable part of the 'western' drama of ancient greece that contributed so much to philosophy and those 'fully formed' notions of virtue, pleasure, and personal happiness. Purely circular reasoning through and through.

Actually, Signifer's ignorance about algebra is a perfect illustration of the wishful thinking that informs his definition of what it means to be western: he has picked out the things that he thinks are admirable or impressive and claims them for western culture, regardless of their actual origin. Anything else is non-western, regardless of where the Celts (f'r instance) actually lived and followed their highly developed material culture, or how much of that 'non-western' culture influenced the development of 'westernism'. But hey, don't believe me- ask Herodotus, who often attributes much of greek culture and science with oriental origins. And he was born in Turkey.

Which is a good segue to what is really the main thing wrong with Signifer's post. Most of what he values as 'westernism' (political and ethical philosophy, science, law, art, engineering etc etc) was transmitted to the west through eastern sources (as latin translations of arabic or persian translations of latin or greek originals) (does he even know who Abu Musa Jabir or Ibn Rushd or al-Farabi or Ibn Sina were?), so who is now to say what is western and what is eastern? Hell, for a long time if you wanted to read the defining works of 'westernism' first you had to learn ARABIC. Without the availability of 400,000 books captured from the Moors at Cordoba, or the works plundered by crusaders from Constantinople and the mid-EAST, there would have been no Renaissance, and no 'westernism'.

Gaah. Trying to keep calm. Trying not to resort to adhominem attacks. Would be so satisfying. Must resist.

Ahem. Sorry. Dude, Signifer, with all due respect, your concept of western culture is terribly outdated. Thankfully, serious scholarship and popular history have moved on. To everyone else, try

Barbarians, Terry Jones
Black Athena volume One: The Fabrication of Ancient Greece 1785-1985, Martin Bernal
Empires of the Word:A language History of the World Nicholas Ostler
Babylon, Memphis, Persepolis: Eastern Contexts of Greek Culture, Walter Burkett (this one really upsets Signifer's apple cart)
The Ancient Celts , Barry Cunliffe

Obviously don't take any of these books as the whole truth and nothing but the truth: everyone has a perspective of there own that informs their work. Make your own judgments, just try to base them on the facts, and not on what you wish the facts had been.

Black Athena is something -I- take major offense to. That is just tripe.

There are plenty of wonderful things about ancient greece and rome... but what I take offense to is when people attribute more than the massive amount they did!

[tk-421]

it's just music simply, not a degree of comparison in those times and in that state of development. It is completely different and primitive compared to the Western music, as brought to bear by J.S. Bach in 1600s.

That's really a rather simplistic view of the development of music. First of all, your dates are wrong. Born in 1685, Bach wasn't doing a whole lot of composing in the 1600s. More importantly, saying that Bach "brought to bear" "western" music not only ignores contemporaries of Bach like Handel, Telemann, Vivaldi, and Albinoni - all of whom we're more prominent in their day than Bach - but it also discredits all those who came before. Have you ever heard church motets and oratorios from the the late 16th and 17th centuries? Although generally not as complex as the extreme contrapuntal music of Bach (although you should note that Bach was not the first to write contrapuntal fugues and such), there is nothing "primitive" about them. Not to discredit Bach, his compositions were very important to the development of music, but any argument that states that all that is good in music stems from Bach and all that came before is "primitive" is fundamentally flawed.

[artavazd]

This may sound very simplistic, but most indo-european cultures shared similarities between them including music. People forget that all the way to western china there were indo-european speaking people ( Tocharians) One can not look at the contemporary cultures of the world and think that it has always been that way. What is Turkey today was one of the main centers of what is now "westernism) For example traditional Armenian music has similarities with Celtic music.

[KARTLOS]

And we have a winner! ...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ancient China

.

Oh, before you start aguing against it, all of philosophy, all of government, all of lterature and all of art applies just as much, or even more to China in those days than to any state whatsoever in 'Europe'.

There's just one exception, and that is the brief Ch'in dynasty - and then we're mostly talking about the first and only real Emperor. Granted Chinese kings or emperors didn't really submit to the judge or people like some Celtic kings appear to have done - but neither did the Roman emperors, or the Diadochi kings / emperors, now did they?

free government? yeah thats right. i would have expected more from an eb member than crass sinophilia.

[KARTLOS]

Signiferone, you make it sound to me that if you value Germanic or Celtic culture and if you are proud of what your Germanic or Celtic ancestors achieved that you are a racist.

And yes, I am proud of my ancestors and their culture. I do not however hate other peoples or races.

You talk about the qualities of a culture as if a people with a culture with some lesser qualities should just toss aside their culture and accept the one with the "better" qualities? If they don't do so, theyare just being racist and blind to the truth?

I am proud, tho not overly proud so I become blinded from the truth, of my Germanic roots and will remain to be so.

as a belgium (if that is indeed what you are) are you not of mixed celtic/germainic roots?

[KARTLOS]

My wish to have SigniferOne define to me what Western-ism is started when he PM'ed me and called most of EB's - and "even" some of my own - comments as "anti-Western." (though he conveniently did not cite quotations)

Being a student of propaganda, my radar went up on the word "anti-Western", as a word identical to those used in totalitarian societies to quell dissent.
That is why the definition was very interesting to me.

Now, with public discussion, the truth can be gleaned.

now that you have read it would you agree that it is a definition used uniquely by signifier 1?

[KARTLOS]

Without the availability of 400,000 books captured from the Moors at Cordoba, or the works plundered by crusaders from Constantinople and the mid-EAST, there would have been no Renaissance, and no 'westernism'.

i agree with much of what you are saying, but i think you have certainly overstepped the mark here. it would be very hard to convincingly argue that without those events the renaissance would never have happened. the paucity of knowledge in western europe is often exagerated for starters.

p.s you should be ashamed to reference black athena. if the copy is your own i suggest you burn it.

[artavazd]

p.s you should be ashamed to reference black athena. if the copy is your own i suggest you burn it.


I had a professor in college he was African American and a Racist He would say things to the caucasian students that if a caucasian teacher had said things like that to black students he or she would have been fired and most likely gone to prison on the charges of hate crimes. He was not a history teacher, but an instructor in the teacher credential program. He asked me my ethnic backgroun I told him I'm Armenian, and this dumbass said well you know that about 500 years ago your people were about the same color as me, until they mixed with whites!!! My first reaction was shock. I thought to my self how can a college profesor be this dumb! I started giving him a little history lesson and this guy starts jumping from topic to topic he first says that well the sicilians which is the center of italian civilization was african. I refute that then he talks about Greece and the greeks being black refering to "black athena" I refute that then he asks me how old are you? I tell him my age 23 and he says well Im 60 ive been around u knowww. I laugh at him i told him you can be 160 and you'll still be wrong. Infront of the entire class I offed to make a deal with him. I told him in the 3000 years of Armenian history if he can find one source that relates armenians to africans I would drop the class with an F but if he doesnt than the entire class gets an A. This idiot waved me off trying to act profesional telling me lets get back to the subject

[KARTLOS]

p.s you should be ashamed to reference black athena. if the copy is your own i suggest you burn it.


I had a professor in college he was African American and a Racist He would say things to the caucasian students that if a caucasian teacher had said things like that to black students he or she would have been fired and most likely gone to prison on the charges of hate crimes. He was not a history teacher, but an instructor in the teacher credential program. He asked me my ethnic backgroun I told him I'm Armenian, and this dumbass said well you know that about 500 years ago your people were about the same color as me, until they mixed with whites!!! My first reaction was shock. I thought to my self how can a college profesor be this dumb! I started giving him a little history lesson and this guy starts jumping from topic to topic he first says that well the sicilians which is the center of italian civilization was african. I refute that then he talks about Greece and the greeks being black refering to "black athena" I refute that then he asks me how old are you? I tell him my age 23 and he says well Im 60 ive been around u knowww. I laugh at him i told him you can be 160 and you'll still be wrong. Infront of the entire class I offed to make a deal with him. I told him in the 3000 years of Armenian history if he can find one source that relates armenians to africans I would drop the class with an F but if he doesnt than the entire class gets an A. This idiot waved me off trying to act profesional telling me lets get back to the subject

what a cunt, i would have got up and slapped him.

people like that deserve to be shot, there should be no place for them in a university. political correctness gone mad indeed.

[artavazd]

If it wasnt for the quota system he probebly wont even be there


the sad thing is non of the caucasian students said anything to defend themselves. This idiot was insulting everyone including females in the class. After the whole incident There were somestudents that came up and told me they appricated what i did, and said that they were afraid of being called a racist if they said anything. It is sad very sad

[oudysseos]

A. Black Athena is highly controversial, politicised ( the author is a marxist ), and not particularly well written.
B. Martin Bernal is clearly completely and totally bonkers, often just plain wrong and obviously a total asshole.
Also he lets his desire to prove his case overcome his respect for the truth. Hardly a unique sin, eh Signifer?
C. Anyone who ignores or burns books/ideas because they don't like the author or the conclusion is a bit of a f***wit.

In fact I disagree with a lot (most) of what Bernal writes, yet some of what he says about the history of classical scholarship is not worthless. I could wish that his argument had been made by someone nicer and with a higher regard for good scholarship. For me the difficulty is that classical Greek culture is so central to western culture that it is nigh impossible to have any kind of objective perspective on it. That's precisely why I have read some of Black Athena (sorry, Martin, I skipped a lot of your ranting), because I like to think that I'm grown up enough to entertain another point of view, and I think that you're not entitled to disagree with a book until you have read it. If this was Third Reich Total War I would encourage people to read Mein Kampf. Recommending a book is not the same as endorsing its views.

And hey, you know what, I have almost precisely the same reaction to the first post of this thread- I think it's badly written, shows poor scholarship and has an obvious political agenda. But I don't think that Signifer should be burnt or ignored. And it may come as a surprise to him but I do agree that there is something called Western Culture and that it has great value (after all my degree is in classics). I just don't think that he has shown that he knows what it is.

[KARTLOS]

C. Anyone who ignores or burns books/ideas because they don't like the author or the conclusion is a bit of a f***wit.



. That's precisely why I have read some of Black Athena because I like to think that I'm grown up enough to entertain another point of view, and I think that you're not entitled to disagree with a book until you have read it.

.

but now you have read it surely you can burn it? it would be cleansing for your soul, you could consider it a sacrifice to the spirit of common sense!

[oudysseos]

KARTLOS- Let's not make this about Black Athena. I think everybody should have a look at it and make up their own minds.

Mea Culpa, I was (only very slightly) overstating the importance of Muslin scholarship to the renaissance in order to make a point.
I was annoyed at Signifer's didactic tone and his wildly unfounded assertions about the definition of the ancient classical west (his redundancy). His inclusion of algebra as one of the achievements of Graeco-Roman civilization is just the most obvious example of his cultural prejudice and his willingness to claim other people's accomplishments as 'westernisms' own.
The ironic (for Signifer) part is that regardless of their own cultural background people like Muhammad bin Musa al-Khwarizmi (that's the algebra guy), ibn Sina or Ibn Rushd were totally in love with Aristotle, Euclid, Ptolemy and Archimedes and kept them alive for us. We owe the survival of most of the important texts of westernism to easterners! Without Muslim scholars we would have no Aristotle. And we only have what they though was good enough to translate into arabic, so how western are we now?
The same applies to medicine- another one of Signifers defining characteristics of westernism that he GOT TOTALLY WRONG.

**Goes away and has a nice cuppa**

Hey well how bout them Twins, eh?

But seriously, It is difficult to overestimate Western Culture's debt to the East. I know it's only wikipedia, but still have a look:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_t...e_12th_century

Kinda hard to find a sentence without an arabic name in there. Anyone feeling slightly humble and less Romano-centric?

[keravnos]

Black Athena... or how a way of depicting figures on vases (which was abandoned later as artistic styles changed), became a rallying flag for African Americans with an agenda and a set goal in mind.

I never did get that. There were major, MAJOR empires that thrived in "Black" Africa (to differentiate from people of Lower Egypt and Mediterraneand coast who aren't) at any one point. Meroe/Nubia, Axum, Many kingdoms in the area of Niger, and best of all Great Zimbabwe.

Why not embracing your culture fully, and be proud of it and go mind-raping young students about people who had absolutely no relation to what you are saying, instead?

a small guide to how NOT to be a historian.

1. take an artistic method (black figures over white background) as in the below vase of 5th century BCE)

Circe offers cup to Odysseus; end 5th century BCE
swine-man in background. Ahtens, National Archaeological Museum

or even later ones who have men painted as black and women painted as white (another way to create antithesis on people who were basically wearing the same clothes)

birth of Athena from Zeus. Greek
New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art

or... as pointed to by this hellenistic painting,

Men were outside tilling their fields, brandishing their wares, being soldiers and generally earning a living, thus getting a tan while the women were "protected" indoors without much rights but an obligation to have a family white was a desired quality back then when female beauty was on display (It is not generally known but Ancient greek women were treated much like property). Whereas Pahlavan and Saka women were generally treated in a much better light, with Sarmatians according to Herodotos having an armoured contingent of ONLY women warriors.

2. Project your own bias-goals into it.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

However wronged one must feel to have his ancestors snatched from their own continent and brought to another land to live and die for many generations as slaves, WHICH IS DEAD WRONG, no doubt about it, it doesn't give those people the right to assume false identities, or try to find "hidden secrets" where there aren't any!!!

3. Lie, lie, lie to keep your own little moment of "Look mom I'm famous!" known to the world, blatantly disregarding things like the fact that there were other methods of drawing figures, like the following ones...(later than the one shown above)


and


or even white on white with colour (different artistic style)


There are basically thousands upon thousands of examples, as there are thousands upon thousands of ancient greek vase fragments which can depict what I am saying. A book on art can also be far more precise than I will ever be. Still, it is kind of sad to see art history being turned into " they live among us" kind of conspiracy theories.

So...how were "black" africans depicted back then?

found in London, British Museum

[Basileus Seleukeia]

people like that deserve to be shot, there should be no place for them in a university. political correctness gone mad indeed.

Kartlos, for yourself's sake I hope that you were drunk when you wrote this. Saying that racists deserve to be shot is the same thing as saying that one "race" has to be entirely killed. The sole wish of killing somebody for his political intentions is a shame. Btw, if a policeman would read this, he would be forced by law to get as many information about your location and give it to the police. well, everyone here would be forced by law.
I do not want to defend racism, I hate it, but countering that with a murderous rage is simply the wrong way. Seriously, that Professor should be kicked out of the university, but surely nothing worse, as even to those subjects, human rights apply.

[Treverer]

Kartlos, for yourself's sake I hope that you were drunk when you wrote this. Saying that racists deserve to be shot is the same thing as saying that one "race" has to be entirely killed. The sole wish of killing somebody for his political intentions is a shame. Btw, if a policeman would read this, he would be forced by law to get as many information about your location and give it to the police. well, everyone here would be forced by law.
I do not want to defend racism, I hate it, but countering that with a murderous rage is simply the wrong way. Seriously, that Professor should be kicked out of the university, but surely nothing worse, as even to those subjects, human rights apply.

Seconded!

[Krusader]

I don't have any voodoo mod powers, but can someone who do please split up this thread, because this is about EB and anti-westernism, NOT Black Athena.