Pak Tea House » Uncategorized » Why the West? Race, Religion, Culture and Development

Why the West? Race, Religion, Culture and Development

January 15th, 2011 | 13 Comments

By Dr. Niaz Murtaza

Until East Asia’s rise, white-majority countries monopolized progress, allowing white supremacists to claim race-based differences in IQs. However, scientific evidence quickly refuted this theory and soon no serious writer dared propound racist theories. Attention then shifted to the supposed superiority of Christianity, especially of the ‘Protestant ethic’, in facilitating progress. This theory receives some backing in the west even today, despite its weaknesses.

First, there is an absence of rigorous empirical evidence. Sans evidence, proponents provide a selective, self-serving listing of teachings from different religions to show that Christianity encourages development-friendly attributes, such as hard work and risk-inclination, while others do not. Thus, some argue that Islam discourages risk-taking and personal responsibility by propagating fate. However, like other Abrahamic religions, Islamic teachings about ultimate judgment based on worldly deeds emphasize personal responsibility. The ban on interest encourages greater risk-taking in investments than under other religions. Similar teachings related to all such attributes can be found in all major religions.

Second, teachings about these attributes (encouraging or discouraging) do not constitute the inflexible core of religions but merely their peripheral aspects. Thus, Islamic teachings about risk-taking, for example, are not sacrosanct–beyond modification or divergent interpretation–unlike the five basic pillars. Where people’s adherence to even core teachings is mixed, proposing religion as a major determinant on peripheral issues makes little sense.

Third, historical evidence undermines this theory. If Christianity facilitates development, why did it take 1000+ years for Christian-majority countries to start developing? Why did China, the Abbasids and India start developing, however modestly, before Europe? Why did Europe develop only after the church’s influence declined? Why have so many Christian-majority countries in Africa still not developed? Why are non-Christian countries in Asia developing–more rapidly than Christian countries ever did? Nor do arguments about Protestant virtues withstand serious scrutiny. Catholic Italy was the cradle of the Renaissance—the foundation of European development. France, Italy and Germany are more developed than virtually all Protestant European countries today.

Religion has certainly been abused under certain groups, thereby undermining larger societal progress, e.g., under the Taliban and during the peak of papal control in Europe whose end undoubtedly facilitated progress there. However, such instances represent particular interpretations of these religions and a small portion of their vast temporal and geographical spread. Thus, they have had limited impact on the current overall developmental fates of their adherents.

So, if not race or religion, what then? Proponents invoke the last bastion of western supremacist thought, i.e., that western culture, and not race and religion, is superior. Thus, the scope of claimed supremacy shrinks further! They suggest, with some empirical evidence, that hard work, risk-taking etc. are more common in western countries. Personal experiences reaffirm scholarly findings. East Asian success is also explained under this theory as based on increasing adoption of ‘superior’ western culture and becomes a basis for exhorting other countries to follow suit.

Culture includes food, clothing, music and festivities, which are at least as good in non-western cultures. Culture includes social/family structures. Western structures provide more freedom but non-western ones provide more support and stability. Culture includes work and general ethics, where western societies undoubtedly have a wide edge at present. So, unlike sweeping racial, religious and overall cultural superiority claims, a major western edge exists, presently, on only one cultural aspect, though admittedly one perhaps most crucial for material progress.

How did Europe achieve this superiority when around 1400s similar ethics prevailed even there, e.g., exploitation, voodooism, and fatalism? Renaissance is the answer, but why did it emerge only in Europe if racial, religious and other cultural differences (and even colder geography) were irrelevant? Renaissance emerged in the trading cities of Italy because they received intellectual currents from around the world, especially Asia, through the silk route. Additionally, Copernicus, Galileo and others, like most great thinkers, were cosmopolitan cultural and religious deviants. Thus, cities and individuals that catalyzed change did so not by immersing themselves deeply into ‘superior’ European religions and cultures, but by often bucking them and ‘virtually’ connecting themselves with the best thought globally (as happens even today). Thus, a deviant cosmopolitan minority, as almost always in cataclysmic changes, helped unleash society-wide change. Rationality and better work ethic are common human heritages, like the wheel and fire.

But why did Asia stagnate despite being ahead of Europe earlier? Just before Europe’s take-off, Baghdad, India and China were attacked by Central Asian nomads, who reveled particularly in destroying formal knowledge. India’s Nalanda University burned for 3 months after Khilji’s attack while Mongols piled the books in Baghdad’s House of Wisdom to cross the Tigris. Without such attacks, some Asian intellectual centers too may have soon then sparked Europe-like societal changes. While Europe suffered warfare too, its intellectual repositories survived them.

European colonialism followed Central Asian attacks in Asia. Many consider colonialism a blessing as it provided European technology. However, this could have occurred through trade too, as under the Silk route trade. Such inventions would then have fostered local progress rather than European exploitation. Japan is the only country to rival the West today, as it remained free but gained western inventions through trade. Freed from colonialism, some of the same Asian countries are growing the fastest today.

Thus, as throughout history, Europe developed not just due to good or better attributes alone, but through a combination of the good (work ethic), the bad (colonization), the lucky (escaping Mongolian attacks) and the copied (Asian knowledge). This has strong future implications. We clearly owe gratitude to western progress. However, western-style progress has also exposed humanity to serious risks, such as climate change, nuclear destruction, recessions and social breakdown, due to over-rationalism, over-individualism and over-risk inclination. Non-western holistic thought offers antidotes for these problems. Thus, humanity’s future lies not in cultural arrogance and monotony but, as almost always, in diversity and mutual respect and exchange.

The writer is a Research Associate in political economy issues at the University of California, Berkeley.
murtazaniaz@yahoo.com. This article recently appeared in Dawn.

Written by admin

Filed under: Uncategorized · Tags: Niaz Murtaza, Religion, West, western

13 Responses to "Why the West? Race, Religion, Culture and Development"

Amaar says:

January 15, 2011 at 9:14 am

Interesting read
Fellow Pakistani says:

January 15, 2011 at 11:09 am

Christian Europe developed after abandoning Christian teachings as presented by their clergy.
Muslim Asia declined after adopting Islamic teachings as presented by our clergy.
Fellow Pakistani says:

January 15, 2011 at 11:17 am

“However, western-style progress has also exposed humanity to serious risks, such as climate change, nuclear destruction, recessions and social breakdown, due to over-rationalism, over-individualism and over-risk inclination. ”

I highly recommend a book that tells about flaws in Western thoughts and why Islam has better solutions to today’s problems faced by the West, written in 1942.
THE NEW WORLD ORDER
BY MAULANA MUHAMMAD ALI
http://aaiil.org/text/books/mali/newworldorder/newworldorder.shtml
Andy Martin says:

January 16, 2011 at 12:22 am

Lies My Teacher Told is a book recommended by many school districts, at least more progressive ones, in USA at high school AP History course. How many of you know that Jesus birth happened in March and Church used to celebrate it that way as recently as 150-200 years back. Pagan native winter celebration for Santa was adopted by the Church as Jesus Birthday sincve they could not stop it. Church as we know it today has nothing to do saint or sage Jesus. 70 years after Jesus’s death and when all his first line followers were dead Bible, New Testament was written. Then on Christianity became a ready fanatic brainwashed cannon fodder to build empires and enslave other lands and culture. Mohammed and his followers perfected this technique of using spirituality to build empires, enforce slavery and make the natives rootless. It seems China and to some extent India are saved and that is the reason they could adapt to scientific and technological age easily and hopefully they do not fall in the trap of consumerism and commercialism.
Fellow-Pakistani says:

January 16, 2011 at 2:04 am

@Andy Martin:
“How many of you know that Jesus birth happened in March ”

Muslims know it. According to Bible when Jesus was born people use to sleep outside, under open sky. So it must be at least April/ May. In Palestine it is very cold in winter with some snow fall. So, Jesus could NEVER born in December. Church and Paul in particular “fitted” Jesus according to Pagan beliefs. Including a birth of Shinny star, December 25, immaculate conception, raisen to sky after death etc. Like so many lies in beliefs of Christians, Jesus birth on December 25th is also a lie.

“Mohammed and his followers perfected this technique of using spirituality to build empires, enforce slavery and make the natives rootless. ”

This is an absolute lie. I recommend you to read:
Muhammad the Prophet:
by Maulana Muhammad Ali
http://aaiil.org/text/books/mali/muhammadtheprophet/muhammadtheprophet.shtml

and
The Early Caliphate:
by Maulana Muhammad Ali
Biographies of: Hazrat Abu Bakr, Umar, Usman and Ali (rta)
http://aaiil.org/text/books/mali/earlycaliphate/earlycaliphate.shtml
Fellow-Pakistani says:

January 16, 2011 at 2:05 am

@Andy Martin:
“How many of you know that Jesus birth happened in March ”

Muslims know it. According to Bible when Jesus was born people use to sleep outside, under open sky. So it must be at least April/ May. In Palestine it is very cold in winter with some snow fall. So, Jesus could NEVER born in December. Church and Paul in particular “fitted” Jesus according to Pagan beliefs. Including a birth of Shinny star, December 25, immaculate conception, raisen to sky after death etc. Like so many lies in beliefs of Christians, Jesus birth on December 25th is also a lie.

“Mohammed and his followers perfected this technique of using spirituality to build empires, enforce slavery and make the natives rootless. ”

This is an absolute lie. I recommend you to read:
Muhammad the Prophet:
by Maulana Muhammad Ali
and
The Early Caliphate:
by Maulana Muhammad Ali
Biographies of: Hazrat Abu Bakr, Umar, Usman and Ali (rta)
Feroz Khan says:

January 16, 2011 at 12:01 pm

The article by Dr. Niaz Murtaza seems to have been written for a section on Europe for a Pak Studies textbook.

The dominance of Europe over most of the world started in earnest in the sixteenth century and by the end of the seventeenth century, it was complete. The emergence of Europe on the world scene would be a remarkable feat of overcoming economic obstacles, political problems, the hurdles of technology and but importantly, it would be the triumph of effort and the ability to take calculated risks. Nothing better exemplifies the European voyages of discovery and exploration more than the slogan “God, Glory and Greed”. Though reasons for venturing beyond the limits of the European continent were often based on the premise of bringing the civilizing virtues of Europe to the rest of the world, the yearning for personal glory and the motivation for personal profit would make sure that God, in this trinity of justifications, would always come last.

@ Fellow-Pakistani (January 16, 2011 at 2:05 am)

The Council of Nicea in the 700s was responsible for creating the present day rituals and theologies of Christanity and it was held under the guidance of Constantine, who wanted a political religion to unify the empire.

When religion is introdouced in politics, it ceases to be a religion and God is simply ignored for the sake of political agreements; afterall, why ruin the beauty of a thing by bringing God into it?

ciao
harbir says:

January 17, 2011 at 8:35 am

too lame to deserve more extended comment
no-communal says:

January 17, 2011 at 9:15 am

A very good article. The writer presents his own point of view, but certainly an interesting read.
PMA says:

January 17, 2011 at 8:03 pm

January 16, 2011 at 12:01 pm
Feroz Khan: Would you care to extend your thoughts on Seventeenth Century European Christianity, Scientific-Industrial Revolution and Rise of Europe. Under that light how true is the statement by Fellow Pakistani (January 15, 2011 at 11:09 am) that ‘Christian Europe developed after abandoning Christian teachings as presented by their clergy’…… and ‘Muslim Asia declined after adopting Islamic teachings as presented by our clergy’. Did Europe in order to advance first abandoned Christianity? I would tend to think that Europe advanced in spite of Christianity. And did Muslim World decline because of Muslim Clergy? Could Religion alone be held responsible for the Rise and Fall of Civilizations? Are we not assigning Religion a role much greater than deserved?
Feroz Khan says:

January 18, 2011 at 3:11 am

PMA (January 17, 2011 at 8:03 pm)

If you wish, I can write an article on these issues for PTH. In order to understand the answers to the questions you have asked, we really need to understand the background and the context to the situation in which Christanity existed and evolved in Europe.

Christan Europe did not develop beause of abandoning religion, but because of a decentralized state of affairs, where economic, political and intellectual competition could not be muzzled by the church. The reason the power, influence and the reach of the church weakened in Europe was more a result of the Black Death, which arrived in Europe in 1347 and decimated nearly one-third of the European population.

The next event, which weakened the power of the church was the Great Schism in the late 1400s. By the time we get to Reformation in 1517, the church had been serverely weakened. The wars of the reformation, which started in 1517 lasted till the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which ended the church’s role in Mitteleuropa also known as the Holy Roman Empire.

Muslim lands declined and the Europe progressed not because of religion but because of an open enviroment of learning, questioning and a lack of a centralized political authority that could impose a standarized view upon the people and one, which had the means to enforce such a view point. In other words, religion instead of being the first among equals became just another idea that that to defend its views in light of empirical evidence and against critical reasoning, which questioned its dogmas.

Religion is a factor, as one of the many, which can be attributed to the rise and fall of civilizations and great powers, but it is not the only cause and to suggest religion as the sole of cause of decline and rise of great powers is a misleading statement.

ciao
Impartialobserver says:

April 2, 2011 at 6:39 am

@ all the biased comments it may be interesting to note that, freedom be it religious or political brings with it prosperity and progress and oppression also, be it religious or political brings with it economic decline and therefore decline in progress and development, (the greatest example is the oppressive communist experiment). Talking of communism if we look at China, as oppression of private sector decreased the country’s economic status grew to became a manufacturing giant.
European supprmacy? … “But why did Asia stagnate despite being ahead of Europe earlier? Just before Europe’s take-off, Baghdad, India and China were attacked by Central Asian nomads, who reveled particularly in destroying formal knowledge. India’s Nalanda University burned for 3 months after Khilji’s attack while Mongols piled the books in Baghdad’s House of Wisdom to cross the Tigris. Without such attacks, some Asian intellectual centers too may have soon then sparked Europe-like societal changes. While Europe suffered warfare too, its intellectual repositories survived them… …If one looks @ European history it is evident that most European countries did not escape “Central Asian nomads” invasions and severe decimation either.
Trish Bartosch says:

May 8, 2011 at 9:19 pm

Well, it’s fine, but how about the other options we have here? Would you mind crafting one more post about them as well? Regards!