[StopDisinfo910]

I would like it a lot better without the mention to the "West", which, as usual, is a code word for: "I want to pretend my point extend outside the USA but I have absolutely no knowledge of how true that is. I don't intend to do any research because that would demand efforts from me so bear with my casual imperialism". Queue the purely American historical lesson following.

[wredcoll]

If we're nitpicking, is it queue or cue?

[StopDisinfo910]

I guess it's cue like on cue but it's late on a Sunday. You will have to excuse my brain.

It wasn't a nitpick by the way. I deeply resent American using "the West" like if my own country and culture was somehow fungible in their experience. They are not. We don't have that much in common. That doesn't include a legal tradition, or a conception of what freedom of speech should be, neither does it include values or history.

Edit: Enjoy downvoting me. It doesn't make what I said any less true. If you think the various European countries can be grouped with the US in a coherent whole, you are deeply deluding yourselves. They can't even be lumped together.

[wredcoll]

It would probably help if you made a more specific point rather than just ranting in very vague terms.

Grouping terms like "the west" can be broad enough to include over half of all living humans or so narrow that it applies to a small village.

It is, admittedly, not a particularly useful term, but it's not like americans are reaponsible for it.

[StopDisinfo910]

Where have you seen it used outside of Americans pretending their culture is somehow a standard and NATO apologists? The world doesn't even exist as such in my own language. It's a staple on Hacker News and nearly always for the bad reasons. I'm supposed to politely nod and shut up when people are casually erasing my culture?

[wredcoll]

What even is a "nato apologist"???

> Where have you seen it used outside of Americans

Well, there was this minor thing called "the western roman empire" for a few years, so that might be a starting point.

I am fascinated to learn how a claim that westerners "prefer liberty over security" is somehow erasing your culture though.

[marcus_holmes]

The Western Roman Empire has nothing to do with "the West". I think it's fascinating that that's even suggested.

I lived in Germany for a while. Germany is definitely a part of "the West", have been the defining border with "the East" in the Cold War. Germans do not share a cultural viewpoint about liberty and security with the USA. So claiming that westerners "prefer liberty over security" while also including Germans (and others) in the definition of "the West" is absolutely erasing their culture.

[marcus_holmes]

I (British/Australian) use it, but not in a cultural sense. I use "the West" when talking about military or economic matters.

I generally prefer the term "Anglosphere" to refer to only the bits of "the West" that share that cultural viewpoint when I'm discussing cultural matters. It's not perfect, but it's useful.

Given the widening gap between the USA and Europe (and Canada) in economic and military matters, I'm not sure how much longer "the West" is going to be useful.

[kortilla]

What are you talking about? Nobody is erasing your culture except for maybe you because you aren’t even talking about your culture. You’re just ranting about Americans.

[1718627440]

Greek philosophy did not happen in the USA and actually predates it quite a bit.

[mmooss]

Universal human rights is a very widespread belief and concept, extending to all continents and many, many cultures. It's not hard to understand why.

[wredcoll]

If you'd said "isn't just a western thing" I would have definitely agreed, but this claim seems a bit unlikely.

[mmooss]

Just look around the world; they are the norm: East Asia (Japan, South Korea, China - Taiwan, Hong Kong, June 4 on the mainland); North America; South America, almost all of the region; Europe; Australia, NZ, Indonesia, the Phillipines; South Asia (India, and I think they are enshrined if not enforced in Pakistan and some others).

What's mostly missing is the Middle East, Central Asia, parts of SE Asia, and large parts of Africa - though there are Benin, Botswana, Kenya, and many others iirc.

[logicchains]

No it's not. There are no human rights for the lowest castes in Hinduism, there are no human rights for polytheists in Islam, there were nothing like the modern idea of human rights in Japan or China before they westernized. That's why the west was able to leapfrog other nations economically (and hence militarily), because it was the first place where people had enough rights for something resembling a modern economy to develop.

[mmooss]

> That's why the west was able to leapfrog other nations economically

I tend to agree, though it's of course hard to prove. However, I'm talking about the present, not the past.

> There are no human rights for the lowest castes in Hinduism

I said it is "very widespread", not everywhere. Perhaps the confusion is the word Universal: that doesn't mean everyone believes it (false for any belief), but that everyone has the rights, whether or not they know or can exercise them. It's the concept that starts the Declaration of Independence: All are created equal, and all have inalienable rights.

> there were nothing like the modern idea of human rights in Japan or China before they westernized

I am talking about the present, where it's adopted in East Asia (including in China - Taiwan, Hong Kong (though suppressed now), June 4 on the mainland), throughout Latin America, Europe of course, parts of Africa, the Anglo world, etc.

> there are no human rights for polytheists in Islam,

There is no country called 'Islam'; if we go by scripture, nobody has human rights. The idea that all practicioners of Islam have the same beliefs is as true as saying all practicioners of Christianity do - and look at HN.

In Indonesia, the largest majority Muslim country, there are human rights, also in India, with the largest Muslim population (but not the majority). I think Pakistan and some South Asian countries probably have them enshrined.

[yencabulator]

And there were no human rights for the slaves of the Western nations.

[synecdoche]

As opposed to slaves in non-western nations? May I remind that slavery was not exclusively a western thing, and that there are more slaves today than there ever was, in absolute terms, almost none in western nations.

[yencabulator]

The parent comment was making it seem like the West is some kind of beacon of virtue.

[whattheheckheck]

If you don't give someone a reason to live they ain't gonna slave away very hard for you

[wredcoll]

I mean, nobody knows why "the west" (whatever that is) leapfrogged anyone, and this is a fairly small period in terms of total human history.

[kortilla]

The industrial revolution is quite well documented

[wredcoll]

Things people did, sure, but not why they did them here and not there is a bit trickier. There's a variety of theories, easy access to coal is my favorite, but some people like to blame the magna carta or something.

[kortilla]

Check out Destiny Disrupted. It covers how the Middle East and China both had technology opportunities much earlier but were missing the right economic incentives at the time to handle the disruption to the labor force that came with the Industrial Revolution.

Essentially the major societies before ended up in local maximums because they didn’t have the ruthlessness of capitalism or the economic desperation to adopt technologies that in the short term would unemploy large portions of society and wipe out old power structures.

[Der_Einzige]

Jared diamonds an idiot and “guns germs and steel” is among the worst books written in human history - right up there with Republic and whatever the hell sam Harris is doing.

[3form]

And any leapfrogging done there hardly has anything to do with human rights I guess, so I'd say the poster above has a really bold claim here

[mmooss]

It's not an unusual claim: Freedom breeds innovation - people are not only free to think for themselves, to ignore the orthodoxy and established power, but they are raised and encouraged to do it and admired for it (to a degree).

I think it's accurate to say that all the wealthiest (per capita) economies in history - i.e., the wealthiest economies over the last ten years - are in free societies.

[zelphirkalt]

So not just to the west?

[pjc50]

Yes, but: crucially, not in the USA. The EU human rights framework includes non-citizens, because they are still humans. The US constitutional rights framework does not include non-citizens, which is why ICE have free rein to abuse them.