Chapter 39 Chapter 29 The Decline and Success of the West

In a sense, the course of 20th century history means the decline of the West.London, Paris and Berlin no longer dictate world news.They also no longer control the empires of the world.Their armies, navies and alliance systems no longer rule the globe.For example, in 1860, Western Europe's industrial output accounted for 72% of the world's total industrial output; by 1931, this percentage dropped to 42%;It goes without saying that Europe's nineteenth-century global hegemony was over, and over forever: it was impossible for Europe to restore its colonial empire, nor to re-establish its former military and political superiority.On the other hand, while it seemed likely that Europe would fall from primacy to subordination immediately after World War II, that was not the case later.On the contrary, while Europe's military, economic, and political power was in relative decline, its culture was sweeping the world like never before.

In addition to entering a period of decline, Europe is entering a period of success: its ideas, technologies, and institutions are spreading across the globe more rapidly than ever before.Fundamentally, this meant the spread of the three great revolutions in Europe—industrial, scientific, and political—that had earlier given it the strength, drive, and knowledge to expand worldwide and conquer vast colonial empires (see Chapters 10, 11 and 12).But Europe's epoch-making success had the opposite effect: for it was by their very existence that the colonial empires facilitated the spread of the three revolutions.Dependent peoples were deeply affected by these revolutions, and their response was to selectively adopt something particularly attractive about them in order to resist the invading West more effectively.

The Industrial Revolution spread from England to Europe and the United States in the 19th century.In the first half of the 20th century, it spread to Japan and the British Dominions.After World War II; the spread accelerated rapidly.When each new nation won its independence, its first task was to promote economic development.All over the world, various economic programs are being developed and implemented, with varying degrees of success.The most typical is Ghana's seven-year plan (1963-1970), which aims to increase national income by 5.5% per year, with a total increase of 42% in seven years.The impact of the economic revolution in Europe is clearly reflected in the words of the President of Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah, in explaining the rationale and objectives of the plan:

Science also spread rapidly from Europe, and has become, in fact, an aspirational knowledge of all peoples.The objective methodology of science has made science acceptable to non-Western peoples who may not have been interested in European art, religion, or philosophy.The reason why people are eager to pursue science is also because it is the basis for technological progress and overall economic development.As a result, Europe had lost its monopoly on science; in the mid-1960s, the United States and the Soviet Union were doing more research than any country in Western Europe.By 1970, the United States had won 81 Nobel Prizes in science, while its main rivals, Britain and Germany, had won only seven and six respectively.The scientific revolution has also begun to spread to non-Western countries, where, however, barriers have been high because of the interrelationship between science and industry.Although it is true that pure scientific research does not rely on industry, the promotion of scientific inventions requires a considerable industrial base.Even if a scientist masters the theory of splitting the atom and develops a technical method to split the atom, only a society with substantial financial and industrial resources can engage in the production of atomic energy.Therefore, it is only possible to engage in advanced scientific research in advanced industrial countries.

Many new nations in Asia and Africa were caught in this vicious circle, so that even the smallest scientific advances were practically impossible for the poorer and least developed new nations.Other new countries, however, already possessed the necessary human and material resources and made full use of them.This is especially the case for the two giants, India and China, which by 1964 had won one and two Nobel Prizes in science respectively.India had the strongest research base to begin with, as the British had previously established technical colleges there and, more importantly, the Indian Academy of Sciences was founded in 1905 by industrial magnate Jamshidji Tata.Its sphere of activity has expanded after Indian independence, and as a result, Indian science has begun to make significant contributions in various fields.The same is true in China, where the government, like most communist regimes, spends a significant portion of national income on scientific research.

As important as formal programs and academies to the advancement of science was the gradual dissemination of scientific knowledge and technology among the masses of people in non-Western areas.In Malaya, witch doctors in remote and backward areas began to rely on modern medicine in addition to using traditional spells to treat diseases.After receiving instruction from government agencies on antimalarials, vitamin pills, disinfectants and hygiene basics, they returned to their villages wearing graduation badges denoting their new status as "doctor's assistants."Now they're putting their new knowledge and first aid kit to good use, though they're still using ancient incantations to mystify science while healing.

Similarly, in China, the Association for the Dissemination of Science and Technology Knowledge had 300,000 members by 1964, who were professors, engineers, and technicians; this association also published several popular science magazines with a large circulation.A British scientist reported during his visit to China in 1965: The third revolution in Europe, the political revolution, is also sweeping the globe.The most obvious expression of this political awakening was the rapid growth of nationalism manifested in colonial revolutions and the demise of empires (see Chapter 27).But nationalism is by no means the only wind blowing from the West.Various other isms are also encircling the globe, including constitutionalism, communism, socialism, and military dictatorship.In the immediate aftermath of the Second World War, constitutionalism was in vogue on a wave of democratic enthusiasm.In country after country, however, parliamentary regimes succumbed to military dictatorships or to Marxist one-party rule.It should be noted that this trend also has precedents in Europe.With the exception of Czechoslovakia, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe were by 1939 under dictatorships in one form or another.At that time, figures similar to Nasser, Sukarno and General U Ne Win appeared - Stojadinovich, Metaxas and Marshal Piłsudski.The latter three, like the first three, were able to forcibly establish their own dictatorships because of the corruption and incompetence of the parliamentary system and the lack of necessary economic and social foundations.

Despite the variety of institutional forms, all new states share a common political characteristic: the awakening and activism of the populace, whether they are formally participating in their own government or not.This is the essence of a political revolution - the age-old idea that God ordained humanity to be rulers and ruled no longer exists.More generally, it means replacing the isolation, ignorance, and acquiescence of traditionalism with the collaboration, knowledge, and initiative of modernism.This political revolution is vividly and explicitly illustrated in the following report by an American journalist, which describes an Egyptian worker who apparently has little say in his country's government.

Nationalism was not the only form that popular awakening and activism took, as can be seen from the following passage, which describes an event in the general strike that paralyzed Nigeria in June 1964: We can conclude that Europe's success is the underlying cause of Europe's decline.The one leads naturally and inevitably to the other.If Europe lost its position as the world's dominant power, the root cause was the spread of the three European revolutions throughout the world.And, the spread is gaining momentum as it affects the masses of people for the first time. Before the 20th century, only an insignificant leisure class joined the process of Westernization.Only these few people understand the meaning of "the West" because they know European languages, understand European literature, and have traveled to various European countries.On the contrary, in the postwar years, more and more people were actively and consciously involved in the process of Westernization.

This is partly because factories provide jobs and roads keep them from being isolated.But just as important are new vehicles of communication such as tabloids, radio and movies, which eclipse older ones such as books and travel.Westernization has gained a huge impetus, as Westernization increasingly relies not on the universities of Oxford and the salons of Paris but on the loudspeakers that blast messages to illiterate but responsive masses in village squares.In order to mobilize popular support for the revolutionary program, the new regime and the new leaders have begun to consciously make full use of these communication tools.President Nasser said, "It is true that the majority of our people are still illiterate. But the number of politically illiterates is much smaller than it was 20 years ago. ... Radio has changed everything. ... Today, people in the most remote villages can get Know what’s going on everywhere and make your own judgement. Leaders can no longer rule the country as they did before. We live in a new world.”

What Nasser called a "new world" was taking shape across the globe.From this point.See the following headlines in The New York Times, which can be added infinitely, as there are tons of headlines appearing every day in newspapers around the world: (March 31, 1969). The significance of these titles becomes apparent if one recalls that only a century ago all Muslims looked down upon pagan Christendom so convincingly that there was nothing in it worthy of their attention.Likewise, in 1793 the Emperor of China flatly refused to consider closer relations with Great Britain because "there is nothing there that we need... We have never valued what is eccentric or ingenious.  …" The opposite is true today, People all over the world yearn not only for such "queer or ingenious things," but, as the above title suggests, for other things that are now commonly called "civilization."This demonstrates the breadth and depth of Europe's success in what is now commonly called modernization.The term modernization is preferable to the term "Europeanization" or "Westernization" because the impetus for reform, although ultimately European in origin, is today not only from Europe but also from the United States, the Soviet Union and even China. Whatever the terminology used, the fundamental point is that societies around the world are today being affected to a greater or lesser extent by this inexorable march of change.The question naturally arises, then, whether the regional autonomy that is developing in the political sphere is invalidated by the process of global homogenization that the above title suggests.Some insist that homogenization can never be complete and all-encompassing due to the residual influence of various wildly different native civilizations.It has been suggested that, despite the rapid expansion of industrialization, the social organization of Japanese factories today is quite different from that of Soviet or American factories.Likewise, agricultural modernization was progressing rapidly, but, organizationally, family farms in the United States, cooperative farms in Israel, and state farms in the Soviet Union were very different from each other.Others mention "the durability of one-party rule in the Soviet Union, the instability of multi-party politics in France and the success of popular political blocs, and the adaptable survival of British parliamentary regimes." In this regard, the comment of Jaroslav Pushik, a well-known Sinologist at the Institute of Oriental Studies in Prague, is very pertinent: "All new literature in Asia is more connected with the literature of the world today than with the literature of the 'past' themselves. more closely connected."We can make the same basic arguments for developments in other fields.Modern American and Soviet farmers work their land in vastly different ways, yet their habits and ways of life have more in common than those of their ancestors in their respective territories.Politically, countries have very different institutional structures, but as noted above, their populations are awakening and energizing, whether they are actually participating in their governments or not.Likewise, the expansion of industrialization led to different forms of factory organization, but at the same time some fundamental aspects of life were equally affected, including the acceptance of labor discipline, the adaptation of life to the clock, the abandonment of traditional clothing and Concentration area living, and more. It can be concluded that homogenization is indeed taking place, albeit with diverse regional variations reflecting cultural backgrounds.Today, the global spread of the three European revolutions, though under the auspices of different parties, seems to be continuing at an accelerated pace to create a world culture that will be consistent in its essential features, though different in its details.