Entry #193614, added on 09-20-02 @ 2:47 am EDT
Entry Access Restriction: None.
| Why the West is more open | Entry #193614 |
Compared to Western countries, particularly the US and Britian, we don't have so much press freedom in Malaysia. It's not easy to get a printing, transmission and other types of media licenses. We have to go through a long process that doesn't make sense except to gauge our political ideologies. We are more authoritarian than democratic.
I have a theory that explains why the Asians (using China as an example) are very autocratic and why the West (generally) are more open than anyone else.
It has been proven that people in the East, for some reason, advanced faster than the West. The East went through three stages, Paleolithic, Neolithic, and the Bronze Stage. They skipped the Mesolithic stage. This means (for some) that 'we' (meaning Asians in general) are more advanced and 'civilized' than Westerners. There are many examples and proof of this. Some say that maths and other 'important' stuff was first discovered by the Asians. This is only for the sake of argument.
The West developed later, and they tended to have more 'destructive' ideas. After all, how else would you explain the reason why there are more weapons now than ever? The Chinise may have discovered gunpowder, but it was not them who used it actively in battles. In fact, it was used mostly as Fireworks and entertainment. However, many people knew that it was dangerous.
This, I hope, proves why traditionally, Asians have been passive. It was not only due to upbringing, but also due to the fact that early on, the Chinese realized that being smart was the way to go. Why else do you think that most martial arts stress not only on skill but also strength of caharcter? This meant that in China, a person who is smart and able to win over the populance gets elected. His dynasty lasts for a few years until the decline.
This means that there are two conditions for ruling in ancient China. A mandate (read your history books) and popularity. It's actually nothing more than a popularity contest.
Most westerners were barbarians Sorry, am thinking about Conan the barbarian, guys in boarskin and furs in the beginning. This meant that the conditions for being a ruler were just, strength. If you have the strength to beat the ***p out of a guy why don't you? It also means that the Westerners also tended to be less... united?
Well, this is what I think. Please, don't hesistate to disagree with me. I BEG YOU! |
© Copyright 2002 Karen Rump (UN: priestess at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Karen Rump has granted Writing.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work.
|
Log In To Leave Feedback
Static Items
Books
Forums
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
