In sending the link, Chuckles wrote: “Answers on a postcard,” and he’s right. So were all the others who commented at Westhunt on why the west outstripped China five hundred years ago.
Not mentioned, for example, was the fallow farming system nor the Romans having been before – it was the combination of so many factors.
I commented below 74 comments at that point:
All the above are correct but don’t discount religions/belief systems, which influenced mindsets.
The way Christianity influenced men and women, even in something as apparently irrelevant as monogamy, [is that the system] had no issue with the financial and scientific advances. A close look at Islam in Persia shows advances despite, not as a result of Islam, which was antithetical to advancement not dedicated to Allah.
The Chinese mindset had a whole lot to do [the stalling of advancement], as people pointed out above.
That comes through in the junk sail, as someone mentioned, which ‘did the job’ quite uncannily but the Chinese developers, for some reason, did not wish to go further.
Compare that to the western mindset of wanting that half a percent more speed and so better and better aerofoils were designed. Computers and kevlar come into this, Dupont’s dacron is ubiquitous today in the world of sail.
And a look at Dupont shows they are one of the 13 satanic families who think they’re the rulers of the world.
There is also the philosophical measure of ‘advancement’. Who’s to say that for the human being, the agrarian Chinese way was not better? Look at the levels of stress and dislocation in society today, look at the inability of anyone, especially women, to be ‘satisfied’.
And to whom do people turn for relief – to Eastern philosophy and mental regimes, e.g. yoga, when a readymade system is there for the taking in Christian faith, which almost all reject, yet those driving the greatest advances of the C18th were openly godfearing men and women.
Penultimately, I’d like to mention two core tenets which almost always paralyse these sorts of discussions, such as the one Westhunt has initiated:
1. The tendency of people with pet ideas to both assert those ideas to the exclusion of other angles and also to flatly reject what were undoubtedly core influences, e.g. in tilling, husbandry and wine production.
Which causes this 80% 20% failure to tie all factors in, in their correct relationship. people will accept the first 80% of why something is but reject the last 20%.
2. And why do people do this? For ideological reasons, which determine their very mindsets.
One of the commenters mentioned the Marxist mindset, which is essentially the old atheism repackaged sociologically and concedes no due praise to a faith which allowed such seeking for advancement to go ahead, as well as tolerating the ideology itself. Libertarianism did not spring from Chinese nor Islamic society, it sprang from ours.
This also applies to the technical and general scientific mindset and how rejection of a key factor [one of many] for ideological reasons hamstrings any true discovery of why things work.
I have a word for those who reject what is staring them in the face – pig-ignorant.
Churchill hit it and that quote remains immortalized, the one about it being present from the French Revolution onwards. Dress it up in whatever livery you care to but an ideology which hinges on:
1) Abolition of all ordered governments
2) Abolition of private property
3) Abolition of inheritance
4) Abolition of patriotism
5) Abolition of the family
6) Abolition of religion
7) Creation of a world government
… is a pig-ignorant ideology. Add twisted and debased definitions of ‘fairness’, ‘equality’, ‘tolerance’ and you have a system for a downwards spiral into barbarism.
Ideological fanaticism, from the Established, pointy hat Church to Marxism to the death cult Islam, is antithetical to the well being and healthy advancement of society. A system combining all elements, which encourages wide reading and discussion, nurtures advancement.