White Pride, White Guilt: Part II

For years, one of the battle cries of the Political Correctness movement has been “dead white European Males.” They are the bete blanc of the world today. They are the cause of most of the problems in the world today. They are the source of so much of the evil that plagues the world today. Their dominance has gone on too long, caused too many problems, led to far too much misery, and it must end.

For years, the white supremacist movement has had its battle cry: the White race is superior. It conquered the world. Its culture is dominant all over the globe. It has the greatest achievements, done the greatest good, led the world in advancements in every aspect of human endeavor.

These two factions are in eternal opposition (although neither sees each other as their arch-enemy). The irony here is that they are both right.

For the last couple of millenia, the European social and cultural model has dominated the world in pretty much every way. No other ethnic group can claim to have anywhere near the level of successes. European (and, by extension, American — we are an all-too-logical evolution of the European model) influence — if not outright dominance — extends to every corner of the world and beyond.

Look around the world. English is the unofficial, unsanctioned univeral language. Western technology is ubiquitous. Western weaponry is the preferred tool of violence. Western culture is so pervasive and popular that some nations have to enact laws to try to keep it out.

On the flip side, Western culture has unleashed some of the greatest evils the world has ever seen. Socialism, Communism, and Nazism are all Western inventions. It took Europeans to do things so heinous, we actually had to invent terms like “racial cleansing” and “genocide” and “Holocaust” (as a proper noun). We might not have invented slavery, but damn if we didn’t refine it and improve on it until it grew so hideous that even we couldn’t stand it. Other cultures invented the caste system, but we tried to ram it down our own throats, with a sophisticated strata that put wealthy white men at the top, and other races and sexes and economic levels below them. Then we overthrew most of that, too.

How can both views be correct? Because both only want to see half the picture.

A brief disclaimer: I’m no sociologist, so this is at best a half-assed analysis. And I am deliberately struggling to avoid any moral judgments or rationales.

The European social and cultural model has achieved both because, in my opinion, it is the most aggressive. It actively seeks out others and competes with them, constantly seeking to assert its superiority through dominance. It tries more great accomplishments than any other, sets itself impossible goals and then goes to nearly any length to achieve them.

That kind of attitude lends itself to spectacles. It is almost a foregone conclusion that tremendous attempts at grandiose goals will end in either spectacular success or spectacular failure.

So, what has made the European culture so aggressive, and so successful? What factors led to that development there, with those people, and has that been overall a good or a bad thing for humanity?

On the former question, I have no idea.

On the latter, though, I’d have to say it’s been overall a good thing. I’d say that the world is a better place thanks to the spread and dominance of the European culture. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it has been a great blessing, let alone an unmixed blessing, and I would never deny the evils that it has also brought. I would also never argue that the good things have been so good as to some how justify or rationalize the evils.

I simply accept them as a fact. Others may debate their relative merits and extents, but that they exist is indisputable.

I’d be curious to hear what others think might be the root causes of European aggression, and why it has worked so well.

Blood on their hands ...
More Evidence That Democrats Are Freaking Out About 2010