What do you think about Huntington theory ? In my country, it was mocked by pretty much everyone. When I read it...

What do you think about Huntington theory ? In my country, it was mocked by pretty much everyone. When I read it, I thought it wasn't bad, and that many people simply didn't even bother to read it.

Other urls found in this thread:

google.com/search?q=guatemalans&biw=1366&bih=651&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwifz6mq073RAhUE8IMKHR9QAFcQ_AUIBigB
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Literal truth, maybe simplified to the bone, but quite evident today

>Vietnam
>Sinic

I wouldn't say a thing like that in Saigon.

Also, did they claim that Mongolia is buddhist?

It seems he was on to something. I'll have to check it out. Thanks for posting.

>the iberic peninsula is closer to 'muricans than latin america
>"Buddhist civilization"

it's fiction pretty much

seems kind of dumb and arbitrary desu

It's a pretty good book, I don't see how he's wrong other than the fact that he simplifies a lot. A lot of people point to sectarian infighting amongst Muslims nowadays as a refutation but I don't think it disproves his overarching theory.

It's fucking bullshit.

Why is Latin America it's own civilization? It's western.

Japan heavily derives a fuckton of it's stuff from China

If Papua New guinea is Western then why is SSA not Western then?

Why is Africa one monolithic whole despite the mass differences between groups on the genetic, political and cultural level? Also why is it implying that being Islamic doesn't make you African?

Why is India the only place with a mixed status and no where else?

There's many nations that are Islamic but not Arab with little ties to the rest of the Islamic world barring religion.

>Grey Tibet
what did he mean by this.....

>not a cultural marxist interpretation of history
Into the trash it goes. It's 2017, ffs.

Desipite term of "civilization" is bad by itself, this division is also bad.
There no "islamic", "buddhist" and "african" civilizations, just primeval and slightely developed tribes.
"Japanese" civilization is Sinic actually.
"Orthodox" term is inaccurrate, because Orthodoxy wasnt important in both inner and external politics of Russian empire.

>Japan heavily derives a fuckton of it's stuff from China
Japan may have borrowed from China, but it was never in the chinese sphere of influence. Not even in the tributary system safe for a few years.

>Spain and Portugal being closer to USA than Mexico and Brazil
>Ethiopia and South Africa being a part of the same civilization despite not knowing the other existed until the 15th century at the earliest
>Kazakhstan being orthodox
>Japanese being its own independent civilization being on part with Western and Islamic
>Mongolia, Tibet, and Thailand all being a part of the same civilization let alone a """buddhist civilization"""
>Greek and Italian culture being as separate from one another as Islamic and Chinese culture
It's bullshit of the highest order OP

this is it, the most uninformed post

Spain and Portugal are both EU and NATO members. Is this some moor or sudaca meme I'm not aware of?

We're talking about "civilization," not modern political leanings dumbass. If you honestly think that a Spaniard and a Canadian have more in common with one another culturally, than a Spaniard and a Cuban, you need to take a step outside and face reality. You are being delusional beyond belief.

You realize this isn't a historical conception of world civilizations, correct? It's a model of PRESENT DAY politics, based on political affiliations and not culture.. This isn't to say that it's totally accurate, but you're all judging it as though it were meant to be a linguistic map or something.

Have you even read the small snipet of text in the image or even a wikipedia page about the subject? Stop being a globe painting autist and read.

A couple of changes and it is correct.

Then it's a gross misuse of the term "civilization." Civilization implies culture well before politics. Even if it is purely political, it's still horribly inaccurate.

simply epic

Makes sense to me

Also corresponds with Spengler's thesis quite nicely as well, interestingly

What the affilations? This is certanly not the map of alliances or types of regimes. Many (or even most of) conflicts are inside whole sectors.

I feel the clash is more racial and ethno/linguistic than civilizational.

Replace "Eurasian" with European and this map does the best job categorizing human groups IMO

>Latin American civilization

It's literally Western civilization.

FTFY

>It's literally Western civilization.
This isn't fucking western civilization.

That's not what he implies with his theory.

He's saying conflict in the post cold war world will be shaped by civilization blocs.

The fact that the map corresponds more to alliances and affiliations than actual civilizations is just him trying to adapt reality to conform to his theory.

>Orthodoxy wasnt important in both inner and external politics of Russian empire.
t.retard

you're forgetting that this board contains high levels of autism

Even through the lens of purely present day politics it makes fuck all sense. Why is Greece, a member of NATO, being lumped together with Russia under the "Orthodox" category. Why the hell is there even an "Orthodox" category if this is a political map. The Orthodox church is not the binding political force of Eastern Europe that it was 500 years ago.

Why the fuck is South Korea being lumped in together with China?

This map makes fuck all sense culturally and politically.

there's literally not a single good argument for including korea and vietnam under 'sinic' but not japan

>Latin American culture is Mesoamerican culture
wew fucking lad

generalized in a lot of ways but not entirely wrong at all. where's sri lanka? also, >png >western, etc.

one thing I do think though is that japan, south america, and russia are all well on the road towards merging with western society, and by the time they have I would guess that the chinese would be following. I expect the world conflicts are largely going to arise where islamic borders are, particularly in india, africa, and southeast asia.

So that's how an average mexican lives.

Russian and Stans block should be separate from Europe

The orthodox nations of Europe have been separate from the Western half since the great schism. They spent centuries under Ottoman yoke while the west was busy conquering the world by using sea lanes.

The stans are. Look closer.

>Latin-Caribbean culture isn't heavily influenced by Amerindians
wew lad. Wannabe Westerners.

I meant as a single group, Russians may be a regional power, but it is their region.

Then this isn't a modern political map, because all that shit is long over with. The modern day greek state has more ties with western Europe than it does Turkey or Russia.

So I'm going to ask you again, what is this map representing? Is it culture, historical impact on areas, or modern politics? Which is it?

>australia and new zealand lumped in with tribal ooga booga islanders
>Literal Turks in Anatolia lumpia in with vaguely related "turkic" groups in central asia and fucking siberia
>Madagascar lumped in with indonesia and the philipines
huh really made me think

Well for one, "Western" should just be called Christian.
And latin america is part of it, being poor isn't a very good separation criteria.

It was made in the 90s when the Yugoslav wars proved the Orthodox/Latin divide was still strong. Greece may have political ties to the West but the fact that Greeks volunteered to fight for the Serbian side shows civilsational ties is still a thing. Which is what this is. Its a map representing civilizations.

Most of those Amerindians died to small pox 500 years ago. The effect of Amerindian culture on modern day Hispanic culture is absolutely dwarfed by the effect that Spanish and Catholic culture has had on the area and its people. It's time to face reality user.

Then why isn't Eastern Europe and multiple African nations a part of it? They're just as Christian.

If Grease should reject EU, muh orthodox brotherhood is their only option. Would agree that Romania, Bulgaria and Ukraine(???) has no business there.

The West hasn't been defined by Christianity since the 1700s.

Then we're back to the central problem of this map in that it DOESN'T properly represent civilizations, because it's culturally nonsensical.

If the basis for their being a part of a distinct civilization from other European countires is their second best political alignment choice, I'd say this is a pretty hamfisted map.

>Most of those Amerindians died to small pox 500 years ago.
Your delusion.

seems to ignore that the vast majority of conflicts today are within those 'civilizations'

Here's an ACCURATE depiction of cultural groups...

Just don't trust the Greeks, nobody can tell with those slippery ducks.

Iberia isn't white so I don't see what point your trying to get across.

>Racial categories are cultural categories
[wewing intensifies]

The point isn't that brothers fight brothers. The point is showing people live in distinct realities which aren't compatible with each other.

>Most Amerindians died 500 years ago
Where reaching wewing levels that shouldn't even be possible.

*were

>Egypt
>Islamic
Discredited along with the other glaring issues.

we're

Eastern christianity had a different trajectory.

And Africans joined relatively recently, most of them still have their own culture, language, and tribal identity, not like the americas where this was first transplanted from europe before differentiating itself.

>Implying most Amerindians didn't die out 500 years ago
You're just denying basic historical knowledge now user. I know you probably don't believe this, but you've backed yourself so far into a corner that you've got no other choice. It's alright to admit that you fucked up.

>The point is showing people live in distinct realities which aren't compatible with each other
well i don't really think it does that

>egypt arent islamic fhellachs since thousand years now
wew

So did protestant Christianity, yet I see that the USA, Britain, and Germany are still handily included.
>And Africans joined relatively recently, most of them still have their own culture, language, and tribal identity
So do most European nations. My point is that Christianity is a stupid commonality to lump these groups together as, because Christianity is not synonymous with Western Culture. I wouldn't even say its the most definitive contributor considering that Western Culture had its beginnings before Christianity even existed.

I guess I consider 95% Amerindian mongrels "Amerindian" and you think your average Mexican or Guatemalan is White as a man from Bern, Switzerland.

>So did protestant Christianity
Not really. Protestantism uses a lot of the same general logic found in Western Christian theology.

>Christianity is not synonymous with Western Culture

Get behind me Santan

>Bringing up race in a cultural discussion a second time
Do you consider Black Americans to not be westerners as well user? Are they africans even though hardly any of them speak an african language, follow african religions and morality, live in african nations, and can barely name any historical african figures?

As does Orthodox Christianity and vice versa. In the end they're not all as different as everyone here seems to believe they are. Certainly not as different so as to warrant their own classification of civilization in the manner that Chinese and Islamic culture do.

spookiest thing ive ever seen

Western culture has its roots in Ancient Greek and Roman culture, both of which existed at times before Christianity did. Am I saying that Christianity did not contribute to western culture? No. What I'm saying is that Christianity is not the single defining part of western culture, and that it is ridiculous to think of it as anything other than a piece of a larger puzzle. Especially in a time when a good number of Europeans are non-religious.

Don't deflect from the fact that the Amerindian hasn't died from smallpox. Go to Guatemala and you'll see plenty, even if they have 3% European genes on a genetic test.

Protestants split off of Catholicism, they didn't spawn from nowhere.

Both of them experienced most of the same wars, political advances and revolutions. Hell one example was used as a counter argument against me But bottom line is, western civilization doesn't necessarily need to be called christian like i said, it just seems arbitrary to define other nations by their religion and not westerners because our values are just as shaped by our religion.

I'm not deflecting shit. Most Amerindians died of smallpox centuries ago. This is a fact. Just because there's a handful of them scattered around 2 continents doesn't mean that they have the cultural relevance that you believe they do.

Also, stop bringing up genetics like it means anything. This is a discussion about culture, is it not? The culture of a person is entirely "nurture."

>Croatia and Serbia belong to different civilizations, despite being neighbors, having the same language and people, the only difference being that they worship a sky wizard on a slightly different way
>Morocco and Indonesia belong to the same civilization, despite having zero in common besides religion and being on opposite sides of the world. There's no relation at all between them.
>PNG is somehow "Western"
>Japanese is a special snowflake that has to have it's own category

>Most Amerindians died of smallpox centuries ago.
google.com/search?q=guatemalans&biw=1366&bih=651&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwifz6mq073RAhUE8IMKHR9QAFcQ_AUIBigB

Who are these people then?

Orthodox Christianity didn't spawn from nowhere either. Both Catholics and Orthodox Christians spawn from the same ilk. If we're going to define Eastern Europe as some civilization separate from Western Europe, then we ought to define SSA Muslims as separate from Iranian Muslims, because lord knows they did not experience the same wars, political advances and revolutions.

>>Croatia and Serbia belong to different civilizations, despite being neighbors, having the same language and people, the only difference being that they worship a sky wizard on a slightly different way
Same civilizations that fought 3 wars in the 80 years before the paper was published, one was a part of Austria Hungary for all it's existence and other Ottomans and later independent for theirs?

really gets my hmmm going

I don't know what an SSA muslim is.

Though I've never read the book a lot of people here seem to be judging the map instead of the contents of the book. how about read it instead of autisticly attacking what may very well be a rough draft using artistic license.

Super Sunni Assholes

Sub-saharan Africa.
Yeah it's a pretty meme term since Black African would be much more straight forward and accurate term alongside the whole "Sahara was like a mountain" meme.

They're not culturally Amerindians that's for sure. When I said Amerindians died out, I didn't just mean the people. That would be stupid considering I've been ragging on your insistence of going back to genetics all this time. The culture dying out is the important thing. It doesn't matter if they're 3% European. The vast majority don't follow Amerindian religion, they don't have an Amerindian style of government, and they don't speak an Amerindian language.

As well Guatemala is a poor example of the average Latin American country to begin with considering how many of the still surviving Maya people live there.

Like said, it means Sub-saharan African. Use Black African if you want, I don't care, the point is is that they're most certainly not the cultural kin of Iranians.

>They're not culturally Amerindians that's for sure.
Go back to what I originally said. Latin-Caribbean culture is a mix of Western and Amerindian. A lot of Amerindian attitudes survived. I wouldn't call the Philippines Western either.

Look at this map. In the nations under 51-60% European, the people BY AND LARGE live and think differently than westerners do.

Your average rural White American has more in common with a rural Pole or Russian than he has with rural Mexican or Paraguayan and vice versa.

I mean the original map I posted.

The average rural White American may have more in common with a rural Pole or Russian, but the average White American does not have more in common, culturally speaking, with a rural Spaniard than a Mexican or Cuban does. And both the average rural White American, and the average rural Mexican have much more in common with one another than the average rural Persian and the average rural Malian.

>but the average White American does not have more in common, culturally speaking, with a rural Spaniard than a Mexican or Cuban does.
I have family in rural South Italy, which is very close, culturally speaking, to Iberia. To say they have more in common with Mexicans or Cubans than other rural Whites is incorrect. Pic related.

The Persian and Malian I'd agree.

Sudacas wet dream

Fine then. I'll concede that Latin American ought to be its own distinct category. The map in the OP is still by and large bs though.

Argentina and Uruguay are more culturally Western than the United States.

>European-style architecture
>Population descended from Europeans, mestizos are a minority
>No natives left (totally wiped out in Uruguay, 2% of the population in Argentina)
>Main national dishes are BBQ, pasta, pizza, ice cream, etc.
>Strong rock tradition dating back from the 1960s, strong classical music tradition, many famous classical directors and musicians
>Welsh in Patagonia, Italians across the country, French, German, British, Polish cultural influences
>Major Non-NATO Ally of the United States, high-income economy, "very high" Human Development Index according to the UN

This is a meme map.

And let's not even discuss Greece (the birthplace of Western civilization is not Western, top kek)

Orale Pablito

No, Latin American countries should be treated as individual countries and not as a single entity to try to shoehorn some half-assed theory.

We don't say orale, Pedro

>Bosnia and Albania
>Orthodox
I'm dismissing the theory on that alone

>Argentina and Uruguay are more culturally Western than the United States.
More Western than the Far West? Kek. Either way, those and Chile are the only Latin American nations which are Western.

>And let's not even discuss Greece (the birthplace of Western civilization is not Western, top kek)
A lot of people divide Greco-Roman civilization from Western civilization. In this case, Greco-Roman civilization would have given birth to both Western and Orthodox civilization. This would have occurred after the great schism.

Wew fucking lad.

You have the more European Chile, Uruguay and Argentina. The rest are heavily mixed or Amerindian.