5 ms·

He should feel proud of vaccines and antibiotics too then, the greatest boon mankind ever had. Very proud indeed. The populations in Africa would be a tiny frac

by dmpk2k 9y ago

He should feel proud of vaccines and antibiotics too then, the greatest boon mankind ever had. Very proud indeed. The populations in Africa would be a tiny fraction of what they currently are were it not for Western innovations. Likewise, the West has utterly crushed global absolute poverty, and is the leading pressure that is trying to end the ancient practice of slavery. By every objective metric (child mortality, lifespan, literacy, starvation, absolute poverty), the world is a better place today than ever before. By a huge margin. Entirely thanks to the West. I only mention this because there seems to be this narrative that we in the West should feel bad for the past, yet the West has been a firm net positive in the world. Probably the greatest net positive there ever was... provided we survive global warming, that is. So if we're going to guilt-trip people today for the actions of some historical Westerners, we should adulate people too for the actions of some historical Westerners. But somehow that never happens. The West is objectively the best thing that ever happened to mankind.

ethbro 9y ago
> Entirely thanks to the West. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_dynasty https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_dynasty https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate Imho, the West shouldn't feel bad for the actions of historical Westerns. But it should absolutely feel bad for the (not insignificant) portion of its prosperity that was a result of that history. To put it another way, say I run an illegal sweatshop in Africa, bury my profits, leave a note to my daughter telling her where to find the money, then die. She doesn't get to ethically say "My dad was a terrible person and wrong" AND keep that money. Even if she didn't know where the money came from, started a business with it, became successful through her hard work, and only finds out later, she still bears guilt. You don't get to rig the game in your favor, then even things out after you've collected winnings from crooked hands and say "Okay, everything's fair now."
- dmpk2k 9y ago
  > But it should absolutely feel bad for the (not insignificant) portion of its prosperity that was a result of that history. And it should feel great for the amazing things it has done for the world as well, as any graph of poverty and disease since the 1700s shows. And therein lies the rub: when was the last time you heard someone thank the West? It is likely 4 out of 5 people alive today wouldn't be if it weren't for the West. Of the remainder, 94% would live in absolute poverty, instead of the current 10%. They'd live at most 40 years, instead of 70+. They'd be anywhere from 300-1200x more likely to be starving. Instead of almost everyone reaching old age, 1/3 - 1/2 of all children would die of various causes. And so on, and so on, and so on. And so on. The list just doesn't end. The past was hellish to the modern eye. I wonder why! Focussing only on the bad, and completely ignoring the good, is intellectually dishonest and betrays a complete lack of perspective. > "Okay, everything's fair now." Except the world would be objectively far worse off if it wasn't for those crooked hands. See above.
  - ethbro 9y ago
    You're supposing an alternative where it was only possible for the West to have created these inventions you allude to. While there have been thesises that only Great Britain possessed the necessary ingredients for steam power and industrialization, that argument isn't universally held. And I refuse to believe that this applies to every invention, especially as world population increased.
    - dmpk2k 9y ago
      You're right, but in the current timeframe? That's one hell of a stretch. I'll go Bayesian on this one. And so: thanks West!
      - intended 9y ago
        Eh? If time frame was the criteria we could Just start wars again. Remove all the people except the victors and chattel. And there’s billions who never got a chance to ever get medicine. Billions more never born or able to live with a fighting chance because the entire social structure was yanked out, root and branch.
hutzlibu 9y ago
"By every objective metric (child mortality, lifespan, literacy, starvation, absolute poverty), the world is a better place today than ever before. By a huge margin. Entirely thanks to the West." If you believe in quantity over quality, then yes. Otherwise, well I just say garbage dumps, that people used to call forest, desertification and climate change. And how come so many people are on antidepressants, if we live in the best world so far? I mean, we clearly live in the most technology advanced world, yes (and I like that), but ignoring, that all this new power from technology did caused many real problems, is soo medieval ...
- dmpk2k 9y ago
  So edgy. While everything you point out is true, if I gave you a magic one-way doorway to 1700, you wouldn't take it. Nobody even remotely rational would. Today's depression is very "firstworldproblems" compared to the problems people used to be depressed about. We definitely have challenges, and some are major, but compared to the past? If you sincerely believe we don't have both quality and quantity nowadays, you've lost the plot. Unless you like diseases, starvation, high mortality, subsistence farming, a rickity home, poor climate control, and a short life. And that's long before we get to a lack of cool things like electricity, planes and computers. Nasty, brutish and short: quality indeed!
  - hutzlibu 9y ago
    I am a child of my time. So of course I do not want to go back, as allmost all of my knowledge and skills were useless there. And as I said, I like technology. I just don't like it, that we got this technology by unsustainable exploitation. And about diseases, starvation, etc. as far as I know, we still have those and in absolute numbers, much more than ever, as there are much more people living on the world today. And looking into modern (first world) hospitals or old people homes, were all those happy people slowly and forgotten rot away - I am not sure, that if you would sum up their suffering you would come up with better numbers than in the most barbaric times, where the old ones had to go to die in the snow, when they became useless. So like I said, yes we have technology now and technology is awesome for solving problens. But now we face the problems caused by technology. And they are big. So no, I would not go back, I rather go forward with better technology. But to develop and use better technology, one needs to see first the problems of the existing one and its effect on society.

by dmpk2k 9y ago

ethbro 9y ago

> Entirely thanks to the West. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_dynasty https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_dynasty https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate Imho, the West shouldn't feel bad for the actions of historical Westerns. But it should absolutely feel bad for the (not insignificant) portion of its prosperity that was a result of that history. To put it another way, say I run an illegal sweatshop in Africa, bury my profits, leave a note to my daughter telling her where to find the money, then die. She doesn't get to ethically say "My dad was a terrible person and wrong" AND keep that money. Even if she didn't know where the money came from, started a business with it, became successful through her hard work, and only finds out later, she still bears guilt. You don't get to rig the game in your favor, then even things out after you've collected winnings from crooked hands and say "Okay, everything's fair now."

dmpk2k 9y ago
> But it should absolutely feel bad for the (not insignificant) portion of its prosperity that was a result of that history. And it should feel great for the amazing things it has done for the world as well, as any graph of poverty and disease since the 1700s shows. And therein lies the rub: when was the last time you heard someone thank the West? It is likely 4 out of 5 people alive today wouldn't be if it weren't for the West. Of the remainder, 94% would live in absolute poverty, instead of the current 10%. They'd live at most 40 years, instead of 70+. They'd be anywhere from 300-1200x more likely to be starving. Instead of almost everyone reaching old age, 1/3 - 1/2 of all children would die of various causes. And so on, and so on, and so on. And so on. The list just doesn't end. The past was hellish to the modern eye. I wonder why! Focussing only on the bad, and completely ignoring the good, is intellectually dishonest and betrays a complete lack of perspective. > "Okay, everything's fair now." Except the world would be objectively far worse off if it wasn't for those crooked hands. See above.
- ethbro 9y ago
  You're supposing an alternative where it was only possible for the West to have created these inventions you allude to. While there have been thesises that only Great Britain possessed the necessary ingredients for steam power and industrialization, that argument isn't universally held. And I refuse to believe that this applies to every invention, especially as world population increased.
  - dmpk2k 9y ago
    You're right, but in the current timeframe? That's one hell of a stretch. I'll go Bayesian on this one. And so: thanks West!
    - intended 9y ago
      Eh? If time frame was the criteria we could Just start wars again. Remove all the people except the victors and chattel. And there’s billions who never got a chance to ever get medicine. Billions more never born or able to live with a fighting chance because the entire social structure was yanked out, root and branch.

hutzlibu 9y ago

"By every objective metric (child mortality, lifespan, literacy, starvation, absolute poverty), the world is a better place today than ever before. By a huge margin. Entirely thanks to the West." If you believe in quantity over quality, then yes. Otherwise, well I just say garbage dumps, that people used to call forest, desertification and climate change. And how come so many people are on antidepressants, if we live in the best world so far? I mean, we clearly live in the most technology advanced world, yes (and I like that), but ignoring, that all this new power from technology did caused many real problems, is soo medieval ...

dmpk2k 9y ago
So edgy. While everything you point out is true, if I gave you a magic one-way doorway to 1700, you wouldn't take it. Nobody even remotely rational would. Today's depression is very "firstworldproblems" compared to the problems people used to be depressed about. We definitely have challenges, and some are major, but compared to the past? If you sincerely believe we don't have both quality and quantity nowadays, you've lost the plot. Unless you like diseases, starvation, high mortality, subsistence farming, a rickity home, poor climate control, and a short life. And that's long before we get to a lack of cool things like electricity, planes and computers. Nasty, brutish and short: quality indeed!
- hutzlibu 9y ago
  I am a child of my time. So of course I do not want to go back, as allmost all of my knowledge and skills were useless there. And as I said, I like technology. I just don't like it, that we got this technology by unsustainable exploitation. And about diseases, starvation, etc. as far as I know, we still have those and in absolute numbers, much more than ever, as there are much more people living on the world today. And looking into modern (first world) hospitals or old people homes, were all those happy people slowly and forgotten rot away - I am not sure, that if you would sum up their suffering you would come up with better numbers than in the most barbaric times, where the old ones had to go to die in the snow, when they became useless. So like I said, yes we have technology now and technology is awesome for solving problens. But now we face the problems caused by technology. And they are big. So no, I would not go back, I rather go forward with better technology. But to develop and use better technology, one needs to see first the problems of the existing one and its effect on society.