Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Gokulmuthu N's avatar

One thought came to my mind when I read this. Yes, it is natural and globally beneficial for a stronger and more efficient system to supplant a weaker one. The problem I see is that strong in one field does not mean strong in another. For example, just because the military power of US is higher than that of Ethiopia does not mean that the food habits of US is better than that of Ethiopia. Just because the scientific temper of country A is better than that of country B, we cannot say that the music of country A is richer than country B. The problem is that the political power (for example) overruns and destroys other fields unrelated to it, in which the weaker society might have been better. If each field is considered independently and is given global space to compete without the influence of other fields, we will get the best of all societies and cultures, in all fields. The problem today is that the political, economic, and military might pushes other fields too. So much of indigenous knowledge in "soft" fields like medicine, cuisine, music, philosophy, jewelry, religion, psychology, etc. have been lost just because those societies were weak in the "hard" fields of economy, military, etc. That way, the US is a great human experiment where the best of all over the world are invited to compete in an almost level playing field by providing a safe space (where rule of law and individual freedom is maintained fairly well), be it sports, science, technology, music, cuisine, fashion, movies, religion, philosophy, etc.

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts