East meets West: Ancient Wisdom shaping Modern Power.
For centuries, the East and West have become more than just ends of a compass but now represent vast philosophical traditions dictating Politics, Economics and Public Policy across the world.
Western philosophy has its roots in the ideas of Ancient Greek thinkers and through numerous other additions in the enlightenment era. It's based around the principles of individual rights, the ideals of progress and rational debate. On the other hand, Eastern philosophy was shaped by Confucian ethics, Buddhist compassion and Taoist balance. It champions the belief of collective responsibility, harmony and the prioritisation of the stability of the whole over the stability of the one. These opposite ideologies do not remain locked in monasteries and churches but instead steer the economic and political directions of entire nations. In the increasingly international world we now live in, conflict and clashes between these two different thought processes is unavoidable, so understanding these philosophical origins is key in grasping the true reasons why nations act in the way that they do.
The governmental processes in the Western world stem from the foundations of their philosophical origins. Constant and open dialogue based on our different beliefs are synonymous with any western parliament where ideas such as individual rights, secularism and liberalism, originating from the enlightenment era, are widely adhered to. These ideas have slowly become entrenched human rights in Western countries such as the freedom of speech as well as freedom of religion and belief. Additionally, the systems of law and governance have been highly impacted by Judeo-Christian moral frameworks. Although these two religions had large disputes in the past, Western philosophy takes great inspiration from both, using both stereotypical Jewish punishment and Christian mercy in the court of law.
Eastern thought on the other hand is more based in traditional oriental values that are still embraced by billions around the world. Confucianism was one of the main driving factors and emphasises social ideals of hierarchy, moral duty and social harmony, striving for a more collective population. Although this ideology is also followed in some Western spheres of influence it was never able to establish itself as strongly on the culture and government that it had in the East. Taoism similarly emphasises balance, non-interference and natural order, with the idea of creating a more equitable civilisation. These criteria are key in running a thriving Asian civilisation as they have the strongest impact on the people. Finally, Buddhism is the last pillar of Eastern philosophy and emphasises the most important characteristic, an ideal ruler should possess compassion, detachment from ego and impermanence. These rules are critical to the creation of a powerful yet righteous leader in an ambitious nation.
These two schools of thought both heavily impacted the political models followed by the different sides of our planet. The West utilises democracy to keep a strong and competitive political climate as to follow the idea that greatness is forged in competition. This would ideally be crucial in the conjuring of strong leading political parties which are both adequately powerful and flexible to treat the needs of an ever-changing political world. Numerous Western states also use the rule of law as a codified, rights-based legal system that is also flexible enough to change. For example, the American Constitution is one of the most ingenious legal documents as the writers knew that they did not know everything, so they made the constitution able to be changed to flow freely and adapt with the everchanging political world. Finally, the west has traditionally been the flagbearer of economic liberalism, possibly the strongest political tool in their arsenal. The freedom of the Western market is a large-scale expression of individual independence derived from Western philosophy. This has materialised in economically in the success of the thriving free market.
Democracy vs Autocracy
While the West capitalises on democracy, the East’s school of thought impacts the political process in a different way. Western governments success lies in the competition present through constant confrontation, however Eastern states tended to have more consensus-orientated government where the primary focus was stability over confrontation. This method of government has arguably led to more mission-driven governments which have less competition than the West but generally a much easier time passing bills and legislation. The East’s united mentality mostly resided in the creation of a father figure that represented the state. This strong paternalistic view of public policy leads to more hardworking populations that act to benefit the state. The most popular examples of this are China and Singapore, both of which developed in 50 years more than most of the West has ever. The last representation of Eastern philosophy in the modern world is the use of a collective mentality over individual expression in public life, this includes not only small things like graffiti and litter, but also as a mindset that positively amplifies the whole country’s state.
Despite these political philosophies being seemingly incompatible, there are definitely points in history where they have been effectively mixed. These points of convergence usually create deeply fascinating countries that are points of modern hybridisation. For example, Japan was the prime example of an Eastern country which embodied the values that I previously discussed, yet as of more recently, started to blend these Confucian cultural underpinnings with democratic systems to conjure a thriving economy. Similar to Japan, South Korea is an embodiment of a mix between Eastern and Western philosophies and this materializes in the shape of a vibrant cultural scene.
These are just two examples of Eastern states adopting Western ideas as they seem to be, in my eyes, the most optimal choice for creating a free and successful population.
It is not only Western economic ideas that blend the boundaries between these two dimensions. Globalisation as of itself spread new ideas to many people that could appreciate and use them in their everyday lives, accelerating the ideological cross-pollination between the seemingly contrasting states of philosophy. Technology also plays a major part in allowing humanity to explore the prominent beliefs that are in other parts of the world by increasing the speed and ease of communication between people once separated by distance and language.
The Western Wealth divide
However, it's important to note that neither Western nor Eastern Philosophy is faultless. They each have unique blind spots and strengths whilst also failing in other areas. For example, the Western strengths lie in the protection of individual rights and freedoms through codified law, it also encourages innovations through open debate and competition present in the market and political circles. Additionally, the West has the flexibility to reform through democratic processes that are currently in place. In spite of this, it still does also have its blind spots, these include the idea that excessive individualism can strongly corrode any social cohesion. Also, the constant adversary politics can lead to governments that are gridlocked and stagnant in determining new laws. In my eyes, the West’s major fault is the undisputable fact that market-driven systems highly risk widening inequality between people. The East also has its own share of strengths and weaknesses. The strengths include, the strong social harmony and collective stability present in its population, an incredibly strong state capacity for long term planning and rapid mobilisation of its resources. Another major benefit which the Western world arguably lacks today is the deep-rooted cultural respect for education and moral leadership in their country, founded on the thought of the patriarchal state. The negatives include, the over-prioritisation of stability in the society that can supress creativity and dissent, leading to a more stagnant population. Hierarchical norms in the society entrench inequality and normalise it, and the high dominance of the state can limit the personal freedoms of a population.
To conclude, the deep-rooted differences in theory founded in the different parts of the world have a large impact on the shape of our political methods and forms of government, this is due to the cultural significance in the climates in which these countries were formed and how the general population acts. In the future, politics may reside in philosophical synthesis instead of competition, creating a utopia where the best of both worlds can be used. Although I was raised in the Western world, I believe that these two forms of philosophical reasoning are equal in both strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore I am keen to see what the future holds for our political and philosophical world.
Thanks,
George Cumisky