I was fascinated by an essay in the current issue of the Economist which maps the differences between American values and those of other countries. The article is called Living with a Superpower and is available in full online. One table in particular fascinates me. This:
It's a bit complicated, but it's an attempt to map national values on two axes, the 'survival / self-expression' continuum and the 'traditional / secular-rational' continuum. After looking at this for a long time, I rotated the table 90 degrees clockwise and found the table much easier to read when I replaced these axes with 'left / right' and 'poor / rich'. Rotated, it was easy to read America on the right and above on the table, and say 'Ah, America is rich and right wing.' Or to see Sweden and Japan sitting on the left, but up at the rich end, whereas Russia is left but poor.
This is obviously a bit reductive. (For instance, politics is about more than how religious you are and whether you accept traditional values.) The article explains the table with a more complex theory:
'The notion is that industrialisation turns traditional societies into secular-rational ones, while post-industrial development brings about a shift towards values of self-expression.'
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 17:29 (twenty-three years ago)
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 17:30 (twenty-three years ago)
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 17:32 (twenty-three years ago)
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 17:35 (twenty-three years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 4 January 2003 17:58 (twenty-three years ago)
― masonicboom, Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:05 (twenty-three years ago)
The 'traditional - rational' axis I have more problems with. For instance, Japan is both highly rational and highly traditional, a high-tech feudal society.
I like how the article talks about the most liberal countries being 'post-protestant'. In that term it's sort of implied that even if you've escaped religion, the type of religion you escaped determines the type of post-religious life you have. If you escape a radical, rebellious religion, you have an even more radical, rebellious secular post-religious culture to look forward to.
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:18 (twenty-three years ago)
Imagine it, too, as an airline map. Imagine you went into a travel agent and said 'I want a holiday somewhere secular-self-expressive, please!'
'Ah, we have a special offers on flights to Stockholm and Kyoto this week!'
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:23 (twenty-three years ago)
― t\'\'t (t\'\'t), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:26 (twenty-three years ago)
― anthony easton (anthony), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:28 (twenty-three years ago)
By the way, anyone following the link to the Maslow hierarchy of needs, please be aware that my hasty link is to a site at the University of Tennessee, and the author has added 'oneness with God' as one of the attributes of the top level of self-actualisation. Something that, as far as I'm aware, is not on Maslow's own list.
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:33 (twenty-three years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:44 (twenty-three years ago)
'industrialisation turns traditional societies into secular-rational ones, while post-industrial development brings about a shift towards values of self-expression'
actually suggests that as nations advance through industrialisation, heading left-to-right along the bottom axis, they should, as they hit their post-industrial stride, turn up and rise up the other axis. Subsistence and tradition are overcome together, replaced by expression and rationality. To see this process in action, we'd have to make the chart 3D, with a line showing one nation's progress, rather diagonal, from a Zimbabwe-like position to a Sweden-like position.
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:55 (twenty-three years ago)
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:57 (twenty-three years ago)
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:58 (twenty-three years ago)
― Jane, Saturday, 4 January 2003 18:58 (twenty-three years ago)
Like, when you fly from Britain to Norway, do you actually walk through Oslo airport thinking to yourself 'Wow, it feels a bit more secular-rational here than I'm used to!'
I think you do feel these things. London - Amsterdam is a short trip in space, but a long way in values: 'Blimey, legal spliffs, legal hookers, euthanasia... and the age of consent is 12!'
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 19:05 (twenty-three years ago)
― OleM (OleM), Saturday, 4 January 2003 19:05 (twenty-three years ago)
― DavidM (DavidM), Saturday, 4 January 2003 19:05 (twenty-three years ago)
Could we add a 6th rung to the Maslow ladder of needs -- once you've done the self-actualisation thing, Level 6 is escape? Knock the tower down and start again?
I know from my own experience that I like hanging out with people lower down the Maslow ladder because I get to embody, for them, values (liberal values) I'm otherwise skeptical of. In other words, I escape the Freudian 'narcissism of small differences' trap. To put it another way, imagine a left wing Labour politician who hates most people in his own party and hangs out with Conservatives, because they make him more comfortable with his own left wing beliefs.
Is that it, or are 'traditional-survivalists' just nicer people?
We tend to like people who are struggling better than people who have arrived. I'm tempted to add 'the same way we like puppies better than people'.
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 19:11 (twenty-three years ago)
What I find depressing is the idea that with inevitable Western-style industrialisation and development we’ll all end up occupying the same value-space in the top-right of the chart with no room for diversity or even debate.
Skopje wins over Stockholm because it forces me to confront ideas and values I find difficult. In don’t get that in Stockholm, Brussels, Berlin, Glasgow. I do get it in Atlanta. But if we all end up squeezed in that top right-hand corner, yawn.
― Jane, Saturday, 4 January 2003 19:53 (twenty-three years ago)
― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Saturday, 4 January 2003 20:13 (twenty-three years ago)
that was legitimately funny (esp. re this chart)
― Tad (llamasfur), Saturday, 4 January 2003 20:50 (twenty-three years ago)
POLE GETS WRONG PLANE TO INDIA, NOTICES SOME PARALLELS IN DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS (BUT NOTHING ELSE) BETWEEN THE COUNTRIES.
― suzy (suzy), Saturday, 4 January 2003 21:01 (twenty-three years ago)
plus, i'm sure that curry kielbasa would taste very nice -- i'll have to try it sometime.
― Tad (llamasfur), Saturday, 4 January 2003 21:03 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Saturday, 4 January 2003 21:09 (twenty-three years ago)
also interesting how armenia and azerbaijan also have the "not very different" status on this chart, since the two have been at blows for the past decade. those small differences can be very important, indeed.
― Tad (llamasfur), Saturday, 4 January 2003 21:10 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Saturday, 4 January 2003 21:13 (twenty-three years ago)
By the way, this (and the last post) is Momus posting as Suzy (visiting with Kate and her right now. Their house in Clerkenwell is more rational-secular than mine in Bethnal Green).
― suzy (suzy), Saturday, 4 January 2003 21:16 (twenty-three years ago)
― Amateurist (amateurist), Saturday, 4 January 2003 21:18 (twenty-three years ago)
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 4 January 2003 21:28 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Saturday, 4 January 2003 23:15 (twenty-three years ago)
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 4 January 2003 23:37 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Sunday, 5 January 2003 01:50 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Sunday, 5 January 2003 02:14 (twenty-three years ago)
― Colin Meeder (Mert), Monday, 6 January 2003 12:16 (twenty-three years ago)