from the few eastern philosophies I read.. I can’t remember too many that were focused on economics and markets.. i.e Confucius taught mostly on what a ruler should do, harmony, social interactions etc.. but very little on economics (but of course, he was from a time long long before any of the western economists came to be).. you could even say that the differences in belief was a factor too.

when Europe was industrializing, they had the benefit of having alot of local coal nearby to power their industrialization. The Asian countries never discovered or at least used it (in the same manner) until much later. Plus the way society and economy was set up, they never had the need to enter the same kind of industrialization as Europe did..they had a large population and had enough efficient man power that prevented them from adopting something similar at the time.

you also had people like Adam Smith, Thomas Hobbes, and later Keynes and Marx, who contributed to European economic thinking.. I cant think of any Asian philosopher who wrote anythign in the same scale and detail in regards to economics.

Hmmm so much irons in fire… So I shal answer first to you, What I asked was that Why did europe produce these economical philoshophyes? Answer would be that Europeans devolped economical systems to that level that accompaning therothetics came along whit them. So perhaps we should think how economical conditons have rosen analog to civilisations and what does it mean compared to civilications levels of global power. What makes some civilisations to devolp economical systems?

To Chinawhite, You still didnt get it. Austrailian current sosiety and culture was born from immigrants, not from native aspects. You dont live in aborginal culture empire but in imported mixuture of different cultures from Europe. Wheter its devolped to individual and different ways doesent make any difference, the idea is on its basis or are still claiming that your ulture was born in Australia and not brougth by anyone? That all immigrants have lost their western european way of life and accepted aborginal manners?
I Think not.

Maybe you are the lost one since you are the one correcting people for something you wrote. Me, hamburger and Tribal are all lost to what you are trying to define

I wrote this before but you probaly missed it
“I should have asked at the start what is in your meaning of domination?. For all i know you are trying to compare a apple to a banna. And lets see if domination is a word you should be using”

well my apoligeses as i know the answer to this guestion and I try to dig the answer from you guys also. So thats why I migth not sound so clear in some occasions but try not to twist the basics. Western european language, English is the sole global language of all time. All major inventions dealing whit global reach have come from europe or its sibling USA, All colonial powers have been US or Europe (japan was minor player in its own area and never reached global levels)…there shouldnt be guestions in this part of the topic.

So try to understand what is difference of Global dominator and leading importer of some irrelevant products. We are looking all the time to History in this matter not today and tomorrow.

never said communism was a theory.

Im just correcting your inaccuraties, Its not smart its general knowledge. I dont believe your a communist but what the heck I trust you as much as **** on a stick. Being a communist does not make you more intelligable in matters like this .Maosim fundentual values are similar to marxism but completely differnt to where it is aimed.

Here is one of his famous quotes
“political power comes from the barrel of the gun”

The aim of this is differnt the type of Socialism is differnt. If you ever read anything published by mao vs Maxrism-Leninism style communism you are very wrong. Start off here
Manifesto of the Communist Party
[url=http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/classics/mao/index.html%5DMaosim

You think your a communist member, This is coming from someone which parents lived through the cultral revolution and whos grandfather joined the communist party at 17 and was the collective mayor until 55.

You know about MAO?

Well never Have I heard that When i told someone that im Communist that Im lying…
China was as much Shame to real communist movement as was any revisionist and opportunist direction. Beeing part of Chinese communist party and propaply not being part of Soviet communist party doesent make one a communist, Stalinist totalitarism isent best way of descriping someones ideological enthustiasmis. I am myself a supporter of Finnish communist party, formed in 1918 and before that was part of true sosial democratic working class party that was pioneering in field s of sosial liberation of working class. Compared to the world. Our ideological ‘grandpa’ O. W Kuusinen was the key author of Soviet Unions communist party central comitee to write down all the evidece that In Soviet side prove Mao’s actions revisionists, opportunists and pseudo-sientific mambo-jambo.
“Political power comes from gunbarrel” What it is more than simpledons way of summing up the revolutions political impacts orginally composed by Lenin himself, thougth saying it so simple gives an exucuse for anarchy that proved its power in idiotic campaings as cultural revolution.

But if you want to discuss whit this dangerous subject whit a real communist, make up an another thread or PM but lets not ruin this topic any more, shall we?

Proving something is not what i need nor want to you. I already know your level and quite frankly I like to challenge you to debate whenever to see you sramble for answers. Debatings is not about who keeps off personal attacks its about presenting facts or theory why this happened or why it didn’t its a X vs Y examination.

As of now you have not provided proof of why nor stated a proper reason for this occuring or stated what is your angle. Debate is about having a good vision of what you hvae

whatever, just dont downgrade to stubid comments like the one i showed any longer and we can go on just fine… 🙂

well european powers never even achieved empire status but kept constantly fighting whit each others so why did it affect onto China that they did have secure their borders.
But as whit economical theoryes, Werent those just inflicts of economical devolpment, why those rose in Europe and America is due that their economics were envolping. But the guestion should be asked then why didnt chinese economics rose in similar manner?

But China is a global power now and has been for many centuries, its “power” of course strengthening and weakening from time to time. Same goes for Japan. China was an advanced, outward looking power that navigated half the globe when Europe was only a collection of backwards, feudal nation-states gripped in the dark ages. Similarly, the old Khmer empire easily eclipsed the achievements of European nations that were its contemporaries half a world away.

The US (I don’t see how you can call the US “European”), has been a global power only for the last 60 years while the French and British Empires lasted for how long, maybe a Century.

Your theory is too Eurocentric, ignoring the non-European world that has always been there whether Europe was aware of it or not, and over which Europe had influence for only a comparatively short period of time.

Well does it really matter how long the global dominance has lasted when talking about the reasons why this has been achieved? And Im not beeing eurocentric, I do realise that Asia has produced fine empires of their own limited range but why havent Asia produced powers so strong that they have taken colonyes from Europe, or US?? As i said to Chinawhite its no good to try to avoid the issue by guestioning comon history knowledge and stick into penny interpretation issues. If the eurocentric wiev bothers you, then consider the question from otherway around, Why isent China the dominator of the world? Why didnt Chinese colonise America inspite they had skills to do so as Chinawhite there has so many times stated it?
And to not make me repeat the starting arguments let me give you a little more to considere: If the isolation and stagnation of Chinese empire has been ideological matter, Why havent those same things rose from Europe or in US??

Hmmm Chinawhite you still go around confusing the issue. There isent no doupt that America and Austrailia hasent got european ancestors and therefore continiuing cultural heritage of that mediterinian civilications born in 3000 years ago. Claiming that Japanese and Chinese immigrants have so big affect on American cultural consuence is like saying that a single pirch tree among the pines make forrest a grove…

So im not goint to venture in that discussion.

So as not to lose the tracks in the topic we shall deepen into that one statement where you are actually close the matter, Yes you claim that:

The europeans where forced to look for resources to fight one another while in asia it was dominated by only one power which did not need nor want to look for outside empires. Each european power had some fight on their hands and the european continent had limited resources so fighting expensive war for little resources was a stupid idea. Instead they explanded to find cheap easily to get resources without much trouble. While china had resources had people and didn’t think anyone else in the world could challenge her.

What that means? You are on the rigth tracks but consentrate too much into single examples as Im already suggest you to avoid them. This is a subject needing carefull generalisation skills.

But as you seem to be little lost in overall I shall help you (and others a bit)

If trying to understand why Europe has rised to dominance among its siblings, You need to figure out the reasons making civilisation to rise into power and dominance. You need to seperate all factors required to achieving that, count them up for europes stance and then count out the ones others are lacking and then you migth get into something more reasonable than trying to hide your misunderstandings by denying that US and Austrailian cultures are purely domestical born in the corresponding countryes whitout any foreing influence.

Ummm… It was the french and not the russianss. But we are talking about socialism and quasi-capitalism arent we?. While if that is the case china already had experience with that type of goervment before this introduction by the west. And if you are talking about Communism china did not european communism like Marxist or Leninism but embraced chinese socialism with chinese thought. Maoism is quite differnt from Marxist or Leninism style middle class but took on chinese enviroment into consideration. China was never a communist country but a Socialist country. Communism is a goal which proved incapable of reaching. It works in theory

and you dont have to sound smart by telling theoryes and historyes of communism to an actual communist like myself. I can gurantee you, Chinese sosisialism as ideology isent nothing more than opportunist twisting of Marxist theroyes to fitting Maos powerelites needs. Maybe it was differnt from Stalins oppurtunism by its own local variations but it had nothing to do whit sientific nature of true Marxist -Leninism. Communism isent an theory but actual level of sosietyes when we were born, and ultimate level of us when we advance to higher levels… but I shall ask you not to venture into this topic anylonger in this thread and also please cut out those childish comments like

*Falls on ground laughing*

this is your change to prove your claims to be so exelent depater That isent fitting to that image and if you continue it I shall drop my intrest to this. I have no intres to venture any loger to a personal insult contest

well Tribal you miss the point. The idea is to ask why the current and all previous global powers have european ancestoryes rathern than Asian. Im not saying or claiming that Europe today rules the world but United States of America and before it the British and French empires, they all roots from mediterenian civilisations. What factors have made europeans the rulers and not Asians?

You all are rigth in there that this domination has slowly begun meaningles as the global world works whit different rules and civilisations arent any longer so seperated from each other. The one taking the lead after european based power runs to dry may not get to that position by same means as the previous ones have, but its not the point here. Why have all global powers came from Europe?

By the way thanks for the articles you send me… 😉