Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Eastern Civilization will fail because they do not believe in The Lord. Every important contribution and every great nation has believed in The Bible. They will fall to communism and atheism but not before committing mass genocide. After the collapse of the East, They will get jesus in their hearts and finally accept Him. Soon Jesus will spread across the world until we are all the same religion
There are indeed a substantial number of Muslims in China, they have been there for centuries. Furthermore, China is hardly a "homogenous" nation, it has dozens of ethnicities.
Eastern Civilization will fail because they do not believe in The Lord. Every important contribution and every great nation has believed in The Bible. They will fall to communism and atheism but not before committing mass genocide. After the collapse of the East, They will get jesus in their hearts and finally accept Him. Soon Jesus will spread across the world until we are all the same religion
That's really very presumptuous, considering that non-Christian civilizations have endured far longer than Christian ones.
That is only if you look at Japan, Korea and China in isolation. Since the Op referred to them collectively, my point to was dissuade that argument.
OK, I misunderstood. Still, I think there is more homogeneity in East Asia than many people claim. Japanese, Koreans and Chinese may not like each other much today, but they are racially very similar and their cultures have developed from the same root. People in these countries aren't really any more different from each other than Englishmen, Germans and French.
People in these countries aren't really any more different from each other than Englishmen, Germans and French.
Well if that is that argument:
"The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them. It is also compatible with our finding that, even when the most distinct populations are considered and hundreds of loci are used, individuals are frequently more similar to members of other populations than to members of their own population. Thus, caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes."
You might also consider that Japan's ascendency as a major industrial power began in 1868 and by the early part of the 20th century Japan was capable of competing with the Western powers. On the other hand despite having the intellectual and mercantile resources, China was incapable of industrializing until almost 100 years later and only after China adopted the Soviet model for industrialization. Two Asian nations, two completely different cultural outlooks spurring two distinctly different pathways to industrial development. One would think that if China and Japan were so culturally similar one would think that they would have shared similar industrial development.
You might also consider that Japan's ascendency as a major industrial power began in 1868 and by the early part of the 20th century Japan was capable of competing with the Western powers. On the other hand despite having the intellectual and mercantile resources, China was incapable of industrializing until almost 100 years later and only after China adopted the Soviet model for industrialization. Two Asian nations, two completely different cultural outlooks spurring two distinctly different pathways to industrial development. One would think that if China and Japan were so culturally similar one would think that they would have shared similar industrial development.
The China and Japan development stories have a lot in common. Both were high-level civilizations during Europe's Dark Ages that stagnated under insular monarchies and were eventually eclipsed by the West in the Renaissance era. The main difference is that China was colonized and exploited while Japan, being a remote island nation, managed to remain independent. Then China had the misfortune of coming under the rule of Mao. But when Deng finally opened the country to global capitalism in the '80s, China modernized quickly, just as Japan had done during the Meiji Period (late 1800s).
The Eastern civilization (China, Japan, Korea) and the Western Civilization (Europe and countries its people occupied) have been considered advanced and its cultures considered as rich.
Now, the Western civilization is being slowly altered by waves and waves of immigration from the Middle East with different cultures and values. While the Eastern civilization's citizens, ethnicity, and culture are and will probably remain 90%+ homogeneous.
Do you think in the future, the Eastern civilization will be more powerful than the West?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaker15
I mean, I don't see Japan ever having millions of Muslims flooding in bringing in different cultures into the Japanese cities and society.
Japan is being wise.
They are taking no refugees. They said they need to spend more on their own citizen's well being. However, that they could send some food and aid.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
