There’s a reason why there is and will never be a world history book that is definitive.
I converted to Eastern Orthodox in 1994 and was deeply into it for about 6-7 years. Learned a bit of Russian too. Spent a short time in a monastery. Had a big case of convertisis.
It was fun.
I Learned all about the Byzantine Empire, Rus, the development of the Russian language from the Greek, how Russia felt they were the inheritors of Rome just as the Ottomans did, just as Napolean did, etc.
I was going to be TRUE ORTHODOX, not like those ethnic ones. Talked back to priests who were throwing out paper icons and all that. Mr. Purity. No regrets but I know why I lost friends.
The politics of the Russian/Greek Orthodox churches bored me. I’m a liberal / leftist. Always was. Multicultural, cultural relativist, all that stuff. So, no, no need for a lecture about universal history but you can if you like. I know.
Doesn’t take away from the fact that that map is a beautiful piece of revisionist history. There may be no UNIVERSAL world history but there ARE promotional materials designed to sway minds.
‘“National sovereignty” is a convenient fiction.’?
That is a problematic statement. So, is this the hypothesis of the “three world powers”? China vs Russia vs USA with Middle East as comedy relief?
If they trade or have any relations with other nations, there needs to be cooperation of some kinds. Of course there are differences and everybody has their stupid patriotisms. Humans. Different histories are expected.
But making executive decisions that affect those OUTSIDE of your domain, enforcing your history upon the actual lives of others outside of your domain, well, that needs a higher answer.
At present, Putin is the victim of the West, according to a lot of people right now.
The more countries, businesses and people respond in some fashion (however odd), the more of a victim Putin becomes and the more sympathetic people become to him.
He becomes the poor little oligarch.
He is simply attempting to do good for his people in his culture and the West is attempting to impress its individualistic liberal value system upon their honored traditional ways that we should respect as an ancient culture, etc.
Conservative Russia believes that Ukraine and several other areas belong to them.
I’ve been saying this since the beginning. You could check my posts but it’s not important.
They feel historically justified. I said so earlier as well.
This does not validate it. [not all Russia is conservative of course, although that is the PR at work]
Yes, I am focusing on one dimension to start with. Part of diplomacy is a successive set of small agreements.
Multiculturalism afford space for boundaries of others and their truths.
Ethnocentrism has no boundaries as it is single and excludes alternatives.
What you are arguing is for multiculturalism, but playing favorites with Russia over this entity you refer to as “the West” and over this entity you refer to as “open culture”.
For “Liberalism”/”Western Modernity” that sounds like Francis Bacon, “The Myth of Progress” (that the world is naturally progressing towards better and better things”) – Stephen Pinker-esque ?