Tuesday, November 3, 2015

The normal Life Cycle of a Culture

What happened to the Arab Spring? What seems to be happening in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia which, apparently, is beginning to change along more “liberal democratic” lines? Carol Giacomo of the New York Times has written about the Kingdom in an article that came under the title: “In Saudi Arabia, Where Women's Suffrage is a new idea,” published on November 2, 2015. To understand some of what's happening in that region of the world, we need to develop a general idea about the evolution of cultures.

Like ripples in a pond, a cultural trend begins with a single event, and spreads horizontally while diminishing in intensity. It dies out eventually unless it is fed by one or more exterior forces such as winds from above or currents from below that would add energy to it, turning it into a raging sea, for example.

Most cultural events live at least for a decade or two because they are fed with enough energy provided by new artists embracing the trend. You see this in such art forms as painting and sculpture that keep evolving till they reach a “logical conclusion,” at which point they begin to transform into a different trend. Often however, the old trend is replaced by an entirely new one – at times one that is the antithesis of the old. In fact, it can happen that the new comes into being as a backlash to the old having gone to an exaggerated extreme.

The same thing happens more massively at the macrocosm level when the entire culture is transformed from one package into another. Such package would contain not only the arts but also the political expression, literature, the leisure industries, dance, theater, sports, foods, the pop subculture and all the rest. Without necessarily producing violence – though such a thing can happen at times – the culture goes through a period of upheaval if not a revolution during which time the old order breaks and makes room for the new.

That is how a culture rejuvenates itself. But like a living organism, a culture can only go through a limited number of cycles over the decades or the centuries before it begins to feel its age. What happens then is that the process of rejuvenation produces something that's not different from the old. That is, the culture clones itself with each cycle as if it were unable to sire a younger, more vigorous offspring.

When this happens, even a culture that has attained the level of a civilization in its own right will stagnate for a long period of time. It will even be seen to decline, if only in relative terms, because the rest of the world will be advancing. This has been the fate of the ancient civilizations in the East of Asia and its south, in the Middle East and the Levant, as well as in North East Africa from Egypt down south to Ethiopia.

Thus, the two burning questions of the day: what to make of the Arab Spring? Is the apparent transformation in Saudi Arabia part of the Arab Spring?

To answer those questions we must first establish that 22 very different countries are called Arab simply because they share one common written language even if they speak, on a daily basis, in hundreds of different dialects that can be as different from each other as Greek is from German. Still, despite the fact that each has its own history, therefore its own core culture, what happens in one country has the tendency to affect the others due to the fact that modern communication has shrunk the world to the size of a global village. In fact, Egypt can affect Saudi Arabia in a cultural sense no more and no less than China or America could.

What we saw happen in Egypt recently, and what Carol Giacomo says is happening in Saudi Arabia, is the phenomenon of public apathy toward the idea of participating in the elections. When it came to doing business such as the twinning of the Suez Canal, the people of Egypt roared like a lion not with their vocal cords but with their pocketbooks. As to Saudi Arabia, the women told Carol Giacomo they are too busy doing business to bother with the elections. Why is that?

Well, think of America; what's the voter turn out there? It is very low. And this is why the candidates who run for election arrange to transport the voters to the polls. And those who do vote do it not because they like someone's message but because they hate the opposition. That's what they call democracy?

Nobody is fooled. The people of the world know that while the idea of democracy started out as something good, it is now reaching its twilight years. The best thing we can do as we watch the developments in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world, is to be relaxed spectators and enjoy the show rather than pontificate as to what should be happening that is not, or what is happening that should not.

As to the English speaking world that believes it owns democracy and has the duty to shove down the throat of everyone, watch it stagnate as did the old civilizations when they started cloning themselves rather than rejuvenating themselves.