[QUOTE=Derleth]
They haven’t even been around 60 years yet.
[/quote]
The current Chinese government dates from 1949, but Chinese civilization is the oldest national civilization/culture in the world.
[QUOTE=Derleth]
OTOH, if you must count cultural continuity, certainly we date back as far as Ancient Greece and possibly all the way to Ur.
[/QUOTE]
The “cultural continuity” of America goes back no further than the Anglo-Saxon conquest of Britain, if that far.
What, five thousand years is something? Hah! My mother’s side, we count back six thousand years, almost.
My father’s side, we only can trace the family name and blood back two thousand years, ignoring the bit about Japheth, but they’re barbarians, what do they know?
WRT China, the last Asian communist superpower that tried to switch to democracy hit a few speedbumbs. And China will have to move to democracy. Capitalism and communism don’t mix. Rich people don’t like to be told what to do by dirt poor local party officials.
India is the country that got the order correct. Democracy, then capitalism. The other way around doesn’t work so well.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
The current Chinese government dates from 1949, but Chinese civilization is the oldest national civilization/culture in the world.
[/quote]
No, the civilization/culture to remain kinda-sorta the same to outsiders for the longest. On the inside, things weren’t nearly that stable. Not for 5000 years.
Then China only goes back to the end of Imperial China in 1912. Hell, China got conquered just like the Britons as late as 1215! (OK, it took 'til 1279 for the conquest to fully ‘take’. Give the Mongols a break, it isn’t like they had C-130s or B-52s.)
The death of Imperial China did a lot more to the culture, though. The Mongols could install themselves as just another dynasty in a long succession of dynasties, whereas the battle between the Republic of China and Communist China was the ‘end of history’ from a Confucian perspective. The Mandate of Heaven wasn’t merely withdrawn: It was taken out and shot by the revolutionaries. A few decades later China split in two.
On the other hand, common law goes back in some form to Roman-era Germanic traditions. It was raised to something approximating the modern level by King Henry II. (One of the things that brought him in conflict with “that turbulent priest” Thomas à Becket.) American philosophy goes back to Plato, mainstream American religion goes back to Abraham. Music goes back to ancient African forms.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Where are you deriving that 1860 figure from? I’d say British dominance started even before the Napoleonic Wars, and certainly they were THE dominant power after France’s defeat. This is the first time I’ve ever heard that the British Empire was a ‘flash in the pan’…considering it was probably the most powerful empire in the history of man kind. Regardless, the British were certainly looked on during their time as a world superpower as the US is looked on today…which was the point I was making.
-XT
[/QUOTE]
Prior to the Indian Mutiny it was a private enterprise thing
After that the UK government stepped in and IMO ran things rather well
[QUOTE=FRDE]
Prior to the Indian Mutiny it was a private enterprise thing
[/QUOTE]
IOW this is all your own opinion and you just pulled that number out of thin air. 
Thats fine as long as we are clear on that. British world dominance was not based solely on their possession of India, nor was their superpower status dependant on the East India Company (which I presume you were referencing here).
[QUOTE=FRDE]
After that the UK government stepped in and IMO ran things rather well
[/QUOTE]
That has nothing to do with the British being a world superpower, and as you said its YHO there…so its debatable in any case.
-XT
I think the US will adjust badly, just as Britain did when the empire crumbled.
It’s always a shock when you aren’t on top any more.
[QUOTE=Derleth]
Then China only goes back to the end of Imperial China in 1912.
[/QUOTE]
Nonsense. Never confuse a state with a nation. The latter is not immortal, but generally much longer-lived. France has been through at least ten different political regimes since 1789, yet it remains the same country as the one the Bourbons ruled. Poland survived as a nation after the Partition, else the Polish state could not have been revived in the 20th Century. And the American nation is older than the U.S. Constitution, and existed almost a hundred years before independence.
I should point out that in China, according to the news of the day, the male to female ratio is hitting 130 to 100, in some places. It averages 118 to 100.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/103239/China_running_out_of_women
This is something I predicted a while ago, and something to watch. China’s going to get more aggressive…
[QUOTE=xtisme]
IOW this is all your own opinion and you just pulled that number out of thin air. Thats fine as long as we are clear on that. British world dominance was not based solely on their possession of India, nor was their superpower status dependant on the East India Company (which I presume you were referencing here).
That has nothing to do with the British being a world superpower, and as you said its YHO there…so its debatable in any case.
-XT
[/QUOTE]
Not really my own opinion, the thing is that the UK was not at all ‘joined up’ until after the Indian Mutiny - it was warfare in Europe against roughly equals and multi-national companies with private armies further afield.
Basically it was an uncoordinated mess.
The Indian Mutiny was a major shock, and the UK government ‘nationalized’ what were essentially private operations.
I was once very annoyed in a pub trivial pursuits game, when my answer that the World’s largest Empire was that of Ghengis Khan and his Moghuls/Mongols.
The rationale was that the Mongol Empire was not an Empire, but an aglomeration of states - like a bunch of amoebae without a central brain.
My definition is central administration, and self proclamation is a joke unless you have got to first base.
In 1910 there was definitely a British Empire, in 1840 there was an uncoordinated mess.
So are India and China likely to ever have the same standard of living as citizens of the U.S.? I’m not sure if you were saying if I was correct or incorrect.
[QUOTE=E-Sabbath]
I should point out that in China, according to the news of the day, the male to female ratio is hitting 130 to 100, in some places. It averages 118 to 100.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/103239/China_running_out_of_women
This is something I predicted a while ago, and something to watch. China’s going to get more aggressive…
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=pool]
So are India and China likely to ever have the same standard of living as citizens of the U.S.? I’m not sure if you were saying if I was correct or incorrect.
[/QUOTE]
I’m just saying there’s no reason, based on their population alone, that they can’t become as affluent as Japan or South Korea. There might be other reasons, of course.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
I know you have a hard on for China and India BG…
[/quote]
Not them in particular, but a multipolar world order would be better than what we’ve got now.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
It will be interesting if the world (a.k.a. Europe and friends :)) ever gets its wish for a world without nasty old America sticking our noses in to everything and fucking up the utopia that the world COULD be if we were just put back in our places. Of course, if we were asking this question a few hundred years ago at the height of the British Empire, I seriously doubt anyone would have predicted the US would become THE worlds power, outstripping every other nation in just about every measure…and I’d guess that there were plenty of folks who felt that the world would be SUCH a better place without those nasty Brits sticking their noses (and warships) into everyones business, blah blah blah. How’d that turn out?
[/QUOTE]
On balance, it turned out to be an improvement. At least America doesn’t engage in direct colonial rule of foreign countries. Well, not nearly as often as Britain did.