Originally Posted by Fuuma
I certainly haven't broadened the "scope" you were discussing (West vs Islam in a clash of civilization) as what I discuss is certainly not based on that. Maybe I shouldn't even have used ISIS as an example and concentrated on other groups to get the point across. Capitalism is a universalist philosophy (well it came from European culture and its universalist tradition) and has in its scope the unlimited, this explains both why (social) conservatives are not as adapted to its mindset as Silicon valley "progressives" (no roots, change instead of social reproduction, global mindset, going toward the inclusion of all races, creeds and sexual orientations etc.) and thus "on the wrong side of history" (they're shooting themselves in the foot) and why it must necessarily create these epidermic reactions in specific certain areas and cultures (i.e. ISIS) when the supposedly aseptic and axiologically neutral global is displacing the traditional local. Demographic data show us there is a convergence of civilizations as far as important indicators are concerned (literacy rates for women, number of children etc.). If I get a rash I don't say there is a clash between myself and the rash.
This is quite good and drives home the point that the conflict between the West and Islam is more of a minor skirmish than a clash.
The actual battle lines are drawn up between the universalism itself and it's discontents, with the former slowly routing the latter for at least 200 years. The type of universalism (sub in progressivism for a more familiar, narrowly defined term that still gets the point across) that was unleashed by the Calvinits has been an extemely successful mind-virus, and when paired with any type of democracy it trends toward totalizing state-expansion.
The invented positive-rights, indoctrination and enforced thought control pushed by public institutions, and dismantling of any future time-orientation in favor of current consumption-- all spiraling out of control in a purity signaling spiral (this is the locus of the Islamic immigration debate
)-- is what half of the (mostly inarticulate) country is rebelling against.
Capitalism is a factor to the extent it enables universalism to take hold through increasing wealth and living standards. But calling capitalism a subsut of universalism is getting the correlation backwards. Capitalism isn't much more than a darwinian process that takes off when a minimum of trade and property rights are allowed. E.g. as the rest of the world has gotten on board and slowed US median wage growth, the pushback against universalism has gained momentum.