In Asia in general there is conformity and uniformity, so the range of subsidiarity is less important. If you can imagine a nation where the localities are all similar, populated by clones, everyone would have the same answer to any problem.
In the West, the good side of diversity means that different areas of the country are not only geologically, meteorologically, and culturally different, but that subsidiarity is what moderates the differences so that we can be "One Nation, Under God", while having utterly different cities where you can move to where you match the culture.
This is a danger with the alt-Right's nationalism, if they ignore that the "nation" is still diverse even if populated by Europeans. The Red-Coats and Patriots were both "Englishmen".
One of the Libertarian/Anarchists points is valid in that the Free Market should decide, but that would also mean if I wanted to live in a gated city among my peers (however I define it) I should be allowed to.
The glory and greatness of the west is because it found a way to create an ecosystem instead of a monoculture.
Afterword by Ex-Army.
First, one thing I think he got wrong, or at least expressed wrong: He refers to Asia as if it were a culture in itself, analogous to Western Culture. That simply can't be the case. I've always accepted Spengler's notion, expressed in Decline of the West, that there have been eight "high cultures." Wikipedia says:
Spengler lists eight hochkulturen or "High Cultures" that have existed:
- Mesoamerican (Mayan/Aztec)
- Classical (Greek/Roman)
- Magian (Islamic)
- Faustian or Western (European/American)
All this reminds me of something interesting I read about Japan. Don't know if it's entirely true, but it has the ring of truth about it. It was said that if a high-school student transfers from one school to another on the other side of the country, when he gets there, each of his classes has the same textbook, and they're on the same page as in his old school. (And, of course, one would probably count Japan as a segment of Sinic culure.)
What TZ expresses here in a concise way has been remarked on elsewhere, but usually not this clearly or coherently. Now, he's replying to the Subsidiarity post here [link] in particular. And I've heard the same principle described other ways in the past:
Somebody, Oswald Spengler or somebody like him, remarked that a strength of the Western Culture is that, unlike Chinese or Classical Culture, it has always lacked a coterminous superstate. At first glance, this might be taken as a weakness, but there's never been a time in Western History that the energies of the West have been coordinated by a single authority. Great accomplishments have been made, largely, by segments of the West in competition with one another. Paris v. London v. Rome v. Berlin v. Madrid, etc.
Others have pointed out that the Reformation is what did it. It prevented any one church from dominating the West, AND is separated the power of all the churches from that of all the states, more or less, again enabling competition and preventing stagnation.
And language, of course. Classical culture had one dominant language, Latin, and a secondary one, Greek. China had one, Chinese, etc. The West has that same Latin, plus English, German, Spanish, French and several smaller ones, all of which have strong literary traditions, again, in competition with one another.
And, almost needless to say, free-market capitalism has flourished more within the West than anywhere else on earth, largely due to the absence of a central authority.
And you can probably thing of some other areas in which the West, unlike other cultures, has avoided uniformity and, deliberately or otherwise, fostered competition, economically and culturally.
Quibcag: No, technically not a quibcag, because I was intent on using the goddess Europa, and nobody seems to have done her up in anime style, oddly enough. I don't know where this art came from originally.