January 10th, 2018
Book review: Worlds of history
In dollarization, Sherif Hetata depicts globalization as reinvention of imperialism. Globalization, he argues, is in essence the neo advancement of the doctrines of imperialism which benefit and build control of the developing and weaker countries and population by the large established multinational companies mainly from developed countries. I do not agree with his views. His cultural veil and opinionated perception is impeding him from conceptualizing the facts about globalization (Reilly 187-198).
According to Reilly (256-278) Fukuzawa Yukichi views the spread of westernization as inevitable; it cannot be held back and soon rather than later every country in Asia will have to embrace it. He compares it to the measles, a communicable disease that is very hard to prevent its spread. However, unlike measles which has lacks any benefits, westernization has both benefits and harmful effects. Fukuzawa argues that the gains attributed to westernization greatly overshadow the damages and therefore, there is no need to impede its spread. Fukuzawa perceives the Chinese and Koreans as being more similar to each other than they to the Japanese. He further argues that they lack the knowhow to advance either as individuals or as a country. They refuse to acknowledge the great achievement and development of westernization though they see them and hear them. They still cling to their antique ways and traditional historic customs.
As depicted by Reilly (473-457) David Hume was an unadulterated disbeliever, and his main argument is directed against, to a large extent, the false way of thoughts of the believers in miracles in his day. He expansively demystifies, through philosophy, the perception of miraculous actions which are so cherished especially to the minds of Christians. He argues that for one to determine the factual claim between two pragmatic claims, one has to evaluate the evidence. The extent to which one accepts as true one claim instead of the other is comparative to the extent by which the verification, proof and facts for one prevails over the other’s evidence. He is dismissing the existence of miracles. Personally I do not think he proves his point.
The World War 1 propaganda posters were used by virtually almost every country that was participating in the war. They were used as a way of mitigating the governments’ participation in the war to its general public and also as a way of acquiring finances and other crucial resources as well as a way of motivating its populace to join the armed forces or participate in the war in various other ways, all which were imperative in the sustenance of the military battles. These propaganda posters worked though to some extent. Recruitment posters ensured continued enlistment of the able men into military and various governments raised immense resources and funds through the sale of stamps, offering war bond schemes and other propaganda techniques perpetrated through posters (Reilly 456- 526).
According to Reilly (536- 547) Nikita Khrushchev’s and Mao Tse Tung attitudes towards America were contrasting. Mao was endeavoring to transform Marxism from a westernized to an Asiatic form with no resemblance at all with the westernized Marxism or Leninism and pursued a lean-on-one side foreign policy; that of distancing from America and fighting capitalism. Nikita, on the other hand, advocated for the views and policies of peaceful coexistence of communism and capitalism. He set and took actions and measures such as negotiating and travelling to United States to defuse the tension between the two countries.
Reilly, Kevin. Worlds of History: A Comparative Reader, Volume II: Since 1400. Fourth Edition. Bedford: St. Martin’s, 2007. Print.