A History of Civilizations

HistoryOfCivilizationsSuggested by Kung Fu Zu • Written from a consciously anti-enthnocentric approach, this fascinating work is a survey of the civilizations of the modern world in terms of the broad sweep and continuities of history, rather than the “event-based” technique of most other texts.
Buy at Amazon.com
Suggest a book • (669 views)

This entry was posted in Bookshelf. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to A History of Civilizations

  1. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Below are some important points made in this book.

    A society’s reactions to the events of the day, to the pressure upon it, to the decisions it must face, are less a matter of logic or even self-interest that the response to an unexpressed and often inexpressible compulsion arising from the collective unconsciousness.

    These basic values, these psychological structures, are assuredly the features that civilizations can least easily communicate one to another. They are what isolate and differentiate them most sharply. And such habits of mind survive the passage of time. They change little, and change slowly, after a long incubation which itself is largely unconscious too.

    Here religion is the strongest feature of civilizations, at heart of both their present and their past.


    Christianity is an essential reality in Western life: it even marks atheists, whether they know it or not. Ethical rules, attitudes to life and death, the concept of work, the value of effort, the role of women and children-these may seem to have nothing to do with Christian feeling: yet all derive from it nevertheless.

    The Leftists who hate Western culture understand the above points. That is why the assault against our culture is -first and foremost- an assault against Christianity. This is something which should never be forgotten.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Frankly, I think this simple, yet vital, message is lost on Progressives of all types — including George W. Bush & Company who think “democracy” is nothing but a process of voting. Well, there is a whole lot more that goes into successful self-government. And Islam doesn’t have that. It works against it.

      So, is George W. Bush ignorant or — like so many others — just carried away with his own sense of omnipotent benevolence? These Ivy League guys (and gals) spend an awful lot of money to learn junk politics at university. What the Leftist/Progressive universities are very good at though is instilling a sense of superiority in them.

      And I don’t mean to pick on George W. But we should be plain about how deep this total misunderstanding of world and Western history goes. It’s not restricted to any one party.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        I suspect that Bush simply didn’t know better, having imbibed the multicultural diversity viewpoint of the intelligentsia. The leftist revolutionaries, on the other hand, probably do know what they’re doing, and that wrecking the Christian base of Western civilization will ultimately lead to the destruction of that civilization (which is their goal).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *