If there's some sort of historical evidence of this, combined with observable behavior to this effect that goes on to this day, it would definitely be food for thought. There's not though.
The same thing is true of your claim, that's why I made the allegory.
Trade is a bit different than abstract concepts like duty and honor.
Trade relies on abstract concepts like duty and honor. Honor, taken from it's modern western individualist meaning, is more akin to "Integrity". Trade requires a voluntary exchange, and high integrity means the most likely fulfillment of a mutually beneficial trade. Duty, like integrity, ensures that a voluntary trade takes place if the trade can't be done simultaneously. Your promise to finalize the exchange is a duty, literally. Only the most minor form of immediate voluntary trade can be conducted without duty. It can't be done at all without integrity.
The same thing is true of your claim, that's why I made the allegory.
You really think there is observable behavior that Europeans don't understand trade? It's not like we have a leader of a European movement openly railing against the very concept of trade.
Trade doesn't really rely on any of those things. It just relies on cost-benefit analysis. The currency of fear can be just as likely a factor in that analysis as fairness or honor.
You really think there is observable behavior that Europeans don't understand trade?
You really think there is observable behavior that Africans don't understand duty?
Trade doesn't really rely on any of those things. It just relies on cost-benefit analysis. The currency of fear can be just as likely a factor in that analysis as fairness or honor.
Only fear of other things that stimulate your need to trade. If you fear the buyer or seller to the point that you feel like you have no other choice but to exchange something, that's not trade, it's coercion.
The same thing is true of your claim, that's why I made the allegory.
Trade relies on abstract concepts like duty and honor. Honor, taken from it's modern western individualist meaning, is more akin to "Integrity". Trade requires a voluntary exchange, and high integrity means the most likely fulfillment of a mutually beneficial trade. Duty, like integrity, ensures that a voluntary trade takes place if the trade can't be done simultaneously. Your promise to finalize the exchange is a duty, literally. Only the most minor form of immediate voluntary trade can be conducted without duty. It can't be done at all without integrity.
You really think there is observable behavior that Europeans don't understand trade? It's not like we have a leader of a European movement openly railing against the very concept of trade.
Trade doesn't really rely on any of those things. It just relies on cost-benefit analysis. The currency of fear can be just as likely a factor in that analysis as fairness or honor.
You really think there is observable behavior that Africans don't understand duty?
Only fear of other things that stimulate your need to trade. If you fear the buyer or seller to the point that you feel like you have no other choice but to exchange something, that's not trade, it's coercion.