The noted distinctions between oriental and occidental, or Asian and European culture and history, can be reduced to a critical factor – individualism.  The Asians tend to be focused on the greater society while the Europeans developed a culture of the individual.  This is a simplification because just as not all Asians are conformist drones, not all Europeans are rugged individuals either.  But, just as any myth or stereotype contains a germ of truth, there is something to this argument which bears investigation.

Racial homogeneity is a frequently cited factor in the more-social orientation of the Asian cultures.  This orientation does run quite strongly through the cultures of China, Japan and Korea.  Close scrutiny of their histories shows us however a multitude of leaders.  The argument is made that the dynasties of China were a force for a cultural homogeneity unknown in Europe of that period.  This is not to say that they were immune from conflicts, insurrections, and intrigues very similar to those experienced in Europe.  Somehow the contention that Chinese history is somehow more unified persists.  I will readily concede that one bit of evidence in support of this assertion is the relative lack of competing languages present in the territory of greater China compared to panoply of languages throughout Europe.

The European cultural model is proposed to have evolved differently due to the competition resulting from a multiplicity of nations states with shifting borders.  The question is whether this is an example of correlation or causation – what came first, a predisposition to individualism or an environment amenable to greater liberty from a central authority?  The empirical evidence is that Europeans managed to maintain distinct national identities even throughout the various wars of conquest and empire which populate their history.

In direct contrast, the Chinese experienced a greater sense of being Chinese in a large context unlike the Italian who might be able to acknowledge living in Europe but is nonetheless an Italian.  The concept of being a European is a geographical association, or a matter of political alliances (which history shows us are subject to frequent shifting) more than an identity to be embraced by a whole society.

The Europeans (and by extension, the Americans) developed the concepts of natural rights, private property, and individual liberty in ways which the Chinese never did.  It remains to be seen whether the current or future generations of Chinese will make this transition form society-centrism to individual-centrism (the reverse of this may be speculated, and even desired by some.  As a champion of the individual over the state, my personal disposition would find it regrettable if the west were to be more like the east in this regard).