Out of the loop . What happened ? <| sep |> The ability to reincarnate , unlimited knowledge , and a beautiful woman who can only speak 5000 words a day . <| sep |> PART 2 e Another argument against technological civilization points out the relationship between the apparent good and the actual good changes when the environment does . Rapid technological change then , implies the heuristics that govern individual actions are not going to work as well as before , for they have not been properly tested in the new environment . In the case of a society these heuristics are defined by the souls of the people in question , the moral system they subscribe to , and institutions that bind them together . I feel I am forgetting something else , please correct me . I will argue why the Persianate Polity the Mughals , and even the Ottoman Empire can be classified as such depending on the criteria and Sharia are better suited to technological civilization than Westphalianism . In this argument I will partially address point number 3 of your post . For whatever reason the states in the European plain never unified , even the largest shot lived European states were comparable with today ' s rump Iran in size . This is without counting the wealth of climatic , or geographic variability present in the Middle East . Compared to west Asian empires , European states were fairly small and homogeneous . Their political structures adapted to deal with this fact . Democracy and egalitarianism are present to an extent , all the way back to the small Germanic and Celtic tribes , even in the days of absolutism , these values remained alive . If you think about it , democracy works best when there is a consensus , and agreement is more easily reached when people are homogeneous in their preferences and motives . Iran in the other hand sits at the crossroads of civilization , the very first settlements were likely formed around trade routes . From the beginning there was a need to accommodate the different legal and moral codes shaped by a variety of ecosystems . Successful empires learnt to use this diversity in their favor , From Cyrus , to Sharia law . It for example , allows Dihimmis their own courts and laws . Even amongst Muslims different interpretations of the law each had their own courts under the same state . It should come as no surprise that Sharia is more compatible with globalization and capitalism than the western model , for Europe has a scarce 6 centuries of experience with civilization , the Persianate polity has had several millennia to adapt . But even in the western tradition , where law is tied to geography and not people , it is recognized that diversity is beneficial for no single law fits all situation . Incidentally this has been one of the reasons the Americans have been so successful . New York has a tradition of mercantile law so companies from all around the world use its courts , Delaware and Utah have very well defined and accessible corporate law , so people from far away states go and make their companies there . A diversity of law opens possibilities for growth and prosperity . There is in fact a deeper principle involved . The fundamental theorem of natural selection , it states that the change of fitness for a population , in a given time interval is equal to the variance in fitness . That is if your population will adapt more easily to changing circumstances in proportion to how diverse it is . In a time of changing material conditions , where technology makes the apparent good ever more dissociated from the actual good , diversity in institutions and their interpretation of law is the best guarantee we have of finding the correct one . Since global capital is one of the few human universals , trade and wealth are worth the same in the hands of all people . Westerners Zizek seems to be the most prominent are beginning to realize that their ideals do not necessarily hold universal . Considering the possibility that an Indian or Chinese version of capitalism would be more successful than the currently more popular democratic on , without the need to borrow their conception of human rights or popular sovereignty . But the civilization with more experience at globalization is us . From a religious perspective , the fact that we know the last revelation before the end of occultation to have already been spoken , leaves open 2 possibilities since there are no specific rules to deal with all this technology , it should be disregarded . Or , alternatively , Sharia shall remain the true path , independently of whatever changes in the means of production or any other circumstance . Because technology is not explicitly , forbidden it is permitted . We must then use reason to guides us in the absence of revelation . You know , Ijtihad . In recognition of my ignorance , both visions of the path should be followed , by different people , the system I envision allows for this . My platform is one of legal pluralism , it is not based on misplaced nostalgia , an infantile nationalismregionalism , a fear of the alien except for those coming from beyond the dark waters of interstellar space or any other reactionary positions . My platform is one of progress , based on observation and reason used to confirm Divine revelation .