Okay I want to say right off the bat that this is a vast subject and I am probably not even going to be able to cover a quarter of it. But let's see where it goes. Also, I will make generalizations. I have to, otherwise this discussion won't go anywhere.
I personally think that people forget that this "civilized and progressive" image of Europe is a very recent phenomenum, that has lasted just a few generations.
Here's the problem with the above statement: How do you really define "civilized"? I am not going philosophic on you or anything but I think it is important the way you define what the words civilized and civilizations mean. Let's look at some of the examples: Babylonians, Egyptians, Assyrians etc were all civilized people of their time. Yet if we judge them according to our standards today, we'd think them barbaric. Persians were civilized people as well, however even in their time, to the Greeks, they were nothing but a little better than animals. Greece, the cradle of civilization, in my opinion--with advances in science, philosophy and expression, was full of people who owned slaves. Do we think its civilized if someone today is a slave owner? I think not.
Romans, civilized people in their time, again scientific advances, republicanism etc. Take today's standards however, and you'll find the Romans amongst some of the most barbaric people. We think UFC is barbaric. We either ban it right out or try to apply rules to it to make it "safer". Yet some of the games at the colloseum, the heart of Rome for many, were so barbaric that we probably couldn't even sit through a minute of some of those. Yet, to use your words, "people forget" that that used to be a pretty awesome source of entertainment for the people of Rome and the visitors alike.
I am not arguing against your point that Europe's history is steeped in "barbarism". I disagree with your use of the word civilized. When Europe was barbaric, the whole world was barbaric. In fact, applying today's standards, I would say that much of the Arab world, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, Mongolia, Bhutan, and much of Africa are still barbaric. But here's the thing, who defines who is barbaric and who isn't?
You turn and say that the Spanish were barbarias because of the Inquisition, I can turn and say that the Spaniards thought the people they were getting rid of were barbaric (I don't agree with that, but just for the sake of this argument). In fact, when they came to the Americas, they thought the natives were barbaric too. They tried to change them and when they didn't change, they drove them away from the newly civilized land that they were adamant on spreading their culture.
So we can argue, that from today's perspective pretty much the whole world was barbaric upto the time of the end of the second world war. Most countries have changed but the parts of Asia and Africa I mentioned plus others are still pretty barbaric.
However, societies have evolved over time and so has our definition of a civilized society. So civilization in Europe is not a recent phenomon, the application of our new definition of civilization is a relatively new phenomenon.
Nazism, fascism, ethnic cleasing, religious wars, trench warfare, inquisition, purges, concetrations camps, Zyclon B, The Holocaust, the War of the roses, the 100 years war, the Spanish civil war, the terror after the french revolution.....This is what most of the reality of Europe has been up until the end of the II World War. Europeans have been killing or slaving one another in spetacular scale since the dawn of ages.
Remember that Francisco Solano Lopez and Franco ruled Portugal and Spain with iron fists not so long ago.
Yup, all of the above is true. No one said that all the things above did not happen. In fact what I said was that Europeans have a habit of getting beat, picking themselves up, gathering their shit together and rebuilding. I did not say that they had been perfect through and through and I did not say that Europe was clean through and through. All of the above were horrible things and horrible times BUT Europe got beat up, gathered its shit together and rebuilt.
They had the so called Dark Ages in Europe. But before the Dark Ages they had civilization. And after the Dark Ages they had civilization. They have always rebuilt. Has it always been awe inspiring and mind blowing? Not necessarily, but they have always strived toward making themselves better in the way they understood it. Again I will mention Arab middle east that still feels like the Dark Ages in the way people think. There's a huge contrast. Freedom of thought and expression, which I would say was a Greek concept, was further developed by the Europeans during the Enlightenment. And now one can not imagine (at least I can't) a civilized society without these freedoms an integral part of that soceity. But you go to Arab middle east and express your thought and expression freely, you're asking for a death sentence (worst) or deportation (best).
Now, it seems a bit unfair that I have painted the Arabs only in a bad light. It would also seem that since Arabs never got better or attained civilization (yes, I have heard about the uneducated claims of them inventing the number 0 and I know of their advances in science) but that too wouldn't be right. Arabs had a group in Egypt (part of the Al Azhar University) known as Al Mutazillats who were influenced by Greek thought and logic. They believed in questioning everything and making sense of everything (logic, Duh!). But what happened? Where are they now? By the 11th century, the group was annihilated by fellow Arabs because they percieved logic and questioning to be against the teachings of Islam. So Arabs too had their time in which they flourished in logic, economics, sciences and culture (judging from today's standards, they were still barbaric), however, once they went down, they never got up.
You might be tempted to say that the Ottomans were a civilizaed Empire until 1919 but then I would kindly ask you to read up on the history of the Ottoman Empire and the general practices (and that we could open a newer thread to discuss that).
Anyway, I don't know if I am making any sense because I am writing this on the fly but this is what I am getting at. Europe has had a lot of ups and downs, and there is no denying that. They have had multiple periods of very dark times and very bright times. But judging whether they were civilized according to today's standards is a fallacy.
People citicize Argetnina (rightfully so), but they seem to forget that the nice, civil, democratic and enlighted Europe is just a tiny interval within the total history of that continent. How did Victorian England looked like? Less than 100 years ago the so sophisticated and civilized Germany was deep into hyper inflation and voting a genocidal maniac into power.
The truth is that this civilized, clean and nice status of Europe is not the norm, it is the exception. Europe, for most of its existence, has been a hellish place, populated with dictators, mustard gas, massive scale wars, ethinic cleasings, religious presecutions and so forth.
Oh but this argument that people critize Argentina but they forget what their own countries used to look like is another weak argument, don't you think? No one is saying, "look at the Argentina of 1945 and the Europe of 1945, clearly Argentina sucks!" That would be wrong (and false). What I am saying is this: Given similar conditions, Argentina has come out worse than European countries. And don't forget that I mentioned Hungary. A newer democracy than Argentina yet they seem to be doing better than Argentina. Are they corruption free? Of course not. Are they attracted to economic and social disasters? No!
Argentina's problem is not that it isn't Europe. Argentina's problem is that it is not what Argentina could be. When I went to Dhaka, Bangladesh, it didn't frustrate me that it is one of the biggest crapholes that I have ever seen. They just don't have the tools or the education to make it any better. Generation after generation, the majority of their population is uneducated. It would be preposterous for me to expect the same technological advances as, say, Germany. However Argentina has the tools and an educated population to make it better here. Hell! They were better! And now they're a dump.
I am not just talking about dog crap on the pavements. I am talking about the way business are run, security, people's attitude's towards others and the way people do not care about tomorrow (or the present). Argentina, overtime, has developed a culture where people think they can not do anything about anything so who cares! I see a completely different attitude in Europe.
Now, I would argue that Argentina not only has the tools but that it has or had the same tools that Europe did and does. Don't forget that the population that migrated here is mainly from Europe. This reminds me of Gaza. When Israel pulled out from Gaza in 2005, not only did they leave the Gazans alone but they actually left a thriving flower (mainly) and agricultural (smaller scale) industry behind so it would provide for the people a way to make some sort of a living. The Gazans waited till the Israelis all left and then they banded together and burned the flower processing factories along with the fields because it was all given to them by evil Jews and then they launched rockets against Sderot!
Argentina seems similar in that they try to burn away everything European because its evil and "imperialistic".
Is it because Argentina has been dealt a bad hand? No I don't think so. You mentioned it yourself, Europe has been through a lot too yet they always get out on the other side wounded but willing to change and make it all better. Argentina goes through crap and comes out the other way defeated. It curls up in a hole, blames the West for all their mistakes and provides for a perfect opportunity for another dictator to beat the crap out of it. And the vicious cycle continues to this day.
Don't take your current state of enlighted Europe so much for granted. Your past history does not give much confidence that the status quo will remain.
Two things:
One, I am not European. Just an outsider with an opinion.
Two, I am sorry that I am starting to repeat myself but your argument seems fallacious to me. I am not ignoring the periods of darkness, I am acknowledging the repeated attempts at enlightening the society as a whole. You seem to be fixated on the dark periods. I can very easily argue that it is not a current phenomenon. That Europe has repeatedly gone back to enlightenment. But that seems like a post for another thread. Or if you're interested, I can post it here later.
Anyway, I should wrap this up. Its pretty long already.
. It is becoming kinda of a sport, is it not? 
