Appreciating other cultures

David Thompson, writes in 3:00 AM Magazine:

Last week, during a conversation about the ‘cartoon jihad’ uproar, I used the phrase “emotional incontinence”. This did not go down well. I was promptly told, in no uncertain terms, that I mustn’t “impose” my own cultural values. Apparently, to do so would be a form of “cultural imperialism”, an archaic colonial hangover, and therefore unspeakably evil. I was, apparently, being “arrogantly ethnocentric” in considering Western secular society broadly preferable to a culture in which rioting, murder and genocidal threats can be prompted by the publication of a cartoon.

As the conversation continued, I was emphatically informed that to regard one set of cultural values as preferable to another was “racist” and “oppressive”. Indeed, even the attempt to make any such determination was itself a heinous act. I was further assailed with a list of examples of “Western arrogance, decadence, irreverence, and downright nastiness.” And I was reminded that, above all, I “must respect deeply held beliefs”. When I asked if this respect for deeply held beliefs extended to white supremacists, cannibals and ultra-conservative Republicans, a deafening silence ensued.

The claim that the beliefs of every culture are equally valid is self refuting. A cursory glance at actual human cultures shows that almost no culture of any significance has ever believed such a thing. Consider Imperial Rome, Imperial Japan, and contemporary Islamic culture. Would any of them agree that foreign cultures and beliefs are as worthwhile as their own? Hell no. Only in contemporary Western culture has such an idea ever been voiced, much less taken seriously. Possibly the only idea that nearly every culture might agree on is that multiculturalism is pernicious nonsense.

The multiculturalist rejects the near unanimous opinion of humanity in favor of the manifestly self-contradictory creation of third-rate Western intellectuals. The absurdity is exceeded only by the irony.

Posted on February 16th, 2007 by pwyll
Filed under: culture

4 Responses to “Appreciating other cultures”

  1. Paco Malo, on February 17th, 2007 at 12:38 pm Said:

    First, let me say that the above the post and the referenced Thompson essay are fascinating and important reading.

    I must take issue, however, with your statement that “[p]ossibly the only idea that nearly every culture might agree on is that multiculturalism is pernicious nonsense.”

    Webster’s College Dictionary (1991) defines multiculturalism as “the preservation of different cultures or cultural identities with a society, state, or nation.” Wikipedia’s entry on multiculturalism begins with this statement:

    Multiculturalism is an ideology advocating that society should consist of, or at least allow and include, distinct cultural groups, with equal status. Multiculturalism contrasts with the monoculturalism which was historically the norm in the nation-state. (Monoculturalism implies a normative cultural unity, ‘monocultural’ can be a descriptive term for pre-existing homogeneity). The term multiculturalism is almost always applied to distinct cultures of immigrant groups in developed countries, not to the presence of indigenous peoples. ….

    Are you labeling as pernicious nonsense the allowance and inclusion of distinct cultural groups within a society, affording each equal status? If so, I must disagree.

    Do you want to forcibly integrate the Amish into modern U.S. culture? Do you not regret the way the various immigrant groups coming to this land have been and, in some cases, still are discriminated against?

    Indeed, the title of your post is “Appreciating other cultures.” This is what I, in both word and deed, do to the best of my ability. Moreover, I would argue that the United States’ cultural diversity is one of the elements that make this country both strong and great.

    In commenting on your post “From hell to paradise”, discussing the current situation in Cuba, J.K. Dooley wrote:

    Castro’s loss is our gain. This nation is a better place because of the Americans of Cuban descent. I had kids in my first grade class who didn’t speak a lick of english and are now physicians, dentists, businessmen, and officers in the Air Force and Army. The Cubans effect on the american economy are the best argument for less government and a free economy since Milton Friedman went to Hong Kong. I am who I am because of my cuban friends.

    Dr. Dooley’s statement, to my mind, boils down to: Cuban immigration is a good thing, as is cultural integration in an existing society, and, most relevantly here, he is who he is because of his Cuban friends. And so am I. But I’m also a product of the Haitians, Pakistanis, Ethiopians, Spaniards, and African-Americans, among others, that I’ve come to know over the years. This is in no small part due to the fact that I have worked to appreciate the divergent cultures I have been exposed to. Indeed, my exposure to Zen Buddhism in college has lead me on a path to Taoism that is the core of my spiritual identity.

    Because of the risk that I wandered completely astray from the point you are arguing in your post, I will stop here.

    Allora.

  2. Paco Malo, on February 17th, 2007 at 12:41 pm Said:

    Alas, my html fails me again. The final section of comment 1, beginning with “Dr. Dooley’s statement, to my mind …” should not be a blockquote.

  3. pwyll, on February 17th, 2007 at 2:48 pm Said:

    The meanings of words change over time. “Fascism” once described a political philosophy and a scheme of governance; now the term is mere invective. Whatever “multiculturalism” might once have meant, today it is a blunt instrument used to excuse atrocities committed by those with the holy status of victim, and to tar critics with accusations of racism.

    By multiculturalism I mean the preposterous theory that all human cultures are equally worthy of respect. They are not.

    I point out that to assert the equal worth of all cultures is to posit a premise rejected by almost every actual culture. The multiculturalist respects the ideas of other cultures by condescension. All values can be considered equally worthy only if none are taken seriously.

  4. Paco Malo, on February 18th, 2007 at 10:28 am Said:

    Point taken, but this “old definition” multiculturalist does not condescend to the cultures he attempts to appreciate. If I were condescending to those cultural representatives ennumerated in comment 1, I would get caught as a poser in a flash.

Leave a Reply

« bubble logic when going the wrong way, go faster »