culture
I'm not sure if anybody is reading these posts. I tried making a big announcement blitz when I restarted this thing called blog a few weeks ago, but I'm not sure if that was effective. Maybe I need to get a word of mouth campaign going.
Look, there's just no way I'm going to write something everyday. I'm just not that interesting or opinionated. So, I would advise potential Joe-maniacs to check in every week or so. I should have at least one pointless thought by then.
I'd like to make a few more comments on Political Correctness. I think modern, particularly Western, culture needs to decide whether or not culture matters. Because if culture really does affect what people say, do, and believe, and I believe that it does, then culture has to accept both blame and praise. Politically Correct culture recognizes the existence of culture when it serves a source of pride, or uniqueness, or individuation. Feminist theorists argue for culturally specific epistemologies. Racial and ethnic groups look with pride on their heritage and culture. Diversity as a norm is a belief that a community is stronger when it is comprised of people with diverse cultural backgrounds.
I have no problem with any of these trends. Black people should look with pride on their political and cultural accomplishments, on the great music and art they have produced, on their struggle for freedom and equality. Because culture IS significant, it is perfectly plausable that different cultures could have different rationalities, values, logics, etc.
But if culture affects who people are on that basic of a level, then culture has to take some of the blame for people's flaws as well. Why are Americans so fucking selfish? Because we live in a self-absorbed culture...one that I also take pride in for all the contributions to art and thought and policy that it has made.
This isn't that difficult; if culture can make things better, then it is a source of power, and anything that wields power can also make things worse. Unfortunately, the PC culture refuses to discuss culture as a contributor to societal problems. And this isn't just an annoying example of hypocrisy and irrationality, like most of the PC bullshit I rail against. This actually stultifies discussion of real solutions to real problems.
If culture can make us tough, or noble, or beautiful, or creative, or passionate, or loving, or kind....it can also make us selfish, or mean, or narcissistic, or nationalistic, or cold, or vicious, or dumb.
posted by Joe @ 5:18 PM
10 Comments:
I’m reading and definitely dig the posts on PC. I particularly liked your views on why PC seems most intense in academia; language is the currency of the realm.
My only quibble is your characterization of American culture being “selfish” or “self-absorbed”. Compared to whom? Should “strong” cultures (western) be judged more harshly than those that are less dominant (eastern)? Believe me, I know that there is much flawed with Americans, and I believe such widespread awareness of these faults are one of our greatest strengths, but as we laugh at those ever amusing Sundance bon mots about what stupid hamburger eating Americans we are, we should do so fully aware of what the alternatives are.
I guess I'm comparing it to very poor communities and villages where people have very little but are still willing to sacrifice for their families and neighbors. I think there is a general human tendency to be more selfish as one acquires more assets. For example, Unitarian Universalists, despite being one of the more affluent religious groups in the U.S., are also one of the stingiest. And I'm thinking of the phenomenon of one's "needs" rising to the level of one's income. How alimony is set to correspond to "the lifestyle to which (the ex) has become accustomed."
But, I'll admit that my evidence for the generosity of poor people is fairly anecdotal.
Are you sure this cultural nobility you are associating to the developing world’s poor isn’t a perception cultivated by years of image shaping by charities, interest groups and sympathetic media? It’s much more appealing to give money to the honest, hardworking, selfless individuals than the lazy, backwards and cruel. It’s also much, much nicer to read news stories about the single mother working 18hrs a day to keep her children fed than the one that sells them into prostitution. I know quite a few people that do aid work with doctors without borders, rotary international and numerous other private charities and took an aid trip dealing with orphans in Bulgaria myself and by and large most come away with the understanding that the poor are poor because their cultures suck rather than the “save the children” dreck we’re getting extra heaping helpings of right now during the holidays.
Now granted the fact that these people had the misfortune to be born in backwards hell holes isn’t their fault and they need help, but I bristle at the notion that somehow we’re culturally equal (or inferior) to those that can barely muster the resolve to keep their children fed and clean. Yes Americans are materialistic, lazy and self-involved and with hard work and luck may the rest of the world have the opportunity to be this way too.
As for the example of Unitarians not being very philanthropic, I think their stinginess may have more to do with ideology rather than material wealth.
http://reason.com/news/show/117303.html
No, I'm not sure. I'll have to defer to people who have more experience in developing countries than I do. Any body out there who fits that description want to chime in?
Sure, Joe...
Along the lines of Unitarians being affluent and stingy...how do you think they became affluent? They may be stingy, but they're also smart. It seems to me that they simply understand how to save their money. Who says people should have to throw their hard earned money all over the place to give hand? Sure it's good to help people, but what good is it if you help only because people expect you to, or because you 'feel' like you should to appease the critical onlookers?
As for the idea that "the poor are poor because their cultures suck," I am confidant that that is bullshit. This may be the case in some places, but that cannot be a blanket statement. There are many instances where poor people are poor because they don't want to work...because they are in fact lazy.
I myself am currently serving in the country of Vanuatu as a Peace Corps volunteer. I have been here for 18 months now so I have a very real and grounded perception of what's going on here in this developing nation. Vanuatu is a very poor country, but it's a great place nonetheless. People are subsitence farmers and everyone has food to eat and a roof over their heads. The basics are all covered and people are generally happy. But due to the fact that there is no real urgency at this point to change anything (there are definately some problems, but none that are life-threatening) people don't. People don't want to work, and instead spend half of every day lying around socializing. There are plenty of opportunities to earn money in that it is a big tourist destination, but very few take the initiative to take advantage of that fact.
The citizens of Vanuatu have been listed as "in need of help" by the powerful developed countries and therefore many aid organizations like my own are sent there to assist, and much donor aid is given to communities. But, in my opinion, Vanuatu is actually being crippled by free handouts. People have simply come to expect freebies, and therefore they cannot do things on their own. It's very sad really.
Thanks Anonymous person whose identity I know but will not reveal unless you want me to.
Question: Are you saying that handouts, not a lazy culture, are the problems in Vanuatu? Or, are you saying that they DO have a lazy culture, perhaps exacerbated by the handouts?
On the problems issue: What about healthcare? Do people in Vanuatu have access to healthcare?
oops..I guess you already revealed your identity. So, Ian who I know, what about it?
As for the idea that "the poor are poor because their cultures suck," I am confidant that that is bullshit. This may be the case in some places, but that cannot be a blanket statement. There are many instances where poor people are poor because they don't want to work...because they are in fact lazy.
Wouldn’t attitudes towards work shared by a group of people be considered an attribute of that group’s culture? If not then what could be? If this cultural attribute (laziness) was the obstacle to the group acquiring material necessities then wouldn’t it be the cause of the group’s poverty? I agree that "the poor are poor because their cultures suck” is an oversimplification but I believe no more so than saying “fat people get type II diabetes because their fat”. Obviously obesity is the most overwhelming cause but it’s possible but rare for skinny people that eat responsibly to develop the disease after certain cancer treatments. Does the mere presence of caveats make nearly any statement “total bullshit”? Natural disasters, some disease and some wars can all cause poverty regardless of cultural virtue but these are all insignificant in comparison to the ignorance wrapped in the colorful packaging of cultural tradition that defines the behavior of so many people in the undeveloped world.
As for the idea that "the poor are poor because their cultures suck," I am confidant that that is bullshit. This may be the case in some places, but that cannot be a blanket statement. There are many instances where poor people are poor because they don't want to work...because they are in fact lazy.
Wouldn’t attitudes towards work shared by a group of people be considered an attribute of that group’s culture? If not then what could be? If this cultural attribute (laziness) was the obstacle to the group acquiring material necessities then wouldn’t it be the cause of the group’s poverty? I agree that "the poor are poor because their cultures suck” is an oversimplification but I believe no more so than saying “fat people get type II diabetes because their fat”. Obviously obesity is the most overwhelming cause but it’s possible but rare for skinny people that eat responsibly to develop the disease after certain cancer treatments. Does the mere presence of caveats make nearly any statement “total bullshit”? Natural disasters, some disease and some wars can all cause poverty regardless of cultural virtue but these are all insignificant in comparison to the ignorance wrapped in the colorful packaging of cultural tradition that defines the behavior of so many people in the undeveloped world.
Post a Comment
<< Home