Deon, I cannot see how you formulate your argument:
"If you believe in an absolute concept of morality: that some things are always morally wrong, then you must acknowledge that there are times when a culture must loose certain traits."
We only set the standard on human rights because America lets us. Before that, you should note some of the worst abuses of human rights came from the west: The British developed and used the concept of the Concentration camp during the Boer War, they used chemical warfare to drug China to it's knees. What about the US? The incredible abuses of the native Americans...one word..Reserves.
So if you are going to be pointing fingers at Islamic culture, Hindu cultures etc...point the finger our way too. Think about the Masters & Servants act of (I think) 1871...that was slavery in its most codified form.
I don't really think your statement that the west has "lost the moral high-ground"...mostly because I firmly believe that we never had it to start with.
I agree in part with what you are saying. The West has done some horrible things in the past, and indeed, under the banner of the USA is doing some terrible things right now. However, most of the time is it due to a division between what we say we stand for (democracy, freedom, human rights) and what we actually do
( ... )
Sorry Deon, I just simply cannot see how you can say that the deeds are not important. Those deeds are in reality millions of dead people. It doesn't really matter what we say if we are still allowing these things to happen.
A smaller example: Person A honestly doesn't have a problem with homosexuality but then uses the words "faggot, poofter, fag-bashing" etc. He may well support gay rights, but if he is saying things like that...he is branded as a homophobe.
If that same person claims he doesn't mind homosexuality, but in reality thinks that it is unnatural and will actively persecute gay people...are the words he says the important thing?
America claims it is there to help and yet is actively engaged on an imperialist kick...but they say they are helping...that must make it ok.
When I say deeds not-so-much, I don't mean that deeds are not important. After all, I hold Viet-Nam as having higher moral strength than the West as they alone went into Cambodia and deposed the Khmer Rouge.
Consider it more as a spectrum approaching some perfect point:
Ignoring Human Rights Completely--> Believing in Human Rights (but ignoring them when convinient)--> Believing in Human Rights and Acting upon them.
You can see that you can't get to the end without passing through the middle stage: and I believe that some of the West (perhaps Canada, the Netherlands, and New Zealand) are in the third stage already. Believing in something is a step towards making it real.
The West, flawed and idealistic (and for the majority unachieving of the idealism) as it may be, at least it recognises today that such things are wrong, whether or not they continue to occur.
Ironically perhaps, Islamic (and if I recall Hindu) countries through history tended to be more enlightened to many degrees than the West of the time, but simply didn't develop further and in many cases degenerated.
One hopes that modern Western culture always maintains that such things as child abuse and the treatment of other humans as objects to be objectionable and wrong; furthermore, let's hope that we all continue to work for a day when these things are abhorrent in deed and not just morality.
Comments 10
"If you believe in an absolute concept of morality: that some things are always morally wrong, then you must acknowledge that there are times when a culture must loose certain traits."
We only set the standard on human rights because America lets us. Before that, you should note some of the worst abuses of human rights came from the west: The British developed and used the concept of the Concentration camp during the Boer War, they used chemical warfare to drug China to it's knees. What about the US? The incredible abuses of the native Americans...one word..Reserves.
So if you are going to be pointing fingers at Islamic culture, Hindu cultures etc...point the finger our way too. Think about the Masters & Servants act of (I think) 1871...that was slavery in its most codified form.
I don't really think your statement that the west has "lost the moral high-ground"...mostly because I firmly believe that we never had it to start with.
Reply
Reply
A smaller example: Person A honestly doesn't have a problem with homosexuality but then uses the words "faggot, poofter, fag-bashing" etc. He may well support gay rights, but if he is saying things like that...he is branded as a homophobe.
If that same person claims he doesn't mind homosexuality, but in reality thinks that it is unnatural and will actively persecute gay people...are the words he says the important thing?
America claims it is there to help and yet is actively engaged on an imperialist kick...but they say they are helping...that must make it ok.
Reply
Consider it more as a spectrum approaching some perfect point:
Ignoring Human Rights Completely--> Believing in Human Rights (but ignoring them when convinient)--> Believing in Human Rights and Acting upon them.
You can see that you can't get to the end without passing through the middle stage: and I believe that some of the West (perhaps Canada, the Netherlands, and New Zealand) are in the third stage already. Believing in something is a step towards making it real.
Reply
The West, flawed and idealistic (and for the majority unachieving of the idealism) as it may be, at least it recognises today that such things are wrong, whether or not they continue to occur.
Ironically perhaps, Islamic (and if I recall Hindu) countries through history tended to be more enlightened to many degrees than the West of the time, but simply didn't develop further and in many cases degenerated.
One hopes that modern Western culture always maintains that such things as child abuse and the treatment of other humans as objects to be objectionable and wrong; furthermore, let's hope that we all continue to work for a day when these things are abhorrent in deed and not just morality.
Reply
Leave a comment