Topic: Do you believe that all cultures are equally valid?
Anonymous A started this discussion 11 years ago #39,017
Barring such things as genocide, murder, etc., do you believe that all cultures are equally valid, or that the way your culture does things is superior?
| Poll option | Votes | Percentage | Graph |
|---|---|---|---|
| All cultures are valid. | 2 | 33% | |
| My way is best. | 2 | 33% | |
| Other (please specify). | 2 | 33% |
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later[^] [v] #519,878
My country is the greatest! Great cuisine (McDonalds) and gun ownership!
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #519,879
Anonymous B replied with this 11 years ago, 7 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #519,880
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #519,881
dw joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 20 minutes later, 42 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #519,883
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 49 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #519,886
Why the fuck would you not include things such as genocide or murder??
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #519,887
@previous (D)
Because I think a case can be made for humans universally acknowledging those things as wrong, no matter the culture.
Because I think a case can be made for humans universally acknowledging those things as wrong, no matter the culture.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 34 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #519,889
all cultures are valid as long as i don't have to live with them
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 16 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,070
White American culture has some aspects I hate. Clapping after airplanes land, saying hello to people you pass on trail hikes, mayonnaise, tying sweaters around your waist, rampant racism, Lana del Rey. It's certainly not superior in any sense but then again exoticizing other cultures instead isn't exactly complimentary to those cultures.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 41 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,071
Anonymous F replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,072
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,073
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 19 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,074
> Barring such things as genocide, murder, etc.
Does this include people like the Aztecs, Mayans, Incas, and Olmecs whose religions were about tons of human sacrifices?
One good way to judge cultures is the ones who fought against slavery are better than those that did not.
Does this include people like the Aztecs, Mayans, Incas, and Olmecs whose religions were about tons of human sacrifices?
One good way to judge cultures is the ones who fought against slavery are better than those that did not.
Anonymous F replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,076
@520,073 (A)
Probably both. When in movie theaters, white people will also clap once the movie's finished. I had to retrain myself to stop participating in that and I still get the urge sometimes.
Probably both. When in movie theaters, white people will also clap once the movie's finished. I had to retrain myself to stop participating in that and I still get the urge sometimes.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 4 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,077
@520,074 (G)
Well, although I personally find religious, ritual human sacrifice to be distasteful, I do distinguish between it, and outright murder.
Well, although I personally find religious, ritual human sacrifice to be distasteful, I do distinguish between it, and outright murder.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 35 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,108
@520,074 (G)
> One good way to judge cultures is the ones who fought against slavery are better than those that did not.
You pretty much just made an argument for Jewish supremacy. (and maybe some African peoples as well...)
> One good way to judge cultures is the ones who fought against slavery are better than those that did not.
You pretty much just made an argument for Jewish supremacy. (and maybe some African peoples as well...)
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 16 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,109
@previous (H)
> > One good way to judge cultures is the ones who fought against slavery are better than those that did not.
>
> You pretty much just made an argument for Jewish supremacy. (and maybe some African peoples as well...)
The people in Africa never fought against slavery. They enslaved their own people and sold them to others. Outsiders couldn't even survive very long in Africa back then. They'd die of disease or predators.
The anti-slavery movement began in Britain. Or should I say revived in Britain. Before the Romans came and murdered the druid leadership, slavery had been banned then.
The Jewish and Christian relgions never spoke against slavery and Islam only was against enslavement of Muslims. Jews were more of opposing human sacrifice and this continued their branches of their religion. Though these religions had circumcision which is bad. Buddhism is better since no circumcision, no human sacrifices, and the religion has only been spread peacefully. But the rulers of East Asia tended to practice slavery.
> > One good way to judge cultures is the ones who fought against slavery are better than those that did not.
>
> You pretty much just made an argument for Jewish supremacy. (and maybe some African peoples as well...)
The people in Africa never fought against slavery. They enslaved their own people and sold them to others. Outsiders couldn't even survive very long in Africa back then. They'd die of disease or predators.
The anti-slavery movement began in Britain. Or should I say revived in Britain. Before the Romans came and murdered the druid leadership, slavery had been banned then.
The Jewish and Christian relgions never spoke against slavery and Islam only was against enslavement of Muslims. Jews were more of opposing human sacrifice and this continued their branches of their religion. Though these religions had circumcision which is bad. Buddhism is better since no circumcision, no human sacrifices, and the religion has only been spread peacefully. But the rulers of East Asia tended to practice slavery.
Anonymous H replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,114
@previous (G)
> The people in Africa never fought against slavery.
You don't think they fought against slavery by neighboring tribes? You don't think they fought against Europeans trying to enslave them??
> They enslaved their own people and sold them to others.
Oh, I see. Some forms of fighting against slavery don't count. You don't think the enslaved didn't fight? Does fighting against people on your own continent enslaving you not count as fighting now?
> The anti-slavery movement began in Britain. Or should I say revived in Britain. Before the Romans came and murdered the druid leadership, slavery had been banned then.
Ummm... Have you read any history before or since then? Britain wasn't exactly a republic or a gleaming beacon of freedom to the world. Many other nations had, in fact, revolted against tyrannical rule before and well after that. During Roman rule Britain was a Roman province, and many people there owned slaves. How exactly did the anti-slavery movement begin in Britain? And when did it end? Slavery, and support of it, certainly seems to be fully alive up through the colonial period. For a practice (slavery) that goes back thousands of years, I think you are being a little ambitious to say that opposition to this began in Britain given the many slave revolts and wars fought before this.
> some shit about circumcision and shit
This is me not giving a fuck. Stop whining about your dick.
> The people in Africa never fought against slavery.
You don't think they fought against slavery by neighboring tribes? You don't think they fought against Europeans trying to enslave them??
> They enslaved their own people and sold them to others.
Oh, I see. Some forms of fighting against slavery don't count. You don't think the enslaved didn't fight? Does fighting against people on your own continent enslaving you not count as fighting now?
> The anti-slavery movement began in Britain. Or should I say revived in Britain. Before the Romans came and murdered the druid leadership, slavery had been banned then.
Ummm... Have you read any history before or since then? Britain wasn't exactly a republic or a gleaming beacon of freedom to the world. Many other nations had, in fact, revolted against tyrannical rule before and well after that. During Roman rule Britain was a Roman province, and many people there owned slaves. How exactly did the anti-slavery movement begin in Britain? And when did it end? Slavery, and support of it, certainly seems to be fully alive up through the colonial period. For a practice (slavery) that goes back thousands of years, I think you are being a little ambitious to say that opposition to this began in Britain given the many slave revolts and wars fought before this.
> some shit about circumcision and shit
This is me not giving a fuck. Stop whining about your dick.
Anonymous G replied with this 11 years ago, 13 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #520,116
@previous (H)
> > The people in Africa never fought against slavery.
> You don't think they fought against slavery by neighboring tribes? You don't think they fought against Europeans trying to enslave them??
>
> > They enslaved their own people and sold them to others.
> Oh, I see. Some forms of fighting against slavery don't count. You don't think the enslaved didn't fight? Does fighting against people on your own continent enslaving you not count as fighting now?
Having a Sparticus or two isn't a culture as a whole fighting against slavery. Slavery was just an accepted horror of life throughout human history.
> > The anti-slavery movement began in Britain. Or should I say revived in Britain. Before the Romans came and murdered the druid leadership, slavery had been banned then.
> Ummm... Have you read any history before or since then? Britain wasn't exactly a republic or a gleaming beacon of freedom to the world. Many other nations had, in fact, revolted against tyrannical rule before and well after that. During Roman rule Britain was a Roman province, and many people there owned slaves. How exactly did the anti-slavery movement begin in Britain? And when did it end? Slavery, and support of it, certainly seems to be fully alive up through the colonial period. For a practice (slavery) that goes back thousands of years, I think you are being a little ambitious to say that opposition to this began in Britain given the many slave revolts and wars fought before this.
>
Before the stuff in Britain and France a few hundred years ago, there was St. Patrick (from Britain).
> > some shit about circumcision and shit
> This is me not giving a fuck. Stop whining about your dick.
Intelligent commentary as expected.
> > The people in Africa never fought against slavery.
> You don't think they fought against slavery by neighboring tribes? You don't think they fought against Europeans trying to enslave them??
>
> > They enslaved their own people and sold them to others.
> Oh, I see. Some forms of fighting against slavery don't count. You don't think the enslaved didn't fight? Does fighting against people on your own continent enslaving you not count as fighting now?
Having a Sparticus or two isn't a culture as a whole fighting against slavery. Slavery was just an accepted horror of life throughout human history.
> > The anti-slavery movement began in Britain. Or should I say revived in Britain. Before the Romans came and murdered the druid leadership, slavery had been banned then.
> Ummm... Have you read any history before or since then? Britain wasn't exactly a republic or a gleaming beacon of freedom to the world. Many other nations had, in fact, revolted against tyrannical rule before and well after that. During Roman rule Britain was a Roman province, and many people there owned slaves. How exactly did the anti-slavery movement begin in Britain? And when did it end? Slavery, and support of it, certainly seems to be fully alive up through the colonial period. For a practice (slavery) that goes back thousands of years, I think you are being a little ambitious to say that opposition to this began in Britain given the many slave revolts and wars fought before this.
>
Before the stuff in Britain and France a few hundred years ago, there was St. Patrick (from Britain).
> > some shit about circumcision and shit
> This is me not giving a fuck. Stop whining about your dick.
Intelligent commentary as expected.
Dat Black Bitch joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #520,133
Ain't no bitch gunna make me no damn slave. I'll bust a cap in they ass, then I'll jump in my mudda fukin caddylac an drive da fuk off. Shit, niggas be talkin slave an shit. Fuck off bitchesKiller Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 36 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #520,140
@520,076 (F)
That may just be an American thing. It never happens over here.
In fact, when I went to go and see the latest Hobbit movie, one guy tried to start an applause. Nobody joined in, and a few people laughed at him. It was quite awkward.
That may just be an American thing. It never happens over here.
In fact, when I went to go and see the latest Hobbit movie, one guy tried to start an applause. Nobody joined in, and a few people laughed at him. It was quite awkward.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous H replied with this 11 years ago, 17 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #520,250
@520,116 (G)
> Having a Sparticus or two isn't a culture as a whole fighting against slavery.
Does having a constantly rebellious Judea work for you?
> Before the stuff in Britain and France a few hundred years ago, there was St. Patrick (from Britain).
I guess you don't subscribe to the idea that St. Patrick was a Roman tax collector and slave trader then.
> Intelligent commentary as expected.
dickhurt
> Having a Sparticus or two isn't a culture as a whole fighting against slavery.
Does having a constantly rebellious Judea work for you?
> Before the stuff in Britain and France a few hundred years ago, there was St. Patrick (from Britain).
I guess you don't subscribe to the idea that St. Patrick was a Roman tax collector and slave trader then.
> Intelligent commentary as expected.
dickhurt