on many things, no, and if you know something about it, now

someone being treated badly(rape, murder at birth/telling people, enslavement, lessened rights ect.) simply because they were born different (economic racial or sexual prejudice) is always a bad thing or maybe "hm... so disease is extremely common among your people? have you ever considered NOT eating your own stool?" but recognizing these problems within your own culture is more important, even if only to make yourself not look like a hypocrite.

To deny the right to criticise is to deny the freedom of speech. Of course, I do not support attacking a cultre/religion without any reason. If something is to be criticised.. I demand reasons.

You could criticise another culture, but prepare to face the metaphorical lynch mob of today's politically correct, overly paranoid society. Seriously, say a bad word about anyone who isn't you and at least ten people will hate you for it.

Balios:

Fondant:

Gxas:
Cultures are like opinions; to each his own.

And, like opinions, most of them are wrong.

*Dances smugly*

Nothing is above critiscim. Not my culture, not yours, not his, not feminism, not partiotism, not god. NOTHING!

And yes, I will critiscise other cultures. Right Now:

Saudi Arabia: Your treatment of women is disgraceful. Pray mend it, lest I be forced to open a can of high-explosive whup-ass on thy nation once the Americans stop being interested in you.

Russia: You are barbaric, cruel and unnecersarily violent.

China: STOP WORKING SO HARD!!!! (Joke)

Africa: Were to begin....
1. Raping people is unnacceptable.
2. Ethnic cleanising is unacceptable.
3. Female circumsion is unacceptable.
4. Stealing things from others is unacceptable.
5. Land-snatching is unacceptable.
6. Jacob Zuma is unacceptable.
7. Corruption is unacceptable.

This is why Religion holds societies together. All your Africa 1-7 is basically the 10 commandments, actually all your points are. Just live by do unto others as you would do to yourself.

Or, here's a thought, or maybe I'm talking out of my arse, maybe religion doesn't. Maybe it's the fact that(I'm hoping)alot of people(like myself) can tell that it's bad to rape people, that etnic cleansing is bad, religion doesn't come into this at all, I'm hoping we're not THAT stupid that we can't see it's wrong without some kind of "divine" being saying so, or not saying so in my case since I have the common(or not so common nowadays judging by the people)sense to know those things are bad.

We are free to criticize people all we like, but does criticism alone make us morally superior?

Why not criticize middle-class white liberals?
Is anybody else sick of all these people who openly disapprove of the sins of the world, and then do absolutely nothing about it?

Take the USA. Supposedly half the country is against the war on terror. What do they do about it? Nothing. If they really gave a shit they could shut the country down tomorrow. Instead they take the typical liberal approach, disapprove of it openly among your peer group, but do fuck all to change things. While half the country might "disapprove" of the war, tut-tutting, but going on with business as usual, it is a tiny minority who actively oppose it, through political action and public protest.

Here in Europe (Ireland, for me) I always hear people loudly condemning other countries, while they do nothing to change the perceived ills in their own back yard. So with respect to condemning an entire culture or even nation, think about this:

If you live in a country that practices democracy, free speech and the right to protest, but you haven't moved to effect change, would you be more or less likely to do so in a nation without these freedoms. My money says, if you won't change anything in a free, "western" country, you won't change anything in a more restrictive one either. Which begs the question:

Who the hell do you think you are; to criticize somebody for where they're born, when you, born free, are moral only in word, never in deed?

Yay opinions! Slap five!

I think it is important to understand cultures before making a decision on whether or not to criticize them. However tolerance of another culture has it's limits, and if say, for instance, one culture would forcibly sacrifice people, or think it is OK to rape children or women. Then it's ok to criticize, and even stop the behavior.

Manbro:
I think it is important to understand cultures before making a decision on whether or not to criticize them. However tolerance of another culture has it's limits, and if say, for instance, one culture would forcibly sacrifice people, or think it is OK to rape children or women. Then it's ok to criticize, and even stop the behavior.

Who gets to make the decisions about what part of somebody's culture is "too far/too depraved?" You? Me? Some jerk who kissed rears to get in office? Either we make a blanket statement, and say that anyone can criticize anyone for any reason (which is fair, especially since unsupported gripes tend to fall flat,) or we say that WE decide, on a subjective basis, what is or isn't okay.

If you're going to do that, go start a church. I'm a fundamentalist Christian Republican, and I have my own values, but I still hold to the idea that freedom of speech means COMPLETE freedom to say anything. Of course, other people have the right to not listen, or to reply with arguments of their own.

Whatever people may say, nobody can argue against the fact that freedom of speech is completely fair. Don't like what somebody is saying? Reply or ignore it. They're just words, and you can make them as well as the next person.

God, Human Rights Commissions piss me off. Especially if they're like the ones in Canada, and make it their goal to footnote every law with a thousand stipulations favouring minority rights over those of the public at large, all while challenging the basic tenants of freedom of speech about as often as I scratch my nose. Like, no - you shouldn't be able to wear a turban in the RCMP, bring a knife to public school if you're Punjabi, or have to be scrutinized because you wrote a thoughtful article criticizing another culture. Equality is contingent upon the existence of general rules which apply to the entirety of society, not separate laws and regulations governing every subset. Freedom of speech, too, is not something for the government to actively condemn, even if someone said or wrote something that the majority disagree with, or is 'unfair': that's the right of both individuals and the press, and if they say things that are offputting they will face consequences without the benevolent government stepping in and playing nanny.

You can criticize, and they might ignore it but eventually some idiot will take it too far, or if here say something distasteful and offensive. Even accidentally it'll lead to problems.

More importantly, can other cultures criticise (and yes, it's spelt with an "s" :P (example 1)) us?

I can't be bothered to find and quote the guy, but he had something like

AFRICA:
1)rape is bad
2)...
7)Don't kill people

Why the hell should they listen to you any more than you would listen to them if they came up to you and said "hey, why doesn't your wife/daughter obey your every word? You should beat her". Who says rape is bad? Western society, western people and perhaps most vitally- Western religion. It is up to the individual to decide what is right or wrong, and whilst you can offer advice, you CANNOT force them to take it.

Taking another example- Taking more than one sexual partner at a time. In the west, if a man is with multiple women at the same time, it is frowned upon. If the women find out, they will protest that they are the "special" person that that man has chosen, and anyone else who is romantically involved with him means that he does not think they are special. In a Hareem, the women are treated as part of a family, similar to a lion's pride or similar. Each woman is part of the group, each woman is special in her own way. And yet by some people's statements, this is "wrong". Who are you to condemn a society that you are not part of?

Samurai Goomba:

Manbro:
I think it is important to understand cultures before making a decision on whether or not to criticize them. However tolerance of another culture has it's limits, and if say, for instance, one culture would forcibly sacrifice people, or think it is OK to rape children or women. Then it's ok to criticize, and even stop the behavior.

Who gets to make the decisions about what part of somebody's culture is "too far/too depraved?" You? Me? Some jerk who kissed rears to get in office? Either we make a blanket statement, and say that anyone can criticize anyone for any reason (which is fair, especially since unsupported gripes tend to fall flat,) or we say that WE decide, on a subjective basis, what is or isn't okay.

If you're going to do that, go start a church. I'm a fundamentalist Christian Republican, and I have my own values, but I still hold to the idea that freedom of speech means COMPLETE freedom to say anything. Of course, other people have the right to not listen, or to reply with arguments of their own.

Whatever people may say, nobody can argue against the fact that freedom of speech is completely fair. Don't like what somebody is saying? Reply or ignore it. They're just words, and you can make them as well as the next person.

I understand your point on who gets to say whether a culture is depraved or not, as well as freedom of speech. I mean, if another culture preaches things I do not agree with, then they have a right to do so because of freedom of speech.

But I was not talking about words, I was talking about the active oppression of other peoples rights. I do not care which culture does it, when somebody forcibly strips away another persons freedoms then that is not okay.

I am a strong believer of individual culture. I took elements I liked the most out of my culture, and removed those I didn't like. Then, added my own elements in the blend.
My culture is now nearly perfect. Just a few behaviors needing more polishing that's it.

I think that Freedom of Speech is completely fair, as is Chaos. Fair in this case does not mean good or beneficial, it just means there is a equal chance for everyone. Like anything else, Freedom of Speech is a double edged sword and there is no point in deciding it is good or not - it could lead to justice and equality as much as injustice and prejudice.

However, the value of the Freedom of Speech is that it puts everyone on equal terms - (supposedly) not one person's words carry more weight than the next's. What we can then do is have a system where who said what is recorded precisely, and everyone is made to take resiponsibilty for their words - you can't just say something and disappear. I mean, we can pretend words are just opinions and are ultimately harmless, but that's simply not true. Words constitute actions on more occassions than we can count and the consequences can be very real. In these cases we hold the person to whom the words belong resiponsible, and reward/punish that person accordingly, the same way we reward and punish people for their actions.

Obviously, in these cases, there can be laws restricting what you can say or what you can't say, just like there are already laws restricting people's actions because some things just can not be tolerated.

And just like there are no perfect Laws regarding people's actions, we can not expect to come up with a perfect set of Laws regarding speeches (no, not even on the Escapist forum), espicially with the added complication that whilst the law should always be against murdering people, some opinions can be acceptable in one era but not another. I guess in the end we just have to rely on common sense and treat words as actions - that we calculate the consequences of our words before we decide whether or not we should say it. It is important to be right, but more important that people are not harmed by our opinions.

Soxfan1016:
As I understand it, the escapist is filled with many different people from many different cultures which is what leads me to this question.

Throughout the world there are obviously many different cultures, each with their own opinions on what is right and what is wrong. My question is, can one culture fairly and wisely criticize another culture and say that something is wrong regardless of what traditions, religious roots (for lack of a better phrase), or ideals that culture has?

Rather than give any direct shove to this topic by providing an example or my own opinion, I'll leave it at this for the time being and let the conversation take its own direction, where ever it may lead.

I take it that this is based on the appaulling comments from oppresive leaders that say we just don't understand their culture.

To paraphrase Mark Thomas:

As if there will be public outcry because they stop torturing, raping and murdering innocent people.

These people rely on liberal guilt in the hope that you won't question their abhorrent behaiour for fear of being seen a rascist. And you know what, it works for them and our goverments are happy to hide behind this weak excuse.

Fondant:

Nothing is above critiscim.... not feminism, :

No you've got it all wrong. If u criticise femenism they will say 'I'm not THAT kind of feminist', because we all know there are that many different types of feminist that feminism is untouchable.

Anyhow... I think cultures can be criticised, but only after you try to understand WHY the part of the culture you are crisicising exists (and you have to really try, you can't just take 2 seonds to pretend to think then criticise away)

Heres an example: slavery is wrong right?

Well nearly every culture has had slavery at one point or another,(albeit often under different names) but why? If you think about it the slaves were needed to do the jobs that kept society running which no one wants to do, do YOU want to work down those mines?

Fast forward a few centuries/millenia and we hav ourselves an industrial revolution, we build machines to work down the mines, and safety in the mines improves, we can now use our combine harvisters to gather our food etc. Next thing you know slavery is abolished, we don't have slavery and slavery is 'TEH BAD'

Disclaimer: I do disaprove of slavery, and do not want it back.

Fondant:
Africa: Were to begin....
1. Raping people is unnacceptable.
2. Ethnic cleanising is unacceptable.
3. Female circumsion is unacceptable.
4. Stealing things from others is unacceptable.
5. Land-snatching is unacceptable.
6. Jacob Zuma is unacceptable.
7. Corruption is unacceptable.

Its pretty fucked up you think that this represents African culture as none of these are in any way cultural.

I think its fine to criticise foreign culture (proper culture) as long as you can take a criticism without getting pissy.

Sayvara:
I can criticise anything I want for any reason I want. It's called Freedom of Speech (at least if I stay in this country or any other that supports it).

Whether someone listens or not is a whole different ballgame though. Freedom of Speech does not imply Obligation To Listen for the receiving party.

/S

Amen

Naeberius:

Armitage Shanks:

Balios:

This is why Religion holds societies together. All your Africa 1-7 is basically the 10 commandments, actually all your points are. Just live by do unto others as you would do to yourself.

You realise by the same token religion can, and has, also caused most of the 1-7, and all of his points?

the added bonus the most common religion amongst these practitioners of barbarism is Christianity brought by the white man who performed most of these things. they are like children brought up in an abusive family, they learnt it from their "parents (the societies that brought them "out of the bush") and believe that it is okay cause they did it.

unfortunately the misuse of religion could probably be linked as a major factor to all of the worlds major conflicts. i would like to see a compulsory subject in schools of culture and religious education. so young people can learn about other cultures and religions and understand their beliefs and ideas.

Ya lets learn about how the most muslims in the middle east want to wipe israel a jewish country off the map!! Lets learn how suicide bombings is justifiable, or why cutting off american soldiers heads is permittible.

Compare that to the christian text (humans are faulted so they screw up all the time, no one can keep all the text commandments) "love your neighbor as yourself." I understand people mistake some religions and use it for their own personal selfessness but to look at the real matter you have to take a look at the direct source. (which i doubt most of you have even bothered doing, yet you lamblast christianity for the source of all evil.)

Of course. Anyone that doesn't look at fundamentalist Muslim theocracies and realize that these people are scum of the lowest form is an idiot.

As long as your critiques do not include irrelevant physical observations or superstitious non-credible beliefs of other people, faiths, and or cultures then probably.

Oh, and avoid generalties or short hand words that though socially used to describe someone or thing; fail at the literal level.

People tend to assume that you must have a perfect culture yourself to criticize someone elses'. While you may have an idea of what a perfect culture may be, no country actually has one.

No. But you need to recognize flaws in yours.

I'll start:
Too much religion
Too many PC people
................ok, you know what after those two creating a third and comparing them would be like insulting Nazi germany for the clothes they wore to a similar level to the halocaust...........
I guess modern conservatives are bad enough to warrant being aknowledged with the other two but they tend to be religious.

of course we can. WE MUST denounce cultures that oppress women, oppress freedom and also allow for uncouth practices. I think we can justly say that some cultures are ethically wrong. Unless their religion calls for men to rape and beat their woman, i believe in worshiping whatever the hell totem they want.

Soxfan1016:
My question is, can one culture fairly and wisely criticize another culture and say that something is wrong regardless of what traditions, religious roots (for lack of a better phrase), or ideals that culture has?

What's a wise and fair criticism? Criticism is an opinion. It's neither inherently true nor false. My claim that India not allowing me to eat beef is dumb doesn't influence said policy in any way.

beddo:

Soxfan1016:
As I understand it, the escapist is filled with many different people from many different cultures which is what leads me to this question.

Throughout the world there are obviously many different cultures, each with their own opinions on what is right and what is wrong. My question is, can one culture fairly and wisely criticize another culture and say that something is wrong regardless of what traditions, religious roots (for lack of a better phrase), or ideals that culture has?

Rather than give any direct shove to this topic by providing an example or my own opinion, I'll leave it at this for the time being and let the conversation take its own direction, where ever it may lead.

I take it that this is based on the appaulling comments from oppresive leaders that say we just don't understand their culture.

To paraphrase Mark Thomas:

As if there will be public outcry because they stop torturing, raping and murdering innocent people.

These people rely on liberal guilt in the hope that you won't question their abhorrent behaiour for fear of being seen a rascist. And you know what, it works for them and our goverments are happy to hide behind this weak excuse.

Actually, the question did not come directly from those comments although I agree that they are appalling. This question actually spurned from my learning more about the Ibo people and various other cultures in which beating women in children is expected. After learning about that and thinking about how horrible it was, I found myself wondering whether or not I could judge the cultures fairly. I couldent come to a conclusive answer myself, so I asked others what they thought.

Unless by "women" you just mean those who attack you, and by "children" they mean little timmy threatening to kill you , judge them all you like.

crepesack :
of course we can. WE MUST denounce cultures that oppress women, oppress freedom and also allow for uncouth practices. I think we can justly say that some cultures are ethically wrong. Unless their religion calls for men to rape and beat their woman, i believe in worshiping whatever the hell totem they want.

All this conversation is a manifestation of western way of thinking, therefore it is closing on itself. How can you think about other cultures if you can't even look from independent position?

Your value system is not absolete: freedom NE democracy, Islam NE agression, imperfection NE barbarism etc.

And the most important: it's very hard to understand other culture. You have to know history of a country (by the way, not EVERY nation had slavery), live there, talk to its people etc. F.e. is there anyone who knows muslim, or russian, or chinese literature, philosophy or myths? What do you know of their way of thinking and value system exept some common knowledge announced for political reasons?

It's hurts to see such attitude especially if you live in a country that is claimed to be, ahem, evil. Just like I do.

BladeL:

crepesack :
of course we can. WE MUST denounce cultures that oppress women, oppress freedom and also allow for uncouth practices. I think we can justly say that some cultures are ethically wrong. Unless their religion calls for men to rape and beat their woman, i believe in worshiping whatever the hell totem they want.

All this conversation is a manifestation of western way of thinking, therefore it is closing on itself. How can you think about other cultures if you can't even look from independent position?

So not beating women is a western way of thinking? Finally we get some slack.

No, for very complex reasons that would make Hippie's kill themselves.

If being fair means being objective:

No, we cannot, because right and wrong are not intrinsic values which some things have and some things don't. Moreover, I find it inefficient expect a whole culture of people to hold up one and only one perspective, based on which to criticise, if only subjectively (unfairly), another whole culture of people.

A person is an individual, with morals and values assembled in a unique set of inheritance and conditioning which only applies to that one person. People of a culture often share a measure of their conditioning and inheritance, so it is not unheard of to find a moral cohesion within a majority of a culture or large pockets of it. However, one must maintain and respect the fact that each person, ragardless of similarities to others, experiences things differently from others, and that what may be right for one person might be wrong for another. It is not only impossible for a whole culture to criticise another on the values of right and wrong, but for any person to criticise anything on the values of right and wrong and be fair about it, since right and wrong are constructs of a subjective judgment.

We may criticise many things based on many categories, but first and foremost we should acknowledge that only objective viewpoints and objective evidence may lead anywhere. Concluding that something is good, evil, right or wrong is not being objective or fair, for that matter.

---

If being fair means being consistent:

Yes, we could, and I'd say that most people do this a lot.

Kikosemmek:
No, we cannot, because right and wrong are not intrinsic values which some things have and some things don't. Moreover, I find it inefficient expect a whole culture of people to hold up one and only one perspective, based on which to criticise, if only subjectively (unfairly), another whole culture of people.

My criteria for critque is much more about which cultures allow for the beliefs of alternate cultures.

Example, lets say one culture says it's okay to beat women. Well, that's a pretty constrictive construct for a woman because the woman is not allowed to fully opt in or out. She isn't even able to express her choice of culture so I would consider a critique of this culture to be valid.

When a culture considers it morally valid to impose their beliefs onto those that wish to opt out, then I consider the culture to be flawed.