David F said
I agree. Cultures are not equal. Mine is best.

Answer-
That's why every culture should have their own nation. So that they don't try and prove it to the other cultures. If you knock down the borders you create conflict and alienation. It's ok to visit another culture but it has to be on their terms.

My view is you should also read "The fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason"- Arthur Schoepenhauer it's based on Kant's work. But you did say that many philosophers have used Kant's work.

In the end philosophy can be used to influence the minds of the "voting" public (in a broad sense) but it should not be used to replace the minds of the public in the form of a "Pseudo Scientific Dictatorship".

As the "territory" controlled by the government becomes larger it becomes more dictatorial- there needs to be a balance between bottom up and top down approaches.

The duty of a responsible member of the public is to understand and defend themselves from those that seek to govern them so that they can't be deceived and intimidated easily. They should not allow themselves to become disarmed

Posted by Armchair Critic, Thursday, 23 July 2020 7:50:48 PM

Thanks for your comment AC- It said what I couldn't say in my own words.

What a tangled web we weave - in search of truth, vision, enlightenment? Or, justification for our 'beliefs', opinions, bias, prejudices?

On another thread I was suggesting that the approach of BLM (in the US) to their inalienable 'concerns' - with rampaging, looting, destroying - might come back to bite them, and was certainly no way to convince others that they are really quite reasonable, trustworthy and fantastic people who have had a poor trot, and so could not be blamed for any bad behaviour.

Maybe I reacted in haste.
Certainly they may well have been 'guided' in their approach by the marvellous example set by the NRA and its leaders and followers. Maybe a few screws loose, all-round, scattered through the mix?

Nonetheless it got me thinking, what may the future hold?
A cursory glance at the world today shows just how far the British Empire has shrivelled - with even Ireland split in two and Scotland looking to be Independent.
Europe in a fair mess, trying against heavy odds to maintain 'integrity', with some states always near economic collapse, some propping-up the show, and some new questionable entrants possibly brought on-board to avert an imminent collapse of the whole box and dice?
U.S. in identity struggle. Africa and the rest trying hard.

Meanwhile, China going gang-busters and spreading its wings.
India not going too bad, and has proven inventive and entrepreneurial capability - just look at Silicon Valley - and has a massive mostly young population.
Japan, going very reasonably, but with an aging population.
Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore peddling or raging along here and there.

Bottom Line: Humans arose in Africa, spread and evolved into a kaleidoscope of whitish and brownish groups - but still maintaining a solid and growing 'original' group including many spread all over.

Maybe Black lives really do matter far more than we realise; and the way things are going 'whitey' may well be on the way out.
So, heterogeneity the way to go? Or a mostly wall-to-wall 'brown' future?

With multiculturalism, Aus has a reasonable each-way bet.
Goodonya, and the best of British!

ttbn,

I'm afraid you are running close to the wire with some of the scurrilous and unappreciated aspersions in your recent post on this thread. (Page 15, 24 July 2020 11:51:15 AM)

I will be keeping an eye out for any further veiled and camouflaged abuse of yours with which I may have to take further exception.

Careful, old mate. You are treading a dangerous path.

There are many reasonable and respected contributors on this Forum, and they are deserving of our, and your, respect.
So, cut it out.

Nudge, nudge.

CM,

So, tens of thousands of nations then ? Most of them at war with others ?

That's really an inevitable outcome of the old-fashioned lett-wing notion of cultural relativism - that all cultures are equally valid in their own contexts. For that, of course we need to keep people 'in their own contexts'. Apartheid comes to mind as a means to do that.

So what is the situation for people not 'in their own contexts' ? i.e. who have migrated to another 'context' ? Surely they have to grapple with very different situations, and tolerate the possibility that their taken-for-granted notions either won't be tolerated (say, polygamy ) or can't be acted on easily. And of course, that the common language may be different.

Migrants are usually prepared to modify their behaviour, and to learn another language. So it may be unnecessary to require people to maintain their cultural slots and somehow stay segregated.

If anything, it may be more difficult for the dominant 'culture' to come to terms with strangers in their midst - and one can see this discomfort from some of the comments on this thread - and to recognise that, by definition in a democracy, the newcomers have as much rights as they have, that the dominant group has NO right to dictate and assume that it has extra rights over newcomers, above and beyond the requirements that newcomers recognise the rule of law, equality of rights, and the need for a common language.

In Australia, common and varying rights include the rights to one's own political persuasions, religious beliefs, choice of occupation, etc. Equal rights should prevail in a democracy.

And they seem to be working okay for those who wish to exercise them, once people have mastered the language. Even Misop seems to have managed.

Joe

Armchair Critic,

Please excuse the mistake I made in my last comment to
you on page 13. It was late in the evening and I was
tired. The last sentence should have read:

" That should NOT mean that the two are incompatible".

Dear Chris,

We must not think that Australia is immune to the viruses
that destroy nations, any more than any of us are immune
to the flu (or the current pandemic) if it's coming
through our city.

Many of the things that most of us were brought up to think
could "never happen here"have begun to happen. Dangerous
scapegoating, small-minded intolerance - just look at some
of the posts on this forum and in this discussion.

Dear Saltpetre,

Thank You for your comments on multiculturalism and
religion. Thank You also for commenting on ttbn's attempted
slurs. But don't worry. I've grown up knowing people like
him. Thank goodness they are a minority in this country.

As for Lithuanians in Australia? They have always been a
tiny minority. Never approaching even 0.01% of Australia's
total population. However their impact on the Australian
culture has been far greater that their numbers suggest.

Most post-war Lithuanian immigrants came to Australia as
refugees, displaced persons, part of the first wave of
Baltic immigrants who were invited by the Australian
government in war-torn Europe to come to this country.
The Baltic people had fled from persecution, from the
communist Soviet Regime that had seized their countries.

The post war- Lithuanian immigrants came as indentured labour.
That is, every migrant over the age of 18 had to enter into
a 2 year contract with the Australian government which
obliged the migrant to work wherever directed.

The contracts were strictly enforced even if it meant
families were split up.

Generally speaking Lithuanians are well integrated into
Australian society. They have achieved a high proficiency
in English and are participating in Australians cultural
activities.

Lithuanians have always been self-reliant and self sufficient.
And this is a trait we have passed onto our children.