[MD] Multiculturalism scam

[X Acto]

Mel,
The arguement seems to be one of clarity. While Platt argues against
cultural relativism, Dmb and myself make an arguement for multicultralism.
While we agree with Platt that cultural relativism inhibits a society, we
disagree that the term multiculturalism is synonomous.
As Dave pointed out, often cultural relativism is used to paint
multiculturalism to support a closed door policy toward
ethnic tolerance.Unfortunately this fosters a justification for
cultural superiority.
While ethnic tolerance is moraly relativistic, multiculturalism ensures
that all members, regardless of ethnic backround, agree
to adhere to the same social laws (morals) governing them equally.
We see this as breaking cultural barriers in a intellectually dynamic
way, making it superior to societies who adhere to a more static
monocultural policy of ethnic intolerance.
Platt had ageed with me until I pointed out that this conflicted
with his stance on ethnic intolerance.
Platt is perfectly within his right to find the cultural practices of 
others as moraly offensive he is not within his right to justify
ethnic cleansing under the guise of cultural supremacy as 
what I took his Pirsig quote to mean to imply.

"It´s a war of biological blacks and biological whites against social 
blacks and social whites. Genetic patterns just confuse the matter. And 
this is a war in which intellect, to end the paralysis of society has to 
know whose side it is on, and support that side and never undercut it. 
Where biological values are undermining social values intellectuals must 
identify social behavior, not matter its ethnic connection, and support it 
all the way without restraint. Intellectuals must find biological behavior, 
no matter what its ethnic connection, and limit or destroy destructive 
biological patterns with complete moral ruthlessness., the way a doctor 
destroys germs, before those biological patterns destroy civilization 
itself. (Lila, 24)

What Pirsig does say here is that social patterns must be upheld no matter
the ethnic origin unless those patterns are biologically destructive.

Multiculturalism is such a position. A position which upholds ethnic
social patterns while limiting or destroying destructive biological
patterns.

-Ron




 

 



________________________________
From: ml <mbtlehn at ix.netcom.com>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Sunday, January 4, 2009 8:15:05 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Multiculturalism scam

Platt/ dmb/ Ron/ all:

I find it interesting that I read these two posts and
find that they are not always antagonistic.  In fact
they seem to raise a question as they work to define
a previously unseen shape, a question.

What are the limits of multi-culturalism inside a
single society?
(at what point does it weaken a society,
at what point does it strengthen one?
  --in MOQ terms)

thanks--mel


--------------------

Platt said:
Multiculturism is based on the postmodern idea that all cultures are
morally equal, i.e, that they are neither "good nor bad," "right or wrong."

This idea is challenged by the MOQ.

"A culture that supports the dominance of social values over biological
values is an absolutely superior culture to one that does not, and a
culture that supports the dominance of intellectual values over social
values is absolutely superior to one that does not "

So a democratic republic that protects individual rights to free speech,
private property, trial by jury, etc. is superior to a Stalinist regime
that requires individuals to support the dictates of a communist state
under penalty of imprisonment or death.

I make no apology for my bias towards a culture of democracy as opposed to
a culture of totalitarianism.
--------------------