Having just watched MDU hang himself on his presuppositions (which each of us largely share) I thought I'd try to expand this line of discussion. I think most of us suffer from a rather diminutive understanding of the definition of culture and all "cultures" involved in any form of Globalism have undergone vast changes resulting in the wholesale expurgation of assumed values.
This man quoted below, has a better handle on the fan bois of post modernism and Fascist Feminists than they suppose. He has determinedly championed historical accuracy, modernism as an expression of the present and post modernism as a cynical justification for a large number of current crimes against personal freedoms and the excesses of the misunderstood and misapplied economic ideas of Adam Smith.
Christianity has functioned for the normative self-understanding of modernity as more than a mere precursor or a catalyst. Egalitarian universalism, from which sprang the ideas of freedom and social solidarity, of an autonomous conduct of life and emancipation, of the individual morality of conscience, human rights, and democracy, is the direct heir to the Judaic ethic of justice and the Christian ethic of love. This legacy, substantially unchanged, has been the object of continual critical appropriation and reinterpretation. To this day, there is no alternative to it. And in the light of the current challenges of a postnational constellation, we continue to draw on the substance of this heritage. Everything else is just idle postmodern talk.
Jurgen Habermas, "Conversation about God and the World." Time of transitions. Cambridge: Polity Press 2006, p. 150-151
Personally I think the only way forward on a global scale is to discard Keynesian capitalism and adopt a mixture of Deliberative Democracy, Universal Pragmatics and Stiglitzian economics. The age of personal responsibility is drawing to a close and Foucault's predictions of Totalitarianism through the rights of the Individual, however flawed are becoming a reality. Instead of an ethical society determined to share the wealth (not necessarily via Socialist means - calm down Finn), there are a decreasing number of financial, moral, religious and radical factions building "Fortresses of Right", and assuming "leadership" while people just try to get on with their life.
The underpinnings of "Western Culture" have shifted way the fuck over there somewhere and there is a significant world power relying on people not noticing. Our biggest challenge is accepting a different standard of living. I shy away from reduced, because what I'm essentially saying is changing from a highly mobile, resource intensive society to a village based, transactional, discursive and conversational communication oriented society, that walks everywhere.
Ethics and morals have disappeared from the "top" layer, the international, intercultural layer of our culture. We, however, still own and operate under their guidance and our assumptions are literally dropping us in the crap. If Jurgen Habermas can acknowledge the underpinnings of Western Society in the quoted paragraph as being diametrically opposed to his model of "rational humanity" yet intrinsic to the survival of our "culture", why do we let ourselves get tripped up by Victorian values and beliefs, based in clear perceptions of other cultures as inferior , stupid, and clearly not worthy of "ascending" to our cultural status?
Reply With Quote
Thanks for making me feel VERY stoopid Jim. I think I only understood 4 or 5 words in that whole post! 
Originally Posted by jrandom
Bookmarks