Why should cultures be kept 'pure'?

[Puah-Puah Kepulauan]

So, there are some questions I'd like to discuss with you. I will ask you them right away:

1. Are cultures something static that stays the same for a specific period of time or are they in a constant condition of irritation, negotiation and restructuring?

2. Are cultures characterized by hybridity, meaning that they are the products of intercultural debates between two different cultures?

3. If so, isn't it dubious to protect the culture you got accustomed to against the (peacefully advanced) influences of other, minority cultures, as every culture will eventually be influenced and transformed?


These questions have bothered me for some time now. I grew up in a city with the children and children's children of immigrants from foreign countries. Although the immigrants and their descendants make up a large part of that city's population, there is still mourning and protesting among the 'natives' when the 'others' want to express their respective cultures in the same free way as the 'natives', starting with barroom chlichés like „In the Alps, a minaret mustn't be higher than a church spire!“ and concluding with the city's mayor acting in an openly discriminant way. Of course, further barroom chlichés like „Those foreigners don't want to integrate!“ are to follow.
And I never understood the reasons for such protective behavior, nor could I follow explanations like „This land has been 'Alextopian' for some centuries now and because of that it has to stay 'Alextopian'!“

In the last few weeks, I had to read some texts by Homi K. Bhabha that made me thinking very hard about it again and finally, the three questions above are those that I would like to ask people that want to protect 'their' land against foreign cultures.
Unfortunately, in my real life I only have contact to people who have more or less the same oppinion as me or who can't really discuss. So I decided to ask them here, hoping that some of you will disagree and bring real arguments.

[Divair]

They shouldn't be.


/thread

[Ostroeuropa]

They shouldn't be.


/thread

Goddammit, I was prepared to make an argument but this pretty much does it.

[Kvatchdom]

Multiculturalism has caused plenty of problems, but cultural purism would be even more destructive. I couldn't live in a 100% Finnish neighbourhood, because most Finns are just too damn irritating.

Cultures shouldn't be kept pure, but letting it all roam around won't work either.

[Ruridova]

They shouldn't be.


/thread

This, essentially.

[7 Deadly Sins]

I think it shouldn't however it isn't a bad thing to know about ones past. But of course that can be debaitable

[Ifreann]

No culture is pure, thus they cannot be kept pure, thus there cannot be a reason for them to be kept pure.

[Arglorand]

They shouldn't be.


/thread

Dammit, Divair, you ninja.

[Tsuntion]

Cultures change. I expect that people who complain about this are probably people losing out because of it.

[Immoren]

"Pure culture" is an oxymoron.
Also bland and boring.

[Wikkiwallana]

Yes, if you get a contaminated culture, all your test results are going to be completely worthless, and then whoops, that's your 10 million dollar grant squandered.

Oh, wait, we're talking about that other kind of culture? Throw them all in a blender and pour me out some of that delicious multi-ethnic smoothie.

[Wikkiwallana]

letting it all roam around won't work either.

Why not?

[Arglorand]

"Pure culture" is an oxymoron.
Also bland and boring.

Also impossible. What racists often tend to forget is that if you browse really good in their family trees, their ancestors had nothing to do at all with the culture they're in, so they're not just idiots, not just boring, but also hypocrites.

[Ostroeuropa]

"Pure culture" is an oxymoron.
Also bland and boring.

Also impossible. What racists often tend to forget is that if you browse really good in their family trees, their ancestors had nothing to do at all with the culture they're in, so they're not just idiots, not just boring, but also hypocrites.

There is a primary branch of humans in africa that could potentially claim to be the purest cultured humans on the planet.
Everything else is basically a mutation of them or of their forebears.

[Arglorand]

Also impossible. What racists often tend to forget is that if you browse really good in their family trees, their ancestors had nothing to do at all with the culture they're in, so they're not just idiots, not just boring, but also hypocrites.

There is a primary branch of humans in africa that could potentially claim to be the purest cultured humans on the planet.
Everything else is basically a mutation of them or of their forebears.

Said branch is also likely to have mixed with mutations, no?

[Zohai]

Don't you think cultures that are intellectually, technologically, scientifically and morally superior have the right (and maybe even responsibility) to annihilate and replace inferior cultures?

[Arglorand]

Don't you think cultures that are intellectually, technologically, scientifically and morally superior have the right (and maybe even responsibility) to annihilate and replace inferior cultures?

No.

[Ostroeuropa]

There is a primary branch of humans in africa that could potentially claim to be the purest cultured humans on the planet.
Everything else is basically a mutation of them or of their forebears.

Said branch is also likely to have mixed with mutations, no?

Sure, probably. But it's the only claim that isn't IMMEDIATELY dismissable as inherently stupid and self-contradicting.

Don't you think cultures that are intellectually, technologically, scientifically and morally superior have the right (and maybe even responsibility) to annihilate and replace inferior cultures?

Only by example and voluntary abandonment of inferior traits by the members of the inferior culture.

[Ruridova]

Don't you think cultures that are intellectually, technologically, scientifically and morally superior have the right (and maybe even responsibility) to annihilate and replace inferior cultures?

I'd doubt that there are cultuers that are superior or inferior to others. So, no, I don't.

[Wikkiwallana]

Don't you think cultures that are intellectually, technologically, scientifically and morally superior have the right (and maybe even responsibility) to annihilate and replace inferior cultures?

Morally superior people generally don't engage in genocide.

[Immoren]

Don't you think cultures that are intellectually, technologically, scientifically and morally superior have the right (and maybe even responsibility) to annihilate and replace inferior cultures?

define superior
define inferior

[Arglorand]

Don't you think cultures that are intellectually, technologically, scientifically and morally superior have the right (and maybe even responsibility) to annihilate and replace inferior cultures?

Morally superior people generally don't engage in genocide.

Thank you.

That was just so right I had to thank you.

[Screensaver]

It depends on the culture. The culture that is savage and entails things such as sexism, racism, bigotry, homophobia, love for violence, and the like should be either heavily changed or replaced with a superior culture.

[Ifreann]

Don't you think cultures that are intellectually, technologically, scientifically and morally superior have the right (and maybe even responsibility) to annihilate and replace inferior cultures?

States Cultures don't have rights. People have rights.

[Elmo Logic]

All cultures should be taken back to how people think they probably were 150 years ago and kept like that.

Because that's better for some reason.