249 messages over 32 pages: << Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 17 ... 31 32 Next >>
Rikyu-san Diglot Senior Member Denmark Joined 5529 days ago 213 posts - 413 votes Speaks: Danish*, English Studies: German, French
| Message 129 of 249 16 November 2009 at 4:34pm | IP Logged |
"Non-culture"... I like that word. What is taking place in the Western world has more to do with non-culture than a sincere cultivation of character and spirit. The passion of the Western mind at its best was not driven by hedonism but some form of higher cultivation - enlightenment, not hedonistic darkness.
A Danish writer, the Bishop of Roskilde Jan Linhardt, once wrote that in today's (Western/Danish) world, vices have become virtues. "Greed is good". Is that really what we would like to export to the rest of the world?
In Denmark, young kids have watched the equivalent of "Britain's got Talent" and sincerely believe that "if you are not famous, you are nothing". Their desires, dreams, and motivations has been shaped towards 15 minutes of fame, Warhole-style. Superficial, of no value, but of great consequence to all of us. Is that really what we would like to export to the rest of the world?
We can put it very simply:
If we are to live in a world of wisdom, we have to live in accordance with the great wisdom traditions of the world.
They might need to be updated but that is achievable. I believe the Chinese model of "Confucian Capitalism" is important to study in this light.
Edited by Rikyu-san on 16 November 2009 at 4:36pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
| cordelia0507 Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 5839 days ago 1473 posts - 2176 votes Speaks: Swedish* Studies: German, Russian
| Message 130 of 249 16 November 2009 at 4:39pm | IP Logged |
Gusutafu wrote:
what the Western world exports to the rest of the planet, and it's not Bach, believe me, it's Britney. |
|
|
On the whole, yes.. I think this has occurred to a lot of people in China..
Apparently there is a bit of a backlash movement among some groups, and a feeling of "let's take what is good a leave the rest".
Its ironic that Europe first pushed it's culture (or rather, the bad sides of it) onto half the rest of the world and now we're getting a taste of our own medicine from the USA...
It's good that big and important nations like China are careful about adopting everything Western and discarding their own traditions.
Personally I think the world DOES need a common language to communicate in, for the sake of peace and trading... but I don't like the effects/results we are seing from that language being English...
And I probably wouldn't like the effects of it being Chinese either.
Edited by cordelia0507 on 16 November 2009 at 4:43pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
| Alvinho Triglot Senior Member Brazil Joined 6235 days ago 828 posts - 832 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, English, Spanish
| Message 131 of 249 16 November 2009 at 4:48pm | IP Logged |
Gusutafu wrote:
Alvinho wrote:
Gusutafu wrote:
irrationale wrote:
So this modern western culture you speak of... is not a culture at all? Rather, a non-culture? |
|
|
Well, I rather mean that when we say that Western culture is being adopted by people all over the world, we tend to forget that Western culture once upon a time was more than Mcdonalds, skyskrapers, Britney spears and consumer capitalism. Those are the things that are spreading like a disease, not Lermontov, Lassus or Leonardo.
Compared to them, no, I wouldn't call Britney Spears culture. |
|
|
You yourself set your own culture....Globalization which has been widespread by West has a lot of elements...therefore, you can scrap whatever you find it useless...it doesn't matter what crappy elements yellow media spreads....you have the right to be inside of a bubble and enjoy whatever you want.....it doesn't matter if it's western or eastern.... |
|
|
This is true but irrelevant. We are discussing what the Western world exports to the rest of the planet, and it's not Bach, believe me, it's Britney. |
|
|
I believe in you, buddy......they export what is more profitable, you know that.....but you're not obliged to take it....plus, I won't call you a nerd also.
Edited by Alvinho on 16 November 2009 at 4:59pm
1 person has voted this message useful
| Gusutafu Senior Member Sweden Joined 5522 days ago 655 posts - 1039 votes Speaks: Swedish*
| Message 133 of 249 16 November 2009 at 6:00pm | IP Logged |
cordelia0507 wrote:
Gusutafu wrote:
what the Western world exports to the rest of the planet, and it's not Bach, believe me, it's Britney. |
|
|
It's good that big and important nations like China are careful about adopting everything Western and discarding their own traditions.
|
|
|
But wouldn't it be better if they chose Bach rather than Britney? Christian charity rather than consumerist individualism? I think that they are making some very bad choices.
cordelia0507 wrote:
Personally I think the world DOES need a common language to communicate in, for the sake of peace and trading... but I don't like the effects/results we are seing from that language being English...
|
|
|
If there is one thing the world and the environment doesn't need right now, it's MORE trade. Not that the lack of a common language has prevented us from completely ravaging the planet in a few generations.
It is hard to say if a common language would lead to fewer wars. Why do you believe it would? Because war is caused by people's lack of understanding for each other? A lot of wars have been fought between speakers of mutually comprehensible languages. Isn't it rather the case that people fight because they have a claim on the same piece of land, because they want to lay their hands on an oilfield or other treasured resource, or just to "spread peace and democracy"?
Edited by Gusutafu on 16 November 2009 at 7:08pm
3 persons have voted this message useful
| Hoopskidoodle Senior Member United States Joined 5501 days ago 55 posts - 68 votes Speaks: English* Studies: French
| Message 134 of 249 16 November 2009 at 6:23pm | IP Logged |
Buttons wrote:
...The English speaking countries have the reputation for being more rich than other parts of the world. There are homeless and extremelly poor people from these English speaking countries but people from other parts of the world do not think of this... |
|
|
I tend to agree with this, and it cuts both ways. Certainly in the U.S. there is a tendency to assume, for instance, that everyone from India is either a doctor or the proprietor of a (24 hours/day, 7 days/week) convenience store. "Slumdog Millionaire" notwithstanding, that's what we're generally exposed to, i.e. Indian people who had enough on the ball to pick up and move half way around the world. They do not represent a random sampling of the Indian population.
I also believe that people are attracted to English and English speaking countries, over and above any economically hegemonic considerations, because they have been branded as representing the opportunity for self-determination (I blame John Locke.) One isn't limited by a (formal or informal) caste. You can, within reason, be whomever you want to be; work in a field other than that of your father, marry whomever you wish, dye your hair the brightest and most saturated shade of pink, where a dress. No on cares.
Moreover, I don't think it insignificant that (in the U.S. in particular) no matter where you emigrate from, your children--presumably raised in the U.S. and speaking English without an accent--will be as American as anyone whose ancestors lived in 17th century Jamestown. Perhaps there are non-English-speaking countries with the same combination of personal freedom and freedom from the tyranny of conventionalism, but they haven't marketed themselves nearly as well.
2 persons have voted this message useful
| Volte Tetraglot Senior Member Switzerland Joined 6440 days ago 4474 posts - 6726 votes Speaks: English*, Esperanto, German, Italian Studies: French, Finnish, Mandarin, Japanese
| Message 135 of 249 16 November 2009 at 8:00pm | IP Logged |
Hoopskidoodle wrote:
Buttons wrote:
...The English speaking countries have the reputation for being more rich than other parts of the world. There are homeless and extremelly poor people from these English speaking countries but people from other parts of the world do not think of this... |
|
|
I tend to agree with this, and it cuts both ways. Certainly in the U.S. there is a tendency to assume, for instance, that everyone from India is either a doctor or the proprietor of a (24 hours/day, 7 days/week) convenience store. "Slumdog Millionaire" notwithstanding, that's what we're generally exposed to, i.e. Indian people who had enough on the ball to pick up and move half way around the world. They do not represent a random sampling of the Indian population.
I also believe that people are attracted to English and English speaking countries, over and above any economically hegemonic considerations, because they have been branded as representing the opportunity for self-determination (I blame John Locke.) One isn't limited by a (formal or informal) caste. You can, within reason, be whomever you want to be; work in a field other than that of your father, marry whomever you wish, dye your hair the brightest and most saturated shade of pink, where a dress. No on cares.
Moreover, I don't think it insignificant that (in the U.S. in particular) no matter where you emigrate from, your children--presumably raised in the U.S. and speaking English without an accent--will be as American as anyone whose ancestors lived in 17th century Jamestown. Perhaps there are non-English-speaking countries with the same combination of personal freedom and freedom from the tyranny of conventionalism, but they haven't marketed themselves nearly as well. |
|
|
Modern Berlin strikes me as fitting this description to a T.
1 person has voted this message useful
| cordelia0507 Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 5839 days ago 1473 posts - 2176 votes Speaks: Swedish* Studies: German, Russian
| Message 136 of 249 16 November 2009 at 9:18pm | IP Logged |
Gusutafu wrote:
But wouldn't it be better if they chose Bach rather than Britney? Christian charity rather than consumerist individualism? I think that they are making some very bad choices.
If there is one thing the world and the environment doesn't need right now, it's MORE trade. Not that the lack of a common language has prevented us from completely ravaging the planet in a few generations.
It is hard to say if a common language would lead to fewer wars. Why do you believe it would? Because war is caused by people's lack of understanding for each other? A lot of wars have been fought between speakers of mutually comprehensible languages. Isn't it rather the case that people fight because they have a claim on the same piece of land, because they want to lay their hands on an oilfield or other treasured resource, or just to "spread peace and democracy"?
|
|
|
I totally agree with everything in this post.. And I don't *really* want more trade...
However my new "image" on this site as some kind of extreme left-wing radical just because I don't love everything about USA / English language / consumerism had started to wear me down a bit..
I DO think that the ability of regular people to communicate across borders helps prevent wars though. It's much easier to whip up hatred or paranoia about another country if people have very little contact or understanding of that country.
Edited by cordelia0507 on 16 November 2009 at 9:19pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 1.2969 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|