• regul [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everything indigenous groups have ever done is good, actually. I am very smart.

    Ritual human sacrifice to appease the gods? Not actually that bad! Kill the krakkka inside your head.

  • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I do not know if the culturalist opponents of the real world and its evolutionary trends, understood as Americanization by some and Westernization by others, can be described as rational. Confronted by the threat of Americanization, some defend unique “cultural values”…This is a dangerous situation, and the danger is enhanced by adherence to the principle of irresponsibility. It is dangerous because the (capitalist) system has reached a stage characterized by the monstrous power of its destructive capacities. As I said above, the system is capable of destroying human beings, nature, and whole societies.

    • Samir Amin, Eurocentrism.

    They certainly aren’t rational here…

    If you start from a culturalist critique and not a materialistic one, this is what happens.

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Essentially the extreme form of liberal ideology that the USA has exported across the world post WW2. The key defining factors are the reduction of social organisation to only two factors, liberty viewed as freedom of private enterprise, and private property. The second key factor that defines this Americanization being the ideological seperation (as the two concepts are in reality inseparable) of economic and political life, in which the free market regulates economic life, and the political life is seperated from it and reduced to voting for a candidate who defines the rules for political life. A low intensity democracy if you will.

        Samir Amin later went on to write “The Liberal Virus - Permanent War and the Americanization of the World” to expand on this concept.

        • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          so the ‘culturalist’ opponents defy something modern and evolutionary, like lgbt rights, on the grounds it is ‘americanization/westernization’. and the culturalists in the OP are defending anti-modern things in the guise of opposing westernization.

          the problem i identify (and maybe he deals with this beyond the quote), is how we should know what is actually modern. because to return to lgbt rights, the suppression of them in the middle-east dates back to the nascent modernization programmes of states trying desperately to resist european colonialism. the very thing culturalists defend as invioable tradition was itself once the ‘evolutionary’ force.

          • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s actually dealt with in the preface/introduction of the book. Firstly culturalism is defined:

            In this work, I propose a critique of what can be called “culturalism.” I define culturalism as an apparently coherent and holistic theory based on the hypothesis that there are cultural invariants able to persist through and beyond possible transformations in economic, social, and political systems. Cultural specificity, then, becomes the main driving force of inevitably quite different historical trajectories.

            Then modernity is critiqued.

            Modernity is the product of nascent capitalism and develops in close association with the worldwide expansion of the latter. The specific logic of the fundamental laws that govern the expansion of capitalism leads to a growing l inequality and asymmetry on a global level. The societies at the peripheries are trapped in the impossibility of catching up with and becoming like the societies of the centers, today the triad of the United States, Europe, and Japan. In turn, this distortion affects modernity, as it exists in the capitalist world, so that it assumes a truncated form in the periphery. The culture of capitalism is formed and develops by internalizing the requirements of this asymmetric reality. Universalist claims are systematically combined with culturalist arguments, in this case Eurocentric ones, which invalidate the possible significance of the former.

            The crisis of modernity is itself the sign of the obsolescence of the system. Bourgeois ideology, which originally had a universalist ambition, has renounced that ambition and substituted the postmodernist discourse of irreducible “cultural specificities” (in its crude form, the inevitable clash of cultures). As opposed to this discourse, I suggest that we begin with a view of modernity as a still incomplete process, which will only be able to go beyond the mortal crisis it is now undergoing through the reinvention of universal values. This implies the economic, social, and political reconstruction of all societies in the world.

            The universalist values (such as LGBT rights) got undermined and invalidated during colonialism, the only way to move forward is a redefinition of universal values from a non eurocentric point of view, not rainbow capitalism/imperialism.

  • Adkml [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    On top of everything else saying native Americans were cannibals is uniquely offensive.

    The whole idea of wendigos is its what happens to you if you consume human flesh.

    Entire villages committed mass suicide before winters if they didn’t have enough food so no one would have to resort to cannibalism.

    • iridaniotter [she/her, she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      There have been some indigenous cultures that genuinely practiced cannibalism such as the Wari’, but to imply it was commonplace is not only incorrect but also doing the work of (ironically cannibalistic) European colonizers.

    • Catfish [she/her]@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The W* (which is how you should refer to it because invoking it’s name is frowned upon) isn’t just some monster horror story. In my tribe and others it is a cannibalistic spirit that may possess you if invoked. That being said there are several tribes where folks do eat their ancestors as a part of their funeral practices.

        • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yeah its origin is probably closer to an uncanny valley “thing looks human but doesn’t act human and is dangerous.”

          There’s usually a kernel of truth in a lot of the old indigenous legends and stories. These become traditions and rituals over time but likely started as practices to guard against actual dangers. Like funerary practices. If you go with exposure you don’t leave the body near where you live. Or you bury the dead. You might do this to “respect the spirits” but it also prevents disease and/or attracting undesired animals to your location.