How can people logically argue that certain cultures are not objectively better than others?
Isn't the fact that people choose to move from one country to another proof that some countries have objectively better cultures?
For instance, if a Mexican person wants to live in America, is that not them admitting that American culture is superior?
Really? No opinions on this?
There are an infinite amount of reasons why one would want to move, whether it be economic, cultural, educational - whatever. The world and its nature, let alone human nature, can't be explained in a small paragraph.
>There are an infinite amount of reasons why one would want to move, whether it be economic, cultural, educational - whatever.
Can't it be argued that a nation's economy or educational system is a direct result of their culture?
...
Mexicans aren't moving to the US at all tho.
usnews.com
Yes, that's why the motions of a single immigrant could not be used to deduce the superiority of cultures. However, the trend among groups of immigrants is a compelling argument. Is it more common for Americans to move to Mexico, or for Mexicans to move to America?
The trend of immigration, now and over generations, is highly indicative of an obvious fact. The culture, that is, life in general, is better in the United States than it is in Mexico. This is likewise reflected with statistical measurements of things like GDP, purchasing power, safety, corruption, and life expectancy.
The idea that are all cultures are precisely equal is founded on nothing more than wishful thinking and is opposed to evidence that is immense and obvious.
I never made that claim and that is literally not the point of this thread at all but thanks for the worthless post you illiterate fuck.
Some cultures are objectively better than others (unless you want to be a pedantic asshole about the word 'objective', but let's not do that, please.)
Cultures that oppress women and minorities, ban harmless practices for reason other than religious puritanism, and fail to educate their members or provide them with a reasonable quality of life (even when they have the resources to do so) are objectively worse than civilized, secular, first-world cultures.
And I'm liberal as shit.
The widespread acceptance of cultural relativism is maybe the greatest failing of the modern left wing. It'd disgusting. Systematic oppression and corruption aren't any more acceptable when done by people with differently-colored skin across the world. That those people sometimes face discrimination in western countries STILL DOESN'T MAKE THEIR BEHAVIOR OKAY. At all. And there's nothing wrong with being proud that such things are no longer acceptable in our culture.
It's time that liberals had the balls to stand up and admit that.
Christ, sorry for all the typos in this post. I guess I'm tired.
So this is the power of mexican intellectuals?
>Isn't the fact that people choose to move from one country to another proof that some countries have objectively better cultures?
No, this only indicates that there are subjectively better cultures.
>One country is a shithole
>Another country isn't a shithole
Country #2 is better
However, the trend among groups of immigrants is a compelling argument.
Agreed
>The culture, that is, life in general, is better in the United States than it is in Mexico. This is likewise reflected with statistical measurements of things like GDP, purchasing power, safety, corruption, and life expectancy.
This is exactly my point. Culture is basically the sum of all things. Economy, crime, education, health, war, etc. All are the aspects of a particular culture.
>Some cultures are objectively better than others (unless you want to be a pedantic asshole about the word
>And I'm liberal as shit.
Unfortunately you're in the minority.
>No, this only indicates that there are subjectively better cultures.
In the case of individual immigrants I'd agree, but isn't a large trend of immigrants moving from one nation to another a strong argument for some objective superiority of one culture over another?
Bullshit
Get Redpilled
youtube.com
What exactly are you calling bullshit? Also that's a long video so I'm not watching it now but can you post a quick summary?
I was at the Dallas Museum of Art last weekend. They have collections sorted by region. It should be blatantly clear by looking at the art that European and Asian cultures are superior to African culture and indigenous Central/South American culture
>smart people using the word 'objectively'
lol
no, just because a lot of people like pop music doesn't make it objectively better.
Not an argument
>Unfortunately you're in the minority.
I'm not so sure I agree with that. I know quite a few young people who are socially liberal (e.g. it seems crazy to them to oppose gay marriage, abortion, the legalization of marijuana, and so on), support robust environmental protection laws, and are comfortable with a fair amount of social spending & regulation of the market, so they're certainly liberal by most people's standards, and yet they have no problem taking pride in their culture's accomplishments nor do they feel the need to kowtow to anybody else's.
You rarely hear from people like that on here precisely because they're not caricatures and so none of them are Tumblr-famous or whatever.
Among card-carrying self-identified leftists I'm certainly in the minority, though, and like I said, that's a disgusting, disappointing failing on our part, and not one I'm interested in excusing.
>How can people logically argue that certain cultures are not objectively better than others?
I've never encountered this argument. All 'progressives' argue as if the equivalence of cultures was a settled conclusion or indeed an axiom but they writhe and squirm when I am trying to make them state it. Some of them don't even actually think that: they think that a future hippie communist culture will be objectively better, and compared to it all current ones are equal as in equally shitty. But they won't state this explicitly, either.
Disclaimer: I only argued this point with Hungarian progressives. Maybe they are too intimidated to actually take a stand when it comes to their principles, or maybe they are merely parroting soundbites without actually thinking about the foundations.
I don't know about cultures, but some places are definitely better than others. Consider the shithole country where I live. Makes me sad when ignorant 'patriots' defend the current situation of our society. It's been a downhill progression for a long fucking time. While the East is not entirely without its own characteristic qualities, botched globalization has made sure that they never resurface, ever again. In conclusion, I agree - West is the best. Given the opportunity, I'll probably resettle and contribute to Western civilization and society wholeheartedly and without regret, because the West has come to define who I am, and I'm glad.
Without actually weighing on which culture is better (US vs. Mexico), the reason Mexicans are immigrating en masse to the US isn't necessarily because the US has a better culture. Right now, the reason is primarily the violence caused by the cartels. The Mexican government is totally unable to fight them (similar to how Illinois and other states were unable to fight mobsters, which led to the FBI (BOI originally) being founded). I'm almost certain that because ending the war on drugs would destroy the cartels, it would also probably drastically reduce immigration from Mexico in general and therefore illegal immigration. Anyway, that's somewhat off topic.
I don't think that any culture is objectively better because it's all about personal preference. You can look at things like technology, economy, citizen happiness, etc. to make arguments about who is better, but at the end of the day arguing about which culture is better is the same as arguing whether chocolate or vanilla ice cream is better.
>Given the opportunity, I'll probably resettle and contribute to Western civilization and society wholeheartedly and without regret, because the West has come to define who I am, and I'm glad.
What exactly is stopping you from doing just that? Economic reasons I assume?
Busy, gaudy Catholic clusterfuck.
That, and I'm only 18.
Germany is full of sandniggers because of welfare, not the Reichstag.
>Right now, the reason is primarily the violence caused by the cartels. The Mexican government is totally unable to fight them
Can't one argue that such aspect of Mexico are part of their culture?
summary:
Ann Coulter says, "fuck off shitty life cock sucking mother fucking maple syrup gulping cigarette smoking low education stupid fucking moronic kike subhuman subtier subpar illiterate lazy low testerone high estrogen piece of fucking human garbo"
There you go user!
Merely moving country isn't necessarily a judgement call on culture. Economics (which can be due to external factors such as mineral wealth or foreign companies having offices in the country), climate (not culture related) and natural disasters (refugees) for instance are possible factors.
But yeah cultures can definitely be better or worse, from the point of view of one, the other or a third culture.
>There are an infinite amount of reasons why one would want to move, whether it be economic, cultural, educational - whatever. The world and its nature, let alone human nature, can't be explained in a small paragraph.
But if one chose A instead of B, then we can conclude with 100% certainty that this person prefers A to B.
If a Mexican then decides to reside in the US instead of Mexico, it is therefore a certainty that they prefer the US. This is true no matter what the reason for that preference might be. But culture will most certainly have something to do with it, just because of how all pervasive it is. You don't see people desperately trying to get to Saudi Arabia. It's rich as hell but it's also shit.
its more about money, either welfare or job opportunities.
culture... who cares about that, when you can just do your own thing within your minority group?
>For instance, if a Mexican person wants to live in America, is that not them admitting that American culture is superior?
We do it for the easy money you stupid leaf, we couldn't give two shits about burger 'culture'
>Merely moving country isn't necessarily a judgement call on culture. Economics (which can be due to external factors such as mineral wealth or foreign companies having offices in the country), climate (not culture related) and natural disasters (refugees) for instance are possible factors.
You got me with climate and natural disasters but I still see the economy as a result of a nation's culture (or the nations are it) since it is the beliefs and actions of a nation's citizens that influence it.
Welfare and job opportunities are enabled by the culture.
Why don't muslim, chinese, or indian nations have such welfare states and job opportunities?
Because their cultures are inferior.
Generally yes, but that doesn't mean that immigrants will adopt the culture of their new nation.
>You got me with climate and natural disasters
Temprorary displacement.
Nobody in the US or any European nation is going to move to Africa because of a natural disaster in the US or Europe. They may move elsewhere within those regions, but leaving entirely - even during the height of massive european wars people kept to their land.
Another retarded Mexican completely misses the point.
>its more about money, either welfare or job opportunities.
All aspects of a nation's culture.
>culture... who cares about that, when you can just do your own thing within your minority group?
The culture of an entire nation is much bigger than that.
>liberals
>logical arguments
dude this triggers me and logic doesn't matter because what you're saying feels bigotted
>feels
True, but from my experience it is only the immigrants that successfully assimilate and embrace the culture of their new countries who are truly successful.
Also, if they are moving to another country there must be some aspect of that country those immigrants find appealing and superior to their own country otherwise why move in the first place?
The individual's economic motivation may be, perhaps, because their job requires a move to another country, which the individual may hate.
Its impossible to be objective because you cannot be conscious of all your personal bias. I don't see how a countries economic and social wellbeing can be attributed their culture and not vice-versa. If that's the case then its all circumstantial and individual cultures really have no merit over each other. This constant and aimless debate steers everyone from the utopian society we ought to pursue.
Some ppl move for climate all the time. It used to be a "thing" in the UK for people to move to The Colonies for the climate (cos lets face it - Britain's climate sucks)
As for natural disasters, if Yellowstone went up tomorrow you'd have plenty of yanks going all over the place to avoid the mess and some would happily go to 'culturally inferior' places just to get away.
Whilst the pursuit itself of a utopia may have useful side-effects, the utopia itself is impossible and shouldn't even honestly be desired. Humanity does its best work under pressure.