Charley, I started by asking the question, "what do we do about the gap between us and this "strange" cultural morality."
You responded, "The first thing we must do is acknowledge the superiority of Western Civilization."
Now, you embellish with "Some of us understand that Western tradition embodies universal truths, but many postmoderns and relativists in media and academe still think it's a mere ideological construct, and imperialist too."
I still say that we've acknowledged it. Do we have to have 100% conformity? Rote mumbling of some mantra? Is it so threatening to the consensus that a handful of intellectuals are expressing a counterpoint? It's their nature and their job to express a counterpoint. There has to be a counterpoint to illuminate and clarify the boundaries of the point.
Those who express the counterpoint out of relativism or universality or simply tolerance or kindness wouldn't personally choose to trade in their tradition to the other. They're not traitors. Maybe they just don't think it's nice to pile on when another culture is down.
As for your expanding on your original point with notions like "universal truths," "mere ideological construct," and "imperialist," it seems to me that you're going out of your way to look for differences where none need exist. One can, for example, recognize our culture as imperialist, which it so obviously is, without any suggestion that Islamic culture might be superior. Our culture is sweeping the world because it is successful and it is so successful because, at this time in history, at least, it is superior. That doesn't mean that there are no inherent negatives in our culture. And it sure doesn't mean that our culture necessarily "embodies universal truths." It's superior because it works better than any other. IMO, it works because it best channels human nature in a productive direction. (Of course, others might have other definitions for success <g>.)
Back to my original question, I still don't see how our acknowledging the superiority of Western culture deals with the culture gap that started this colloquy. Perhaps it's a first step. If so, what's the second step?
<<The terrorists [on Tuesday] . . . issued no demands, no ultimatums. They did it solely out of grievance and hatred—hatred for the values cherished in the West as freedom, tolerance, prosperity, religious pluralism and universal suffrage, but abhorred by religious fundamentalists (and not only Muslim fundamentalists) as licentiousness, corruption, greed and apostasy.">> |
