> Chris Doss wrote:
>> There's a big difference between some one forced to beg and someone who
> does
>> it voluntarily (and teaches their children to do it). If that sounds petit
>> bourgeouis, fine.
>
> Yes. There really are "bad" cultural norms (e.g. heterosexism). Otherwise,
> what reason would there be to care about changing them?
>
> -- Luke
There are differences between changing cultural norms, which I think we can all agree is desirable, forcing such change, which takes some justification and seeking to eliminate a socio-cultural unit, which is rather difficult to justify. When you remove children so as to indoctrinate them out of their cultural norms, you are doing something very different than if you were to undertake reforms, or even a revolution.
It's as if it were acceptable to totalise Gypsie culture as dysfunctional on the grounds that they beg and thieve (always forgetting the Django Reinharts...) But no one would get away with suggesting that the entirety of American culture should be exterminated, that American children should be distributed to more sensible cultures, on the grounds that Americans are far worse thieves and murderers than the Gypsies. The fact that we all fail to see an equivalence here is extremely important. As is the fact that we would immediately and very rightly point to economic, political and material reasons for American misbehaviour.
But if you could establish that an entire culture was bad, then eliminating it would fall under the category of justifiable genocide, a crucial category which permits us to see how our thinking falls into the traps we see in our enemies. I don't think we should console ourselves with the thought we would never find an entire culture to be bad. That's just not true.
Thiago