If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Wrong to criticise other cultures?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Before answering, make sure you watch this video. And I'm warning you now that it might be the most disturbing thing you've ever seen.
Story.
Story.
It's that last bit that worries me the most. I fully accept that the circumstances of many of these tribes will result in difficult decisions having to be made, particularly when it comes to their ability to care for disabled babies. Of course this doesn't excuse the superstition involved or the barbarism of the method. But my question is at what stage do you have to put down the "respect" for other people's culture are say that enough is enough, and that certain practices are barbaric and shouldn't be allowed (not just legally, but actually do something practical about it too). Because obviously, I assume we would all criticise such action, but how many would consider it acceptable to effectively force them to change their way of life to stop it?Babies born into some Indian tribes in the Amazon are being buried alive, a practice that is being covered up by the Brazilian authorities out of respect for tribal culture.
Speaking of the tribes, he said: "This is their way of life and we should not judge them on the basis of our values. The difference between the cultures should be respected."
Of course this last one gives you a pretty good idea of the beginnings of religion in general. Probably a practical reason for this teaching, but of course you need to make up some bullshit to get the parents to go along with it, because they'd never agree to it otherwise, and as we've seen don't agree to it a lot of the time in spite of this. But that's kinda a seperate point.Like other tribes, the Suruwahá considers that if a child has any deformity or disability, it does not have a soul and so - as an animal - should be killed.
0
Comments
It sounds sick but look at it objectively. What chance does anyone have in a forbidding environment like the Amazon rainforest if they are born with a dehabilitating deformity or disability? Whilst the methods might be disturbing, the reasoning behind it is perfectly logical. In Amazonian tribes, every member of the tribe has to work in order for the tribe to survive. If you have 20 people, 1 of whom is disabled and 2 of whom need to care for that person round the clock, you're left with 17 men/women and children to do the hunting, cooking, farming e.t.c.
It's no problem if your tribe is like ours and numbers in the millions, where there are established support mechanisms in place to assist people with disabilities, but in a small tribe it is a matter of life and death for the tribe as a whole.
I'm With Stupid (and others) will call me a fascist for saying so though. But then again I think there's is an amoral stance to take.
And countries such as Papau New Guinea have shown that it's possible, where most of the formerly cannibalistic tribes live in societies of small villages, and do so after decades of voluntary changes. And they have western medicine, western education, etc. I just find it bizarre that anyone considers a way of life to be more important than preventing the suffering of innocent people, especially when it's largely possible to do so relatively peacefully. The position of the Brazilian government as outlined in the article is that it's wrong to even try to convince these tribes because "it's their culture." I suspect there are plenty of arguments against it, but "it's their culture" isn't a valid one imo, which is what I'm trying to get at in this thread. Another example might be reports of British police turning a blind eye to female genital mutilation in certain communities because it's part of their culture and they're afraid of offending them. Now I don't know how true such reports are, but I wouldn't for one second back the police's reported actions on this issue. So it's a more fundamental issue that just the question of this particular tribe. I just find that extreme examples are usually a good way of finding out where people stand on the issue.
Where do you get that idea? When have I ever expressed an opinion that intervening in atrocities is a fascist opinion? I can't remember arguing that murderers shouldn't be arrested, for example. I have called your opinion fascist on certain other issues. Usually ones where you believe that everyone should be banned from doing something you don't agree with, despite not coming up with a shred of objective evidence as to it's negative effects on society or individuals, and have actually admitted that your only reason for wanting something banned is that you don't like it. That's not the same as wanting to stop children being killed.
I suspect we agree on this issue, although maybe our opinion on the best method of achieving the goal differs.
There's a big difference between a tribe in Brazil and the Police's alleged blind eye over here towards genital mutilation.
For one thing, who says the tribes want to integrate into society? People here claim the tribesman's way of living is barbaric, but how would they react upon seeing our society? Every man for himself, random murder, war, crime, pollution, e.t.c.
Maybe they've seen our way of doing things and decided theirs is much better, and who are we to question them?
Secondly, if the Police over here are turning a blind eye to certain things, for fear of offending, then that should stop. People of different cultures are here because they want to be, and they accept that they should abide by our rules and customs. If we forced them here then we wouldn't be in a position to dictate to them how they should live, but we didn't so we can't.
:yes: I think it is quite possible to be respectful of another person's religion and/or way of life, but when it starts to contravene the rules of the country (e.g. the female circumcision referred to earlier), the law of the land must prevail.
Regarding the OP, I feel we must intervene. The needless death of any individual must take precedence of their customs, to save him/her.
I personally agree. The practice should be stopped, it's barbaric. But that is my opinion, which is based on my own experiences, ideals and morals, and no-one should forget as it applies to all, based on the fact that we all live in comfortable houses in Western Europe, and not a hut in the middle of the jungle.
Who are we to impose our belief on a tribe's way of life which is necessary for their long term survival?
It's possible
I thought it, it looks very fake, and i really cant see a western camera man standing there recording that.
I know what you are saying but where do we draw the line in turning a blind eye? Perhaps, if the majority of the Earth find the practice repugnant, then we as majority stakeholders, have an obligation and a right to intervene.
Amazonian tribes have lots of legal protection in Brazil at least.
One of the main issues being discussed was whether they regarded it to be evil or not. I do think that from these tribes point of view, they're acting according to the contribution of their survival. If you ownestly do think that disability will affect siblingins deep down (based on superstition) and have no access to the benefits of modern life such as a healthcare and doctors you will do everything you need to survive no matter how horrific your actions are deemed by people of other cultures. These tribes are not an exception.
I'm in no way supporting such actions myself, I find them horrific, but I think we should be careful to judge an up until now a culture that has not been integrated into the modern world by our own standards of moral. As far as I'm concerned, the best method of stopping this is probably to try to to enlighten them in one way or another, without trying to erase their entire culture.
yes its a terrible thing to do but to them its life, I am sure many people in todays society have no idea of what it constitutes to live like these people do if they can't bring enough food home they will die its as simple as that and disabled members are an extra mouth that cannot help in hunting/gathering food.
looking at then and judging them by our standards of living will not help enlighten us or them it just leave us even more ignorant of "the fact of life"
I agree with the part where you're sayin that very few people in modern society, at least in the richer parts of the world have a grasp of what it's like to live from day to day and wondering if the hunters will bring home enough food or not. And although the spartans serves as a good example of the same behaviour, one can't really compare a (as seen by our eyes) a barbariq culture today and a nation that existed 3000 years ago, even if there are many similatirites with regards to customs, as no nation, nor any group of people on earth had access to the same amount of science or anything like the idea of the "modern and including society for everyone" at the time being.
I didn't say that we should judge them by our standards, I claimed the exact opposite of that. And I disagree with you that we can't do anything. As you say, they need an alternative, and that would be something like a health care system. In order to do that, one can't just build a hospital outside the chieftain's tent but I mean that one has to think long term integration and input from the "modern world" without just running them over. Yes, it's probaby easier said than done, but few claim that integration issues are easy, they have never been no matter which groups of people you're regarding. But it doesn't mean it's impossible
There is nothing wrong with criticising a culture. It would be rude to say they are stupid for painting themselves for example but its correct to criticise when they do something that is clearly harming someone, even one of thier own. Wuuld anyone here seriously not criticise kurds practicing honour killings or pashtun collective punishment? But its thier culture...
My point is that they should be integrated into mainstream Brazilian culture. Now no, they may not have access to healthcare as good as the NHS, but as far as I'm aware, killing disabled people because you can't look after them is not tolerated in Brazil in general, so the idea that it should be tolerated in Brazilian tribes on cultural grounds is ridiculous. So the problem is therefore a logistical one. But let's assume that it is possible to get access to such facilities to these people, I think there is a moral obligation to attempt to integrate them in this way, and not refuse to out of "respect" for their way of life (or probably more accurately, a way of sweeping them under the carpet and not having the deal with them). It may be a long time and a few generations before you destroy the practice completely, but I think that it is essential to put every effort into doing so, and not worry about destroying a way of life.
I agree. Like most superstitions, it may have been born out of a genuine practical reason, but the challenge is that if these people were given access to the best medical facilities in the world, it would probably still take them a generation or so to get rid of the superstition that a disabled child has no soul. Hell, our cultures are still slowly but surely getting over our superstitions (and picking up various new ones as they go).
I would have died at birth with a hairlip and cleft pallet but I was treated, but then that was very costly and if i have children there is a very large chance of them having the problem too and so it could go on and on. 100 years ago I would have died through lack of the science to deal with it. I had something like 6 operations what would happen if these people had a growing number of disabled members ? it not a case of this one child for them its that it could pass on if they have children, look around yourselves can you think of many people that never need health care ?
Whether or not legal protection exists in a lot of Latin American countries, indigenous people are exploited, sometimes forced from their land and in the case of Ecuador especially, killed for protesting against oil developments.
Europe, East Asia and the Middle East are the supreme cultures in the world because they've all contributed the most to human civilisation, be it scientifically, philosophically or technologically.