Comment on The Not-So-Great Replacement Theory

• FabioTheNewOrder@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Again usually means that there was a first time. The conversation as started in this post didn’t have the context that you just said it did.

  Never said otherwise, just that heritage is not something you get from your race, but from your culture

  That’s where the false correlation between heritage and colture started for me

  To clarify when you said “Give me a proof about the results of your method and I can consider its benefits towards the common good” was that the impersonal your or was it addressing me?

  I was referring to the hypothetical person enforcing a custom or a cultural aspect of his heritage on someone else. What I meant is that if you want to have a requirement of your culture to be enforced on the general population you have to prove somehow that it will improve the quality of life for everyone or you need to shut up. Classical example: the Christian faith does not allow for any contraceptive and, in their view, abstinence is the only way to avoid unwanted pregnancies and STDs. Numerous studies have proven this approach to be the worst imaginable so why is a religious organization having so much influence on people left alone and allowed to predicate their false truth when we have seen first hand the harm it can cause to a population (I think, for example, about all the damages they did in Africa by not allowing people to use condoms during sex. How many people died by AIDS or by childbirth for this foolish stance?)

  the spectrum of options between providing social services in any capacity to physically and sexually abusing children forcibly separated from their parents and even killing them is so wide that your question doesn’t deserve an answer.

  I never stated that this spectrum was narrow, I can see how wide it is. My question was, in this spectrum, where would you draw a line between what is acceptable and what is not? And, most importantly, who should enforce this arbitrary limit? Again, if it were for me anyone being found to be associated with a mafia family should loose his or hers parental rights and their children should be adopted by a civilized family for a better upbringing and for their own good. The Italian state does not agree with me tho so children of mafiosi are left into their original families where they are thought that the evil state has brought their daddy/mommy away for no good reason (nevermind they killed someone, if they did he had it surely coming and he deserved it, in their view) and the mafia epidemic still goes on stronger than ever. Who is right and who is wrong between me and the state in this case?

  source

  • magnusrufus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    “Never said otherwise, just that heritage is not something you get from your race, but from your culture”. That was enough to set you off to the point that you said culture never did anything positive for humanity? The obvious answer is that heritage can be drawn from both race and culture but neither is absolutely required. None of that explains the things you said about foreigners or about culture being a blight on humanity.

    “My question was, in this spectrum, where would you draw a line between what is acceptable and what is not?” That wasn’t your question but let’s answer that anyway. The line would fall between providing social services and taking children to abuse. One would think that would be obvious. This would be enforced by society usually with a government and a system of laws. It isn’t arbitrary it’s a social consensus. You are very slowly rediscovering the fundamentals of society, government, and civilization.

    source

    • FabioTheNewOrder@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      How can you (correctly) say that what the Canadian government did with its Inuit population was wrong but, at the same time, also state that social services need to exist? Who draw the line between what is acceptable and enforceable and what is not? You?.

      This was my question, don’t cut a citation where it’s convenient to you

      “Never said otherwise, just that heritage is not something you get from your race, but from your culture.” That was enough to set you off to the point that you said culture never did anything positive for humanity?

      Yes it was since confusing culture with heritage is quite a misconception in my view. Again, culture is something humans use to create bridges between different groups and societies, heritage is what keep us apart by building walls among different people. You still continue to focus on my observations about aspects of foreign customs but are unable to consider the same type of observations I made about my own Italian heritage. To me it would seem that you are trying to find xenophobia where there is none and it’s becoming quite amusing I must admit. Almost as much as receiving a single answer where there were multiple questions asked.

      The line would fall between providing social services and taking children to abuse.

      Ah yes, a general answer to a general question. In my previous post I made quite specific references to actual situations which were handled or would need to be handled by the Italian government, yet you are unable to provide me with a response to any of these questions.

      You are very slowly rediscovering the fundamentals of society, government, and civilization.

      And you are slowly discovering that laws and governments should evolve to adapt to our modern society, yet our politicians tend to keep the status quo unchanged because… Heritage!! Things were always like this in the past and we’re fine and dandy until these sjw arrived and ruined the fun for everybody (/s, I’m interpreting the main reason given to keep the status quo as it has always been).

      Now that we have established what culture and heritage are as defined from my point of view can you please give me an example if heritage being anything but counterproductive to the development and improvement of the human race?

      Let’s see if you can answer more than one, comfortable question at a time

      source

      • magnusrufus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        I quoted your question directly and pointed out how out of line it was. You asked other questions after that one sure but to say that those other questions were your question instead of the one directly quoted is dishonest and is cutting the quote where it’s convenient for you.

        You were the one using the word culture in place of heritage, apparently internally, while saying a bunch of xenophobic sounding stuff. I’m not sure that using your corrected terminology would change that. I don’t know that including your own demographic as exhibiting the same behavior makes it an ok outlook.

        “And you are slowly discovering that laws and governments should evolve to adapt to our modern society”. No I already knew this. I’m not the one being reductive and claiming that things are simple and static.

        The definition of heritage that you want to use is simply wrong. If we accept the wrong definition that your tailored to achieve the answer you want then yes we will arrive at the answer you want but that’s rather like the pigeon strutting about the board thinking it did a good job.

        Also you seem to think that you’ve provided a clear definition of heritage but you haven’t. You should do that, without getting side tracked. Give the dictionary definition of heritage as it would appear if you wrote it.

        source

        • -> View More Comments