Total Posts:49|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

- Segregation -

Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 8:22:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I believe that segregation is good for society. I believe that racial segregation develops culture. Also, I believe that cultural segregation within the racial segregation helps develop laws that are better suited towards the societies of those segregated cultures.

I would like to hear your thoughts on....

1.) Racial segregation in society.

2.) Cultural segregation in society.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 8:28:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 8:22:24 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
I believe that segregation is good for society. I believe that racial segregation develops culture. Also, I believe that cultural segregation within the racial segregation helps develop laws that are better suited towards the societies of those segregated cultures.

isolation is a great way to cause stagnation in a culture. what "develops" a culture is an influx of fresh ideas and perspectives. in other words, mixing with other cultures. so. you're factually wrong. are you going to change your beliefs?
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Steelerman6794
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 8:31:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Institutionally speaking, racial segregation is pointless and counterproductive. Genetically, it is unlikely that "race" even exists.

http://www.eurekalert.org...

In fact, it is perfectly likely that the DNA of I and Johnny Wonderbread differ more than I and Chris Rock. Attempts to isolate and prevent the mating of humans based on variant shades of brown skin failed miserably, and segregation is therefore meaningless practically and morally.

Privately speaking, I have no problem with business owners reserving the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason. Who you permit to frequent your property is none of the government's business (this is the more extreme libertarian side or me).
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 9:10:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 8:28:58 PM, belle wrote:
At 6/3/2011 8:22:24 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
I believe that segregation is good for society. I believe that racial segregation develops culture. Also, I believe that cultural segregation within the racial segregation helps develop laws that are better suited towards the societies of those segregated cultures.

isolation is a great way to cause stagnation in a culture. what "develops" a culture is an influx of fresh ideas and perspectives. in other words, mixing with other cultures. so. you're factually wrong. are you going to change your beliefs?

I disagree with you on this point. Fresh ideas and perspectives are what develop a culture initially. Once the culture is developed, if outside cultural ideas are continually accepted by the influenced culture, then their previous culture vanishes.

In your scenario lasting image culture would never really exist, because the acceptance of new or opposing cultural views would give a society nothing to personify as a specific culture.

Take 1000 families. Some of those families believe in God, some do not. Some believe in only eating meat, some believe in only eating vegetables and fruit. Some believe in having one spouse, some believe in having multiple spouses. Some believe in no drinking law, some believe in having a drinking law.

Segregate culture into separate societies, into sections of people who believe the similar things and who live in similar ways, and you will have more harmonious societies with laws that reflect that culture accordingly. Th would be much more harmonious than throwing all the different cultures in the same pot of laws, tell them to all live according to one way, and then expect a harmonious or happy result.

Segregation is good for society.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 9:13:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 9:10:10 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/3/2011 8:28:58 PM, belle wrote:
At 6/3/2011 8:22:24 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
I believe that segregation is good for society. I believe that racial segregation develops culture. Also, I believe that cultural segregation within the racial segregation helps develop laws that are better suited towards the societies of those segregated cultures.

isolation is a great way to cause stagnation in a culture. what "develops" a culture is an influx of fresh ideas and perspectives. in other words, mixing with other cultures. so. you're factually wrong. are you going to change your beliefs?

I disagree with you on this point. Fresh ideas and perspectives are what develop a culture initially. Once the culture is developed, if outside cultural ideas are continually accepted by the influenced culture, then their previous culture vanishes.

In your scenario lasting image culture would never really exist, because the acceptance of new or opposing cultural views would give a society nothing to personify as a specific culture.

Take 1000 families. Some of those families believe in God, some do not. Some believe in only eating meat, some believe in only eating vegetables and fruit. Some believe in having one spouse, some believe in having multiple spouses. Some believe in no drinking law, some believe in having a drinking law.

Segregate culture into separate societies, into sections of people who believe the similar things and who live in similar ways, and you will have more harmonious societies with laws that reflect that culture accordingly. Th would be much more harmonious than throwing all the different cultures in the same pot of laws, tell them to all live according to one way, and then expect a harmonious or happy result.

Segregation is good for society.

oh i see. so you think your culture (or any culture for that matter) is perfect? you think the way things work now in some specific culture is ideal and should never change? praytell, what culture might that be?
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 9:31:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Segregation is good for society.:

That's really ambiguous. Segregation based on what? Race? Gender? Musical tastes? Right-hand dominant? Left-hand dominant? Blue eyes? Over 6'0 tall group?

If you want to live in a cookie-cutter society where everyone thinks exactly like you, more power to you. That sounds incredibly boring to me.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Rob1_Billion
Posts: 1,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 10:04:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Justin you seem to be contradicting yourself somewhat. You opened up talking about racial segregation, and now you are concentrating on ideas being the basis of segregation. I don't believe your argument is cohesive.

At any rate, segregation is negative IMO. Go ask the haves and the have-nots about it and see how they feel about the subject.

My biggest beef with segregation is ignorance. Segregation is the mother of ignorance. White Republicans who are anti-gay probably don't have many homosexual friends, for instance. Blacks who are segregated into ghettos, as well as every other minority example of this sort, gain a sense of pride for their race. This is horribly negative; pride is the mother of all evil. 90% of blacks will vote for Obama this next election without bothering to check who his opponent is. That will be a real shame if Ron Paul somehow struggles his way into the Republican nomination. How many of that 90% is even going to consider how Paul's policy-decisions would drastically help the black community better than Obama's? Paul would work to end the war on drugs, which may as well be called the war on blacks. But even if Paul gets nominated and disseminates this information, the ignorance and pride will likely not be enough to make a dent in that black vote.

When people are exposed to new cultures it makes them think. It makes them open their mind. It makes them see others as people, where before they saw them as something slightly less. It's easy to think less of others when you don't interact with them. I therefore wholeheartedly disagree with you, and I believe what we should be doing is trying to motivate people to mix and learn about each other. I value my experiences with different cultures to no end; I've mixed it up with everyone from street-gangs to hardcore conservative Christians and everyone in between. Every new experience has made me stronger and more open-minded. I would say that a fair amount of the problems in this country would be solved very quickly if people had to face those they criticize and those they don't feel a sense of pride with on a regular basis.
kfc
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 10:09:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 9:13:57 PM, belle wrote:
At 6/3/2011 9:10:10 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/3/2011 8:28:58 PM, belle wrote:
At 6/3/2011 8:22:24 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
I believe that segregation is good for society. I believe that racial segregation develops culture. Also, I believe that cultural segregation within the racial segregation helps develop laws that are better suited towards the societies of those segregated cultures.

isolation is a great way to cause stagnation in a culture. what "develops" a culture is an influx of fresh ideas and perspectives. in other words, mixing with other cultures. so. you're factually wrong. are you going to change your beliefs?

I disagree with you on this point. Fresh ideas and perspectives are what develop a culture initially. Once the culture is developed, if outside cultural ideas are continually accepted by the influenced culture, then their previous culture vanishes.

In your scenario lasting image culture would never really exist, because the acceptance of new or opposing cultural views would give a society nothing to personify as a specific culture.

Take 1000 families. Some of those families believe in God, some do not. Some believe in only eating meat, some believe in only eating vegetables and fruit. Some believe in having one spouse, some believe in having multiple spouses. Some believe in no drinking law, some believe in having a drinking law.

Segregate culture into separate societies, into sections of people who believe the similar things and who live in similar ways, and you will have more harmonious societies with laws that reflect that culture accordingly. Th would be much more harmonious than throwing all the different cultures in the same pot of laws, tell them to all live according to one way, and then expect a harmonious or happy result.

Segregation is good for society.

oh i see. so you think your culture (or any culture for that matter) is perfect? you think the way things work now in some specific culture is ideal and should never change? praytell, what culture might that be?

First, calm down.

Second, I don't have any any specific culture in mind. I am saying that it is more harmonious to let a society develop its own culture and rules, which is segregated from differing societies.

The people from these different societies could still interact. But the cultural rules and ways of living would be different for people living in the different societies.

It's respectful and I think it would be much more interesting to see full societies of culture bloom in areas throughout the nation. It would make life a lot more harmonious and interesting in my opinion. Do you not find it interesting to go to other countries and experience their cultures? This already done on a super small scale, which is a diluted version of what I speak. China town, Omish villages, Southern Creole, etc. I am talking about giving cultures their own society with their own rules. Of course their would still be melting pot zones, respectfully so, for all the people who like a cultural blend of anything goes. But people who have very similar ideals and who have a specific cultural way of life, they should be able to live in their own society where their culture enjoys it's life according to cultural law.

This would be much more interesting and much more harmonious than mixing all the cultures together.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 10:19:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Segregation breeds fear and distrust of other groups. Plus it's important for different groups to interact with each other, it gives people new perspectives. A lot of cultures have natural, inborn distrusts of other groups and we can't break these down without a certain degree of personal experience.
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 10:42:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 10:19:43 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Segregation breeds fear and distrust of other groups. Plus it's important for different groups to interact with each other, it gives people new perspectives. A lot of cultures have natural, inborn distrusts of other groups and we can't break these down without a certain degree of personal experience.

Segregation doesn't breed anymore fear than what we already have and I never said that differing societies shouldn't interact... I said they could or should if they wanted.

A lot of the hate problems that we deal with in today's melting pot version of society, comes from the fact that we don't have segregated cultures where people can go to belong and feel comfortable.

It's like leaving your house to go out... You experience things when you go out, but when you get home you feel at ease and comfortable in your home.

The segregated societies would be much like this, but on a larger scale.

Imagine it... I'm going over to the bar in Brazilian town, or body builder village, or science city, animalville, Christian city, etc.

Much more interesting to bring people of like mind together in a society, to let their like-mindedness grow into a culture for everyone to experience.

How does this breed fear and distrust of other people? Because they are different? If that's the case, then you must be scared and distrustful every time you leave your house.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 11:06:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 10:42:44 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/3/2011 10:19:43 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Segregation breeds fear and distrust of other groups. Plus it's important for different groups to interact with each other, it gives people new perspectives. A lot of cultures have natural, inborn distrusts of other groups and we can't break these down without a certain degree of personal experience.

Segregation doesn't breed anymore fear than what we already have and I never said that differing societies shouldn't interact... I said they could or should if they wanted.

A lot of the hate problems that we deal with in today's melting pot version of society, comes from the fact that we don't have segregated cultures where people can go to belong and feel comfortable.

It's like leaving your house to go out... You experience things when you go out, but when you get home you feel at ease and comfortable in your home.

The segregated societies would be much like this, but on a larger scale.

Imagine it... I'm going over to the bar in Brazilian town, or body builder village, or science city, animalville, Christian city, etc.

Much more interesting to bring people of like mind together in a society, to let their like-mindedness grow into a culture for everyone to experience.

How does this breed fear and distrust of other people? Because they are different? If that's the case, then you must be scared and distrustful every time you leave your house.

When you interact with large numbers of people of different groups you learn to view them more as individuals rather than a collective entity. You really only solidify your own views when you're around other like-minded people. A diversity of views can moderate, and every culture has positive and negative aspects. It would be a mistake to let the negative aspects of those cultures go unanswered.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2011 11:08:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Don't people do these things naturally?

Why enforce it?
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Rob1_Billion
Posts: 1,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 6:50:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Second, I don't have any any specific culture in mind. I am saying that it is more harmonious to let a society develop its own culture and rules, which is segregated from differing societies.

By "let" you mean "let's do nothing?" So that would be exactly what we're already doing.

The people from these different societies could still interact. But the cultural rules and ways of living would be different for people living in the different societies.

You could abolish the federal government, but that is an argument outside the scope of this one. Again, nothing you've said indicates anything that should be done differently than what we currently do as far as culture is concerned. You are seeming to proclaim that we are not "letting" people establish their cultures already.

It's respectful and I think it would be much more interesting to see full societies of culture bloom in areas throughout the nation. It would make life a lot more harmonious and interesting in my opinion. Do you not find it interesting to go to other countries and experience their cultures? This already done on a super small scale, which is a diluted version of what I speak. China town, Omish villages,

Insulating you from other cultures isn't going to help you spell "Amish."

Southern Creole, etc. I am talking about giving cultures their own society with their own rules. Of course their would still be melting pot zones, respectfully so, for all the people who like a cultural blend of anything goes. But people who have very similar ideals and who have a specific cultural way of life, they should be able to live in their own society where their culture enjoys it's life according to cultural law.

So you want to not only abolish the federal government and its laws, but the state governments and their laws too? Cultural law would rule the land? So is this anarchist system going to be capitalistic or communistic? Since you don't like ancap, perhaps you are a communist.

This would be much more interesting and much more harmonious than mixing all the cultures together.

Implying that we "mix" them together already.
kfc
Rob1_Billion
Posts: 1,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 6:54:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 11:08:01 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Don't people do these things naturally?

Why enforce it?

Yeah Cosmic I'm afraid to guess which culture you'd be assigned to...
kfc
Rob1_Billion
Posts: 1,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 10:09:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Would "body-builder village" look something like this? I grew up with the very first guy in the video, this is from RI. There's a reason I moved away from here...
kfc
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 2:17:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The segregated social theory that I speak of would not be enforced. It would be allowed. That's what I am talking about here. To let people develop an area that is assigned to a specific set of ideals and all who live in that society are choosing to follow those ideals by living there. This is not allowed in today law system. The laws and standards set in such a cultural society would be different from the outside world.

There would still be normal America as we know it of course. But I think people of like mind should be able to group together in forming a segregated society, a society which has set cultural standards and laws.

How is this bad or wrong in any way?

Also, it is my opinion that this would be a good social theory to play out in a Minarchy. Though I do feel it could in a republic or democracy just fine.
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 5:09:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 2:17:14 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
The segregated social theory that I speak of would not be enforced. It would be allowed. That's what I am talking about here. To let people develop an area that is assigned to a specific set of ideals and all who live in that society are choosing to follow those ideals by living there. This is not allowed in today law system. The laws and standards set in such a cultural society would be different from the outside world.

There would still be normal America as we know it of course. But I think people of like mind should be able to group together in forming a segregated society, a society which has set cultural standards and laws.

How is this bad or wrong in any way?

Also, it is my opinion that this would be a good social theory to play out in a Minarchy. Though I do feel it could in a republic or democracy just fine.

Put simply, it really depends on what type of segregation we're talking here. In the case of racial segregation, it might be okay to live in certain communities as a matter of sense of security, but separating these just stagnates the broader community and limits people's understanding of other cultures. I go to a school where over 66% of people come from a non-English speaking background. My friends at a nearby private school have a percentage around 10% non EST. I can tell you that there our school has a greater diversity in more ways than this.

Obviously, some forms of segregation could work. I support the segregation of law abiding citizens and non-reformed criminals (although 'reformed' is a difficult subject) . However, I wholeheartedly oppose the idea of introducing the option for religious laws to overcome government (ie. Some Muslims in Australia want to be able to use Sharia laws vs. current laws) . Sometimes we have a moral duty (don't intervene by talking nilhism) , sometimes we have self interest etc. Segregation must be looked at issue by issue, but on the whole it's definitely better to not have segregation.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 6:27:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 5:09:22 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 6/4/2011 2:17:14 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
The segregated social theory that I speak of would not be enforced. It would be allowed. That's what I am talking about here. To let people develop an area that is assigned to a specific set of ideals and all who live in that society are choosing to follow those ideals by living there. This is not allowed in today law system. The laws and standards set in such a cultural society would be different from the outside world.

There would still be normal America as we know it of course. But I think people of like mind should be able to group together in forming a segregated society, a society which has set cultural standards and laws.

How is this bad or wrong in any way?

Also, it is my opinion that this would be a good social theory to play out in a Minarchy. Though I do feel it could in a republic or democracy just fine.

Put simply, it really depends on what type of segregation we're talking here. In the case of racial segregation, it might be okay to live in certain communities as a matter of sense of security, but separating these just stagnates the broader community and limits people's understanding of other cultures. I go to a school where over 66% of people come from a non-English speaking background. My friends at a nearby private school have a percentage around 10% non EST. I can tell you that there our school has a greater diversity in more ways than this.

Obviously, some forms of segregation could work. I support the segregation of law abiding citizens and non-reformed criminals (although 'reformed' is a difficult subject) . However, I wholeheartedly oppose the idea of introducing the option for religious laws to overcome government (ie. Some Muslims in Australia want to be able to use Sharia laws vs. current laws) . Sometimes we have a moral duty (don't intervene by talking nilhism) , sometimes we have self interest etc. Segregation must be looked at issue by issue, but on the whole it's definitely better to not have segregation.

If you 1000 people of 10 cultures, 100 people being in each culture. Then split designated area of interaction into 10 different sections, each culture getting it's own section... How does cause more problems or misunderstanding than blending the entire group together? If I want to really learn about one of the cultures, then all I have to do is go to that area and learn about it. I think it cause way may misunderstanding and problems when you bend everything together. I don't think that it is good for society as a whole, or for the development and practice of specific cultures. If you blend everything together then different cultures mean nothing. That is pretty much what we have in America now. A huge blend of everything which specifically means nothing, but a blend.

There should be no problem with each of these areas having laws that reflect their culture. How would that be a problem? The people in that culture would accept and agree to it obviously, so how could it be a problem? Because YOUR personal ideals conflict? So don't go there. That's what this theory proposes.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 9:04:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Segregation can eventually lead to the end of our species. So for the love of Homo Sapiens don't endorse segregation!
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 9:15:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 9:04:22 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Segregation can eventually lead to the end of our species. So for the love of Homo Sapiens don't endorse segregation!

Fail. Segregation does not have to be a bad thing. People make it into a bad thing. I live an believe different from you correct? What is wrong with people of like mind grouping together in their own society? Nothing. It would have a positive effect actually.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 9:21:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 9:15:01 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/4/2011 9:04:22 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Segregation can eventually lead to the end of our species. So for the love of Homo Sapiens don't endorse segregation!

Fail. Segregation does not have to be a bad thing. People make it into a bad thing. I live an believe different from you correct? What is wrong with people of like mind grouping together in their own society? Nothing. It would have a positive effect actually.

Fail. I am not referring to peoples preferences in who the hang out or the production of like-minded groups, I am referring to segregation like that of the Pre-Civil Rights Era in the U.S.A. which in and of it self was inherently bad, it leads to distrust between communities and can eventually incite violence and war.
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
That.Guy
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 9:44:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 9:21:16 PM, Agnostic86 wrote:
Separate=/=Equal.

The supreme court already overturned the separate but equal in Brown v. The board.

This man knows what he is talking about
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 9:47:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The problem is.. Certain ideologies are violently opposed to the type of segregation that you are talking about.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Steelerman6794
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 9:50:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 9:15:01 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
Fail. Segregation does not have to be a bad thing. People make it into a bad thing. I live an believe different from you correct? What is wrong with people of like mind grouping together in their own society? Nothing. It would have a positive effect actually.

Look, please explain you argument. Are you advocating that people voluntarily associate themselves with only likeminded and physically similar individuals?
Justin_Chains
Posts: 623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 10:28:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 9:50:15 PM, Steelerman6794 wrote:
At 6/4/2011 9:15:01 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
Fail. Segregation does not have to be a bad thing. People make it into a bad thing. I live an believe different from you correct? What is wrong with people of like mind grouping together in their own society? Nothing. It would have a positive effect actually.

Look, please explain you argument. Are you advocating that people voluntarily associate themselves with only likeminded and physically similar individuals?

I'm saying that people should be allowed to create separate societies where everyone who is part of the society is like minded in the sense of culture and cultural standards. Why is this automatically looked at as a bad thing? If one culture does not like another, then don't go there. Don't participate or interact in that culture. Simple solution. Trying to blend everyone into the same mix, that's a problem. Some things don't blend well. What is wrong with letting a culture have it's own society? Does that make people nervous? Why? How does it negatively effect you? Maybe you don't like what a tribe does culturally in Africa... How does that actually effect your personal life? It doesn't. It effects your life no more than the thought itself.

So tell me again why segregated cultural societies is bad?
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 10:52:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
There isn't anything bad about it, it is just idealistic.

Put a society of Genghis Khan enthusiasts next to a society of communal druggies, and well....
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2011 11:39:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/4/2011 6:27:49 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
At 6/4/2011 5:09:22 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
At 6/4/2011 2:17:14 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
The segregated social theory that I speak of would not be enforced. It would be allowed. That's what I am talking about here. To let people develop an area that is assigned to a specific set of ideals and all who live in that society are choosing to follow those ideals by living there. This is not allowed in today law system. The laws and standards set in such a cultural society would be different from the outside world.

There would still be normal America as we know it of course. But I think people of like mind should be able to group together in forming a segregated society, a society which has set cultural standards and laws.

How is this bad or wrong in any way?

Also, it is my opinion that this would be a good social theory to play out in a Minarchy. Though I do feel it could in a republic or democracy just fine.

Put simply, it really depends on what type of segregation we're talking here. In the case of racial segregation, it might be okay to live in certain communities as a matter of sense of security, but separating these just stagnates the broader community and limits people's understanding of other cultures. I go to a school where over 66% of people come from a non-English speaking background. My friends at a nearby private school have a percentage around 10% non EST. I can tell you that there our school has a greater diversity in more ways than this.

Obviously, some forms of segregation could work. I support the segregation of law abiding citizens and non-reformed criminals (although 'reformed' is a difficult subject) . However, I wholeheartedly oppose the idea of introducing the option for religious laws to overcome government (ie. Some Muslims in Australia want to be able to use Sharia laws vs. current laws) . Sometimes we have a moral duty (don't intervene by talking nilhism) , sometimes we have self interest etc. Segregation must be looked at issue by issue, but on the whole it's definitely better to not have segregation.

If you 1000 people of 10 cultures, 100 people being in each culture. Then split designated area of interaction into 10 different sections, each culture getting it's own section... How does cause more problems or misunderstanding than blending the entire group together? If I want to really learn about one of the cultures, then all I have to do is go to that area and learn about it. I think it cause way may misunderstanding and problems when you bend everything together. I don't think that it is good for society as a whole, or for the development and practice of specific cultures. If you blend everything together then different cultures mean nothing. That is pretty much what we have in America now. A huge blend of everything which specifically means nothing, but a blend.

There should be no problem with each of these areas having laws that reflect their culture. How would that be a problem? The people in that culture would accept and agree to it obviously, so how could it be a problem? Because YOUR personal ideals conflict? So don't go there. That's what this theory proposes.

What you're suggesting here actually complicates the idea of culture. Let's pretend we want an 'American' culture (I'm not American, but for simplicity here...) . We're probably going to associate it with the USA. But wait! What if say 3% of the USA is classified as Islamic culture, 2% French etc. is it really an American culture?

The point about globalisation is it's voluntary and that cultures evolve. People see a benefit of another culture and adopt it. Cultures change. An example is Japan. Around 1000 AD (may be off by a bit) , power was seen through very elaborate actions - ie. how a tea set was organised, formalities etc. In the warring states period it was seen through military might. Also, Japan changed significantly due to the Mejii Restoration where they modernised at an incredible rate.

A few questions for you if you don't mind - What do you consider Japanese culture? From what time does it originate? My point is simple - wouldn't we call 'Japanese' culture say, pre-WWII Japan living? Well, what happened to the former Japanese culture of the Tokugawa shogunate? Is that Japanese culture?

My point is that cultures change, and it's merely a stereotypical point of view as to what a culture is.

Also, it's a hard to explain point, but segregation does create a different atmosphere. I know that during our school's Football (soccer) practice that when asked to separate for various sides, a group of people automatically join together. They are most comfortable with their own culture, and it's rather awkward to try and join their side and such. Designating people as x culture and y culture just doesn't work.

Furthermore, what if people want to break away from a predesignated culture? Can they rightfully do so? Imagine you've got a shopping centre. Supposedly in this system you've got a Chinese area, an American area etc. What happens if say, a group of people (ie. Vietnamese for an example) don't want to promote traditional culture. How do you maintain groups of cultures when the participants of said culture don't wish to segregate?

If people are choosing to create this 'blend' then that's their choice.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Hardcore-Racist
Posts: 12
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2011 10:17:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 6/3/2011 8:22:24 PM, Justin_Chains wrote:
I believe that segregation is good for society. I believe that racial segregation develops culture. Also, I believe that cultural segregation within the racial segregation helps develop laws that are better suited towards the societies of those segregated cultures.

I would like to hear your thoughts on....

1.) Racial segregation in society.
Possibly the best thing that ever happened for a society. (Personally, I just prefer expelling all people who I don't like)

2.) Cultural segregation in society.

Same as what I previously said.