Trackbacks & Pings

1. Parableman on 17 Apr 2006 at 6:42 am

   Intermarriage and Destroying Cultures…

   One common but bad argument against interracial marriage stems from the fear that it destroys cultures. Mixed Media Watch has a good response to this argument. I would add that racial interaction of any sort, especially intermarriage, should create cul…

2. Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Grouping People Together: The Problems and Prospects of Panethnic Language on 30 Apr 2006 at 2:16 pm

   […] Some people lament panethnic categories because they believe that it leads to the loss of cultures, languages, and customs. Once groups are combined together whether by force or by choice people worry that some traditions will necessarily disappear as a new panethnic culture and identity emerges. This attitude comes up frequently in discussions about intermarriage. Many people who oppose interethnic and interracial marriage do so out of a concern that the hybridization of cultures will lead to the loss of traditions and language. I have mixed feelings about this because my sense is that global capitalism and the modern communication and transportation technology will inevitably lead to a mishmash of cultures (what Kwame Anthony Appiah calls the new Cosmopolitanism) In fact, one of the ideas that comes up frequently is the notion that a “mixed” ethnic identity inherently involves the loss of some traits from either side. Personally, I am skeptical of that argument because I think a much larger force is at work–global capitalism and the one world culture that it encourages. Given the trend toward a global culture dominated by capitalist superpowers like the US, the creation of panethnic categories can in fact be a way to retain aspects of cultures that are being over run by western countries (put more simply for those who might be losing me—if local ethnic groups can unite they stand a greater chance of keeping their traditions in the face of corporations like McDonalds. Corporations are some powerful that small ethnic and regional groups can’t do much to keep them out, but by uniting diverse groups, they stand a chance.). Here, there seems to be a tension between humanism and identity based politics. Humanism emphasizes universal human rights, while coalitions along panethnic lines represent one of the last bastion of unique, traditional cultural identities. (Here is an interesting essay on this subject I should forewarn everybody that it is written in the typical post modern academic language, so it is really hard to follow if you are unfamiliar with the jargon.) The irony here is that both the new cosmopolitanism and panethnic identities lead to a flattening of culture. The unique traits of groups are going to be lost under both ideas. The question is just a matter of how much local culture will be lost and how fast it will be lost. […]

Comments

1. Unlisted wrote:

   Wanted to comment on the genius that said mixed race children are sicker than “pure blooded” people.

   First of all…what “statistics” is he reading? Maybe those KKK Scientific “facts”

   The only way to get really pure blood (if anyone is that) is through cousin marriage. And REAL statistics (you know the ones that uses such things as facts and actual scientific data) show that the cultures that often marry their cousins show that THESE people are the ones more likely to get disease.

   Secondly, WHO said it is wrong morally??? The same people who believe that also believe in the “master race” thing

   Posted 16 Apr 2006 at 4:38 pm ¶

2. brad wrote:

   This is nuts if you consider that American culture is multicultural–who wrote “White Christmas”? Not a Christian, but a Jewish person. The most popular forms of music in the U.S. are Hip Hop and Rock, which were created by African Americans. American humor has been shaped by many Jewish comedians and their unique perspective. How many people now consider spaghetti as American standard cuisine?

   People who don’t understand this are people who don’t want to understand because it might shatter their beliefs in racial superiority.

   As for health concerns, I do recall seeing some study on the Internet. However, as with studies that show “minorities” have more health issues, most are stress and environmentally induced, like diabetes, heart disease, cancer, etc. Diseases that might have a genetic component but are caused largely by environment. (Like poor people not having grocery stores that sell fresh fruitThe wealthier someone is, chances are she has more access to better medical care, nutrition, and exercise conditioning. On the flipside, other statistics show that breast cancer rates are higher in middle and upper class white women than other groups. Why? Environmental exposures to carcinogens, like chemicals for dry cleaning clothes.

   Other studies have noted that as countries become more industrialized, or immigrants from countries with lesser rates of certain diseases, their rates of illness increase. For instance, as Asia has seen increased wealth, diet changes have brought on greater rates of diabetes. Immigrants who move to America and partake of the American diet also see the same effect.

   Posted 16 Apr 2006 at 5:16 pm ¶

3. eric wrote:

   Yo Jen I’m gonna have my stomch pumped for even looking at that turducken thing!

   I’ve seen this alot from ‘pro-monorace + monoculture” people as well. The idea that if people mix, individual cultures will die is silly on a number of levels.

   a) RACE != CULTURE (that means race does not equal culture for those not programatically inclined :))
   b) there will always be enough people who love a particular culture enough to keep it around. Case in point ” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanskrit ” and the destination of new england elementary schoolers everywhere ” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Plymouth_Plantation ” . Maybe slightly exaggerated to make the point, but you catch my drift.

   Posted 16 Apr 2006 at 9:43 pm ¶

4. Pete wrote:

   There is not much “data” to back up those claims of “James Smith”.
   Could be just another troll.

   Posted 16 Apr 2006 at 11:34 pm ¶

5. arbit wrote:

   So following the ‘View other feedbacks from James Smith (2)’ link, here’s another gem from the same guy:

   “I just wanted to go on the record saying that I don’t believe those nazi’s are hate-filled. If people stop and actually listen to them they have very heartfelt and meaningful messages to say. The only thing that makes people believe they are hate mongers is the swastika branded on their clothes. If people would actually listen to them they have a great love for the white people and also for the America that was founded, as oppose to the America that has become. People need to be a little more open-minded and listen to people instead of yelling at them. Listen and decide for yourself.

   James Smith
   sweet_bodypiercings@hotmail.com
   Self-Employed
   West Michigan”

   Posted 17 Apr 2006 at 12:01 am ¶

6. Lyonside wrote:

   *snore* The people who debate this obviously 1) don’t know any IR couples, 2) know of ONE CASE (good or bad) that shapes their POV.

   As for the Sympathizer, I can only say that Moxy Fruvous must have been right all along:

   “Happy Birthday, Tricia, I’m in the Michigan Militia.”

   Posted 17 Apr 2006 at 9:59 am ¶

7. Stephanie B. wrote:

   People like him are the reason why racial tensions exist today. If he’s white, then his views are the reason. They the ones who created a hierarchy based on race, then proceed to discriminate according to criteria.

   I bet he got those ideas from American Renaissance, VDARE, etc.

   Stephanie

   Posted 17 Apr 2006 at 8:18 pm ¶

8. Damie_Troy wrote:

   Perfect example why I refuse to recognize and respect the ideology of “race”.

   Anyone I have children with is a American like me, so our children will continue our heritage as pure Americans.

   Posted 18 Apr 2006 at 1:09 am ¶

9. Lyonside wrote:

   That’s great in principle, Damie, but there are subcultures in the US (as in many other countries), and they should be embraced and encouraged.

   Posted 18 Apr 2006 at 8:28 am ¶

10. Damie_Troy wrote:

    I refuse to play the race game. Just because something is traditional or the majority opinion, doesn’t mean it’s right.

    Posted 18 Apr 2006 at 7:37 pm ¶

11. Damie_Troy wrote:

    On second thought. I’m not against people remembering and cherishing differing cultural origins in their identity, as long as it’s superseded by Americanism.

    I am against, for example, being a Mexican before an American. I’m strongly American nationalist and Anti-racialist.

    In my studies on the destructive and cruel purpose of the history of “race”, It’s “racial” ideology I hate and will never accept.

    Posted 18 Apr 2006 at 8:37 pm ¶

12. Unlisted wrote:

    I agree with your last post Damie_Troy

    Posted 19 Apr 2006 at 8:03 am ¶

13. Lyonside wrote:

    I get you Damie, I really do, but it’s the diversity that makes America strong, and that goes from the Puerto Ricans and the santos de palos and parades to Russian enclaves to Native peoples to Gullah, etc.

    “Race” isn’t real. Ethnicity, however, is, and should be embraced.

    Posted 19 Apr 2006 at 3:20 pm ¶

14. Damie_Troy wrote:

    For America’s “racial”or ethnic diversity to become more harmonious in the future, we need to stop making “race” or ethnic differences more important than our commonality as fellow countrymen/women.

    On 9-11, our enemies goal was to murder Americans, and they didn’t care what “race” or ethnic origin we were.

    Posted 19 Apr 2006 at 7:58 pm ¶

15. Lyonside wrote:

    That’s true, Damie.

    I still think that there is not a monolithic “american” culture in the way most people consider culture, and that that in inself is a good thing.

    Posted 20 Apr 2006 at 10:21 am ¶

16. Damie_Troy wrote:

    Your correct. We have a society that allows sub-cultural/ethnic differences, which is a natural effect of a free society, we’re not North Korea.

    If we can evolve in future generations where these sub-ethnic/cultural differences still exist, but become subordinate to a shared American identity, then our nation will be more harmonious.

    I don’t want my children and grandchildren to live in the society we’re in now, where people are judged by their phenotype or by stereotypes, and broad generalizations of their backgrounds.

    Posted 21 Apr 2006 at 12:00 am ¶

17. Anonymous wrote:

    Many members of so-called sub-cultures or “ethnicities” want exactly the same thing, which is to maintain their racial group identity. They just disguise it better. Some of the so-called “ethnicities” are just artificial constructs which were created in order to achieve just that. Why would these “ethnicities” need to be maintained? They don’t. The world is an ever changing place. Real cultures usually blend because they are for sharing.

    Posted 28 Apr 2006 at 8:31 am ¶

18. Christy wrote:

    I have an IR marriage and two children from this marriage. We have a solid family and relationship. He is a man and I am a woman, and yes, it is that simple! Why does it have to be taught that our color is a reason for us to not be a family. Our children will be raised with OUR values and will understand that they have the best of two cultures and will be taught to embrace it and be proud of it. Children are taught at home what the difference between races are. Never once have my children asked why their skin is a different color than their cousins. I am sure that one day when they are in school and someone who did teach their children that black, asian, hispanic, etc.. are different than white people, approach my kids, that I will have to explain that not everyone understands how to let children grow up and learn about how they feel about a person and not a color. Wake up people, whether or not you think it is right ,( I love the no one is pure but cousins marrying by the way,) people will love who they love and it is not your place or your right to judge.

    Posted 03 May 2006 at 10:19 pm ¶

19. amalia wrote:

    Christy I applaud your decision to emphasise BOTH of the cultures in your children’s background, but you are not typical. Hopefully, there will be more and more people like you.

    If, however, you think that all families composed of people from different “races” are based on love, and untouched by all of the racial drama that affects society as a whole, especially in terms of superiority/inferiority, negative stereotyping. . . you are sorely mistaken. From my experience, many aren’t. I know a lot of mixed race people who harbor negative views towards one or even both sides of their family, because people in their family have taught them these prejudices.

    Other times they have picked them up from peers because their parents out of naivete or ignorance, didn’t bother to foster a positive and honest perception of people from both of their cultures.

    I have a friend who is of Sri Lankan and Welsh parentage and she says she is not Sri Lankan or Welsh. She has plenty of subtly negative things to say about people from her own South Asian background. She is also embarassed when her Dad tries to speak to her in Welsh in public saying it “sounds funny” and she doesn’t want to learn. Sadly she is just one of numerous examples.

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 4:31 pm ¶

20. Sydney wrote:

    The origin of human kind shows that human can intermarry what ever color they want. Culture is man made and is changing as the time goes on.

    If it was wrong, then those who did would not bring birth to normal children. If intermariage is wrong, then that could tell us why so much prejudice. There is no race better than the other. If you are a human, then you would feel as human, we are human family and no race was created seperate other race.

    Posted 13 Jun 2006 at 8:12 am ¶

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.