Dachshund:
In responding to your post, I'd like to say first and foremost that where you use the term "white supremacy", I would personally use the term "white superiority"
Understood. For clarity:
From your subsequent words in the post from which the above quote is taken, I assume you mean the objective moral superiority of a particular set of ethical principles that might collectively be referred to as a Christian-based culture with its modern origins in Europe (from ancient Rome and Greece, through the Renaissance and the Enlightenment to the birth of modern "Western" democracies, and so on), which spread to the Americas, Australia and some other places via European colonialism and exploration.
And when we say "white" I assume we're not literally referring to skin pigmentation, in the same sense that when people refer to "western" culture they're not literally referring to a point on the compass. We're referring to the above mentioned European-origin culture. And because of the northern latitude of Europe, most people living there have pale skin. So "white" is a convenient shorthand, just as "western" is.
Do you agree with the above summary of what you're referring to with the expression "white superiority"?
Secondly, I would like to suggest that we not get distracted by worrying about how precisely and/or accurately the results of this particular poll do or do not represent the actual views of the American public overall. The questions posed in the poll, are I think, sufficiently interesting in their own right and warrant further discussion.
I agree. The question we're discussing is the general one of the extent to which "white superiority" is deemed to be under attack and the even more general questions of moral absolutism versus relativism.
You said that you'd like to hear the opinion of anyone who agrees with the three poll statements: (1) America must (now) protect and defend its white/European cultural heritage; (2) that Americans of white/ European (racial) descent are under attack in their own society and (3) that marriage/( and more to the point procreation) between Americans of White/European descent and American citizens who are members of other racial/ethnic groupings should be prohibited. I am one such person.
Excellent.
You also requested that persons (like myself) who agree with these statements should explain why they agree with them. Therefore, let me begin by explaining why I agree with statements (1) and (2).
Say on.
The current historical period in Western civilization that late capitalist, advanced , industrial Western societies like the United States find themselves in) began after the end of the second world war and is referred to by many as the era of postmodernity.
I'm wary of pretending that history divides itself neatly into eras, on the boundary of which people suddenly start thinking in completely different ways. It's a simplification. But simplifications are often necessary for the sake of brevity. So I'll let it go.
The fundamental doctrine underpinning the various social and cultural movements that collectively constitute the postmodernist world view is relativism - the notion that there is no such thing as objective truth and hence the search for objective truth (metaphysics) is dead.
If this really is the definition of "relativism" then I am certainly no relativist myself. I find the idea that there is such a thing as objective truth
extremely useful. I couldn't possibly live without it. I've argued that point several times with posters on this website. RJG is particular example of a poster who springs to mind.
However, if "relativism" means "the idea that morals are created within human minds and do not exist objectively as a property of the universe" then, in that sense, I am a relativist. I find it useful to believe that such things as matter, energy and gravity exist independently of any human's subjective perception of them. I find it useful to believe that these things existed before humans existed and will continue to exist after we are gone. I don't find it useful to believe that of concepts like right and wrong or love and hate.
For postmodern philosophers like Foucault, Lyotard, Derrida, Lacan and the like, the claim that that objective truth does not exist gave rise in the West to the influential notion of cultural relativism. Cultural relativism, in short, is the mistaken and corruptive idea - held devotees of the religion of politically correctness like Steve
- that
there are no objective standards by which our current Western societies and the dominant White/European cultural values that shape them can be judged because all cultures, for example, Islamic/Muslim cultures, black sub-Saharan African cultures, indigenous Aboriginal culture in Australia, Maori culture in New Zealand, North Korean or Cuban or Chinese culture,
are each and all entitled to their own beliefs and accepted practices.
You're conflating different ideas here (shown in bold). I agree with the first bolded part (with which you disagree). The standards by which we judge the merits of various cultural practices are, by definition, our own standards. For example, I disagree with the tradition Abrahamic religions' views on homosexuality not because there is an objectively existing law, like the law of gravity, which states that homosexuality is acceptable. I disagree because of my personal opinions. You either agree or disagree for the same reasons.
But the second bolded part does not follow from the first. It is my view that various peoples are
not entitled to act as they want simply because it is their traditional practice to do so. But the point is that this is
my opinion. I do not claim it as a universal law.
...devotees of the religion of politically correctness like Steve
...
I appreciate the use of the smiley face there, in recognition of the fact that you are, so to speak, putting me in a box, sticking a label on that box and then critcising the label.
As far as I can gather, your conclusion that I follow a religion of political correctness is based on my previous disagreement with your idea that citizens of the UK/USA/Australia who self-identify as Muslim should be stripped of their citizenship and collectively labelled as murderers or the enablers of murderers, in a way that is reminiscent to me of the treatment of Jews in 1930s Germany. I presume it's your view that disagreeing with this proposition is an example of "political correctness gone mad". Yes? If not, can you quote some of my other words on which it is based?
Postmodernism teaches that there is no objective moral truth, and therefore no one moral code that is better or worse than another - and therefore that we cannot contend one culture is objectively superior to another.
I disagree that the conclusion follows from the premise here. The fact that moral truth does not exist as an objective property of the universe, independent of human minds, does not mean that we have to accept all moral codes as equally valid. My own moral code is more valid than that of loads of other people. That's why I've adopted it. If I didn't believe that then it wouldn't be my moral code.
The standard objection to this is that it means I have nothing to back up my moral code when it comes to a moral disagreement. My answer is that neither does anybody else. Look around at the world. Simply asserting that one's own moral code is the objectively correct one, perhaps underwritten by an infallible God, doesn't seem to work does it? Daesch, in Syria and Iraq, have asserted that very thing. It hasn't convinced us, has it?
The only way to convince people with differing moral codes to change their views is to seek underlying common goals. Very very frequently, arguments which appear to be about values turn out to be arguments about facts. Arguments about facts can, at least theoretically, be settled with appeals to empirical evidence.
Moreover, according to the doctrine of cultural relativism there is no need or case for social progress because there are no objective goals to which we ought or can strive and advance/progress.
Again, simply asserting that certain goals somehow exist objectively, outside of human minds, doesn't work.
The era of postmodernity in the West has spawned a number intellectual descendents of cultural relativism in such mistaken and inherently decadent and degenerate social and cultural movements as: multiculturalism (the patently false view that all cultures are of equal value)
That's not my understanding of "multiculturalism". To me, it is the view that there is at least some extent to which people of differing cultural backgrounds can find enough common cause to live in close proximity to each other.
political correctness ( the rigid and text can be interpreted according to any hermeneutical machications the reader so desires ti impose imposition of strict language codes consistent with multicultural principles)
Banning people from talking in particular ways is never something that I have agreed with. Perhaps that means I don't believe in political correctness? Who'd have thought it?!?
deconstructionism ( the claim that words are inadequate for describing reality),
That's an odd one. I'm using words here to try to describe all kinds of things, so clearly I disagree with it.
the notion that reality (and concepts like "race") are purely man - "manufactured" social constructs,
OK, are we talking about "reality" or "race" here? If the latter: In your view, what does "race" mean? To me it's similar to many other classification systems. No different from the system we use to decide whether we think Pluto is a planet or tomatoes are a fruit. Clearly and obviously it's created by humans in order to manage the complexity of the world by compartmentalising.
"social engineering" ( the belief that a "holier than thou" intellectual and moral elite exist whose advanced and special wisdom, virtue, knowledge,compassion and superior judgement qualify them to direct the actions of the many through rational articulation or ,if necessary, by force, to rectify the injustices wrought upon the marginalised, oppressed and exploited "victims" of White cultural imperialism and so forth.
I don't believe in that one. I'm not a big fan of "holier than thou" absolute moral authorities. But given that you are a moral absolutists, presumably you are such a fan, yes?
So, Steve, if I might "cut to the chase" I am going to tell you - at the risk of being very politically [in?]correct and offending your instinctive cultural relativism and multicultural sensibilities/ sympathies, etc...
Thank you for informing me what my instincts are.
...that it is all a pack of LIES and the conspicuous , incontrovertible fact is that there DOES exist an objectively superior culture in the world today and that culture is White/European Western culture.
I note your opinion.
Moreover, I do believe that this superior culture IS presently under threat from the predations of inferior, violent, retrograde cultures like that which grounds Islamic civilization and , for instance, the corrosive influence of growing black African racial agitation, sedition and miscegenation ( to give just two examples) in Western societies like the United States, where the opinion poll that was the subject of your OP was recently conducted.
I note the use of the term "I do believe". So, again, I note your opinion.
Before you ask me how it is I can prove that White/European Western culture and civilization is objectively superior, I'll tell you.
I wasn't goint to ask you that. Proof is confined to the realm of mathematics. But go on.
This fact of the objective superiority of White/European culture/civilization can be clearly and unequivocally demonstrated when different world cultures are evaluated based on the only befitting standard for judging[/i] the merit of any human culture and the civilization that is based upon it , namely, the extent to which it is either life - affirming or antiife.
What do you mean by "life affirming"? Do you mean having a tendency to prolong life? Just human life, or other life? If just human life, all human life or just some?
The prime example life - affirming/prolife culture continues to be White/European, Western culture in societies like the United States,the UK and Australia and the like, as these societies represent man at his very best. It is a self-evident fact is that today's White/European Western culture and the nations founded upon it embody the very same core values that make life as a man possible, namely: freedom; reason/rationality; individualism and man's natural rights; self-reliance, and self-responsibility based on free will and achievement;
Opinion noted. I'm quite a big fan of many aspects of western culture too.
the need for limited, "small" republican representative government,
I'd say that the debate about big/small government and the extent to which taxation should be used to fund public services is a separate thread to this argument. I mentioned above that arguments which are ostensibly about values often turn out to be about facts. I think the argument about big/small government and high/low taxation is often an example of that. I've discussed this elsewhere with other posters.
and the rule of law; capitalism; economic freedom; political justice; language, literature and art that depict man as efficacious in the world, the flourishing of science and technology; the rules of logic, and the idea of causality in a universe governed by natural laws intelligible to man, etc. These - the core values of White/European, Western culture and it civilizations are values for all men cutting across ethnicity, geography and gender.
A hugely diverse number of subjects listed there. I don't really see the function of listing a thing like "the rules of logic" with "capitalism". It would take longer than I currently have available to unpack what you might be trying to say here.
In sum, White/European, Western culture exhibits levels of freedom , opportunity, health, wealth, productivity, innovation, satisfaction, comfort and life expectancy unprecedented in human history.
The industrial revolution, the concept of free market capitalism and advances in healthcare certainly have, as you say, created levels of material comfort and life expectancy that are unprecedented in human history. Again, the pros and cons of all this is a whole other thread.
I believe that cultural relativism is a clear and direct threat to all of this in the current era of postmodernism and its decadent derivative social and cultural movements ( like multiculturalism and political correctness) and it is high time for the white man in the West today to wake up and actively defend his culture - that is, the world's superior, most noble and inherently life-affirming culture before it is too late.
Your opinion is noted and thank you for giving it.
Now I've dealt with the points in your post, after a break, I might offer some views of my own about the way in which values that we hold as precious ought to be defended. But first, I need to do some work.
about this matter. Are you aware of these tendencies?