cultural directions…..

A deeply flawed culture is spreading throughout the world epitomised by today’s global, technocratic and managerial elite with growing inequality and concentration of wealth and power.

Cultures define what we know about the world, and so what we do in the world. We need to pay them more attention.

By Richard Eckersley

When I was young, back in the 1970s, I spent two years travelling across the world: by truck with a group through Africa from south to north; in a campervan with a friend through northern and eastern Europe and Russia; on foot along most of the south coast of Crete; and by boat, bus, truck and train across Asia to India and Nepal.

The most difficult cultural adjustment I had to make was not to the cultures of other countries, but to my own on my return home to Australia. Many long-term Western travellers have the same experience, shocked in particular by the West’s extravagant consumerism. My initial response on flying into Sydney from Bangkok was one of wonder at the orderliness and cleanliness, the abundantly stocked shops, the clear-eyed children, seemingly so healthy and carefree. However, this initial celebration of the material comforts and individual freedoms soon gave way to a growing apprehension about the Western way of life.

In a way I hadn’t anticipated, the experience allowed me to view my native culture from the outside; and in ways I hadn’t appreciated before, I became aware ours was a flawed and harsh culture. I realised that the Western worldview was not necessarily the truest or best, as I had been brought up and educated to believe, but just one of many, defined and supported by deeply ingrained beliefs and myths like any other.

We in the West tend to see material poverty as synonymous with misery and squalor; yet only with the most abject poverty is this so. Mostly the poorer societies I travelled through had a social cohesion and spiritual richness that I felt the West lacked. We see others as crippled by ignorance and cowed by superstition; we don’t see the extent to which we are, in our own ways, oppressed by our rationalism and lack of ‘superstition’ (in a spiritual sense).

Over the following decades, as a researcher and writer, I developed these early insights into an analysis of cultural influences on health and wellbeing; how we define and measure human progress and development; and what the future holds for our civilisation and species. This is the topic of an essay published recently in the American magazine, Salon. It argues cultures exert a powerful, but largely invisible, influence on our lives: on what we understand the world to be, and so on how we behave in it.

This extract from the essay focuses on the importance of paying attention to other cultures and their stories if we are to meet the challenges of the future. These challenges are ‘existential’ in that they both materially and physically threaten human existence, and also undermine people’s sense of confidence and certainty about life.

Listening to other cultural stories

Anthropologist Wade Davis’s writing is an eloquent exposition of this viewpoint. In his books, Light at the Edge of the World: Journey through the realm of vanishing cultures (2001/2007), and The Wayfinders: Why ancient wisdom matters in the modern world (2009), he urges us to heed the voices of other cultures because these remind us that there are alternatives, ‘other ways of orienting human beings in social, spiritual, and ecological space’.

They allow us ‘to draw inspiration and comfort from the fact that the path we have taken is not the only one available, that our destiny is therefore not indelibly written in a set of choices that demonstrably and scientifically have proven not to be wise’. By their very existence, he says, the diverse cultures of the world show we can change, as we know we must, the fundamental manner in which we inhabit this planet.

Davis learned as a student to appreciate and embrace the key revelation of anthropology: the idea that distinct cultures represent unique visions of life itself, morally inspired and inherently right. Cultural beliefs really do generate different realities, separate and utterly distinct from each other, even as they face the same fundamental challenges. Davis cautions that modernity (whether identified as Westernisation, globalisation, capitalism, or democracy) is an expression of cultural values: ‘It is not some objective force removed from the constraints of culture. And it is certainly not the true and only pulse of history’.

The writer Barry Lopez, in Horizons (2019) also brings an anthropological perspective to humankind’s precarity, ‘a time when many see little more on the horizon but the suggestion of a dark future’. ‘As time grows short, the necessity to listen attentively to foundational stories other than our own becomes more imperative…. Many cultures are still distinguished today by wisdoms not associated with modern technologies but grounded, instead, in an acute awareness of human foibles, of the traps people tend to set for themselves as they enter the ancient labyrinth of hubris or blindly pursue the appeasement of their appetites’.

The future of cultures

Davis’s and Lopez’s warnings take me back to an early 1990s UNESCO project on the futures of cultures, which had as its hypothesis that ‘cultures and their futures, rather than technological and economic developments, are at the core of humankind’s highly uncertain future’. A project report notes: ‘Some of the participants expressed the view that culture may well prove to be the last resort for the salvation of humankind.’

The project considered some critical questions about culture. Will economic and technological progress destroy the cultural diversity that is our precious heritage? Will the ‘meaning systems’ of different societies, which have provided their members with a sense of identity, meaning and place in the totality of the universe, be reduced to insignificance by the steamroller effects of mass culture, characterised by electronic media, consumer gadgets, occupational and geographic mobility and globally disseminated role models?

Or, on the other hand, will the explosive release of ethnic emotions accompanying political liberation destroy all possibility of both genuine development founded on universal solidarity and community-building across differences? Will we witness a return of local chauvinisms, breeding new wars over boundaries and intercultural discriminations?

Background papers for the UNESCO project proposed two scenarios – one pessimistic, one optimistic. The pessimistic scenario is that cultures and authentic cultural values will be, throughout the world, bastardised or reduced to marginal or ornamental roles in most national societies and regional or local communities because of powerful forces of cultural standardisation. These forces are technology, especially media technology; the nature of the modern state, which is bureaucratic, centralising, legalistic and controlling; and the spread of ‘managerial organisation’ as the one best way of making decisions and coordinating actions.

The optimistic scenario is that humanity advances in global solidarity and with ecological and economic collaboration as responsible stewards of the cosmos. Numerous, vital and authentic cultures flourish, each proud of its identity while actively rejoicing in differences exhibited by other cultures. Human beings everywhere nurture a sense of possessing several partial and overlapping identities while recognising their primary allegiance to the human species. Cultural communities plunge creatively into their roots and find new ways of being modern and of contributing precious values to the universal human culture now in gestation.

Participants in the UNESCO project appeared to see the pessimistic scenario as the more likely, as things stood (and perhaps even more likely today?); the optimistic scenario was more an ideal to guide policy.

Thus with culture, as with so many other areas of modern life, humanity’s destiny hangs in the balance: a dominant culture that is deeply flawed is nevertheless spreading throughout the world. Epitomised by today’s global, technocratic, managerial elite, this culture has become hugely powerful, the ‘default setting’ for running national and world affairs. Yet its failures grow correspondingly more profound, with growing inequality and concentration of wealth and power, growing mistrust of government and other institutions, growing global problems such as climate change. At the same time, ethnic and other ‘tribal’ feelings have become more fervent and exclusive, often fanatical, including in the West. The 20-year war in Afghanistan is a powerful symbol of this cultural contest.

On the other hand, somewhere beyond this ugly mix, largely hidden by the outdated and dysfunctional cultures of mainstream politics and the news media, through these same dual processes, there is also the potential, the possibility, for the optimistic scenario: a world where rich cultural diversity underpins a new and vital cultural universality.

At least we should hope so. Humanity’s fate hangs on the outcome.

https://johnmenadue.com/invisible-force-why-culture-will-determine-humanitys-future/

white woke……..

BY PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Western universities are fixed on a course that denies white students knowledge of the literature, art, and achievements of Western culture, focusing only on its alleged racism and collection of evils ascribed to “whiteness,” while teaching the students the culture and literature of other people.

As this headline in the British Telegraph puts it, “Universities drop Chaucer and Shakespeare as ‘decolonization’ takes root. Many British universities have sought to liberate their courses from ‘white, Western and Eurocentric’ knowledge”

To “decolonize the curriculum” means to deracinate it, to remove white ethnicities from their cultures. In other words, to dissolve Western civilization. This is now the main function of a university education. White students are to be isolated from their heritage by withholding knowledge of it, thus leaving white peoples without any sense of themselves. Kept ignorant of their heritage by the evicting of “whiteness,” they will only be taught the cultures of others. In other words, this is a chosen policy of cultural genocide via deracination.

What then is the purpose of national security, defense departments, intelligence services? With universities busy at work destroying a people’s concept of themselves, what do deracinated people rise in defense of?

The enemies of the Western world are its own universities, not foreign powers.

From the Telegram’s report:

By Craig Simpson
27 August 2022

William Shakespeare’s sonnets are now less likely to be included in British university curricula

Arriving on campus this autumn, students may find their modules peculiarly devoid of Geoffrey Chaucer, Jane Austen, or Shakespeare’s sonnets.

This is for their own good, according to the many British universities, which have sought to “decolonise the curriculum” and liberate courses from the inequities of “white, Western and Eurocentric” knowledge.

The syllogism seemingly accepted across many university departments runs like this: Western knowledge is a product of colonialism; colonialism is an evil to be opposed; therefore Western knowledge must be opposed.

In this view, it is incumbent upon academics to change curricula – megalithic “knowledge” is to be replaced by pluralistic “knowledges”, and the “Euro-centric” canon is to be replaced by one that is more diverse.

Dealing with a ‘colonial legacy’
The view can be summarised in a Royal Veterinary College’s document, seen by The Telegraph, which states: “Knowledge as used in education, is underpinned by the Western or global-north narrative, which has consistently been viewed as being intellectually and culturally superior and has been perpetuated to the exclusion of other global sources of knowledge and cultures.
“Western colonialism enabled this, and the colonial legacy has endured in education.”

Staff across numerous institutions have argued that it is for the benefit of students, with a goal of tackling the discrepancy in average marks between white students and those from ethnic minority backgrounds.

This “attainment gap” is central to the concerns of the institutions, which are eagerly decolonising their courses, and it appears academics pursuing this work believe that moving courses away from the white and Western will close the gulf.

Decolonisation is deemed necessary to boost grades and, as a missive at one institution informed staff, academics must ditch material traditionally revered by the “WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic)”.

Prof Frank Furedi, an education expert at the University of Kent, said: “They assume that an inclusive pedagogy helps students gain confidence by teaching material that is relevant to their lives.”

He has argued that a striving for relevance means the safely familiar is taught to students, rather than the challenging, with professors often offering learners material comfortingly created by people of the “same identity group”.

The effects of this pedagogical philosophy have been seen in numerous universities, including Stirling, which The Telegraph revealed had removed Jane Austen from one English module, replacing her with African-American author Toni Morrison for the stated reason of “decolonising” the curriculum.

The University of Leicester, in a similarly stated effort to “decolonise” its modules, removed Chaucer from its mediaeval literature course, and Salford chose to no longer assess students on the “white Western” sonnet form.

‘Colonialist’ musical notation
The issue is not just literary. At Oxford, one professor took issue with the teaching of “colonialist” musical notation and, at Cambridge, a module seeking to “decolonise the ear” aims to deconstruct classical music and its links to “neoliberal systems of power”. At the Royal Birmingham Conservatoire, the “Black Mozart” Chevalier de Saint-Georges is used to teach sonatas, replacing Beethoven.

Away from the arts and humanities, Durham University has sought to address “almost entirely (or even completely) white” mathematics, and the Royal Veterinary College is pursuing its own programme of decolonisation.

The common culpability of these subjects, even those scientific disciplines rooted in (presumably universal) objectivity, is that they form part of a privileged “Western knowledge”.
According to internal documents, teaching staff at Solent are focused on: “Decentring white, Western and Eurocentric subject knowledge and drawing instead on global, diverse and marginalised perspectives”.

Salford warns in one decolonisation guide against prioritising of “Western sources of knowledge”, when students may have “alternative knowledge systems”.

Winchester has shared a guide on decolonising, which urges academics to “de-centre Western-dominated system of knowledge generation”. Similarly at Aston, there are ongoing efforts to address “Eurocentric philosophies and narratives and their impacts on pedagogy”.

Problems of curricula ‘whiteness’
Abertay’s psychology department notes in an update on “decolonisation” that the discipline lacks representation, as “most psychological science [was] conducted by white males in the early years”. The problem of curricula “whiteness” has also been raised at Liverpool John Moores, where an English department identified the necessity that “the unspoken power of whiteness should be examined and challenged in the core curriculum”.

At Oxbridge too, the pattern persists. Cambridge students have been told that the canon of classical music can be seen as an “imperial phenomenon” and, at Oxford, concerns have been raised about a classical “white hegemony”.

Many institutions stress that teaching must always incorporate the ideas of decolonisation: St Andrew’s history courses have been ensuring staff follow “inclusive and anti-colonial practices”, and staff at Edinburgh Napier “challenge both colonial views and Western hegemonies within higher education”.

Internal diversity chiefs promote this kind of view in many cases, and institutions themselves have professionalised the proselytising for diversity. SOAS University of London, for example, has developed its own frequently shared “toolkit” for decolonising, which warns against courses replete with “Westernness” or “whiteness”.

Kingston has developed a similar toolkit, while some universities have allowed students to simply tell teaching staff what they should be learning during the course of their degree.

Far from self-evident to general public
The inherent virtue of this approach is unquestioned across numerous departments, internal documents suggest, although to the public at large, the virtues of reappraising Western knowledge are far from self-evident.

But internal policy claims that it is to tackle the discrepancy in average marks between white students and those from ethnic minority backgrounds. In 2019, there was an attainment gap of 13 per cent between white students who achieved a 2:1 or first-class degree and black, Asian and ethnic minority students who did so, according to SOAS University of London.
Aston, in Birmingham, has stated in internal notes that its decolonising work “directly informs initiatives that address our attainment gaps”.

Salford, which dropped sonnets from a creative writing course in the cause of decolonisation, has stressed in internal messaging that: “Inclusive curricula reflect and cater for a diverse society and the learning needs of students from a wide range of backgrounds.”

Leicester has cited its decolonisation work as “response to the Race Award Gap”, while the University of Aberdeen’s “decolonisation steering group” cites addressing the attainment gap as a key issue.

Kingston’s toolkit for decolonising aims primarily to “improve the experience, skills and attainment of all students”, and Surrey, which has steered its courses away from “WEIRD” knowledge, has done so in the context of ensuring the “elimination of the awarding gap for black students”.

At Canterbury, the drive for a “diverse and inclusive” curriculum is aimed at closing the attainment gap; Oxford Brookes has been decolonising to achieve the same result. This objective is repeated across academia.

The SOAS decolonising toolkit, taken up by many UK institutions, makes clear that everything occidental, colonial, and white is being addressed in the context of closing the gulf in grades.

https://www.unz.com/proberts/the-acknowledged-and-proclaimed-purpose-of-western-universities-is-to-destroy-the-west/

READ FROM TOP.

THERE IS NO NEED TO WHITE-ANT THE "WHITE CIVILISATION" WITH WHITE GUILT... BEING AWARE OF (AND RESPECTING/CARING FOR) OTHER CULTURES DOES NOT MEAN THE DESTRUCTION OF HISTORICAL WHITEY CULTURE BUT RECOGNITION OF THE FLAWS, THE INFLUENCES AND GREATNESS OF ITS VARIOUS STYLISTIC EVOLUTION. THIS ANGLO/SAXON EDUCATION SYSTEM SHIFT WON'T MODIFY MUCH THE MERCANTILE AND WARRING ACTIVITIES OF THE TOP ECHELONS OF SOCIETY WHO WILL SEND THE BOTTOM PEOPLE, WOKEY EDUCATED OR NOT, TO BE FODDER ON THE BATTLEFIELD — using many tricks in the book, INCLUDING FEAR. At the centre of this, stands "religion"..... AND GREED.

THIS IS A SIMILAR PROBLEM FACED BY DIDEROT — WITH VARIOUS COLOURS ADDED...

(Note: You’ve probably heard the aphorism about freedom coming only when the last priest’s entrails are used to strangle the last king. If you’re particularly familiar with it, you might think that it was written by a French Enlightenment-era philosopher named Denis Diderot. You’d be wrong, but it’s far from the only time that history has failed to properly record the contributions of its real author, which in this instance was a 17th century Catholic priest named Jean Meslier who is perhaps the most overlooked and misunderstood intellectual figure in modern history.)

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.....

By Gus Leonisky at 3 Sep 2022 - 8:27am
Login or register to post comments

Primary links

Search

Recent comments

Democracy Links

Member's Off-site Blogs

cultural directions…..

white woke……..

User login