[Skybird]

Rykaird,

my background is the set of liberties and values that derived from the age of enlightenment, and the French revolution ideals. The idea of humanism as an attitude of mind, the equality of male and female, the ideas you can see expressed in the French, American and German constitutions, and the deriving order of a nation, the strict separation between state and religion, the message of Jesus (I could also say Buddha, for I am no Christian fundamentalism, or even Christian at all). I am aware of the importance that ancient Greek history and philosophy had on Rome and thus, on our contemporary way of thinking. The development of sciences, and arts. The liberties we enjoy, and that are no voluntary offers by someone, but can be sued for at courts on the basis of valid laws.

Never before, in no time and no part of the world, mankind enjoyed such a high level of freedoms, guarantees that the the dignity of the individual is untouchable, and blossoming philosophy. Basing on Greek philosophy for the most, we developed the principle of reason, and logic beyond anything that is to be seen anywhere else in the world. Our daily life is enriched by inventions and tools and possibilities that would not have been possible without these. If you think I am wrong tell your dentist never to give you an anaesthetic again, and don't forget that boarding an airliner is impossible because it does not really exist. Withiut our unique cultural history, there would be neither aneasthetics, nor airliners. where these are build by others today, they are basing on our development work.

Note that excesses of modern times, like the world wars, or unregulated predatory capitalism with all its misery it brings for so many people just to foster the wealth of the few, are no logical consequences fro these things I mentioned, but are happening because the values and cultural developments I outlined just were violated or perverted - this catastrophes did/do not happen because they follow our cultural heritage, but because they explicitly violate it. Capitalism claims it's right for unlimited freedom of acting by he individual, and the world Wars developed by explicit ignoring of these cultural values and developments.

Even the age of imperialism will not stop me saying that the Western culture brought human culture to a brighter blossoming than any other culture ever did (and this does not mean that I am ignorant to other cultures of the past). Despite the exploitation (resources) and mastering taking place, the presence of the colonial powers, especially the British in India and Africa, helped a lot to bring education and health care to these countries, schools, hospitals, from which they benefit until today. Most important, especially in Africa: the British prevented more violence to happen than they caused themselves. African people were better off with the British, than with themselves, when endless tribal wars and slaughtering, being committed with unbelievable cruelty an barbarism, were almost routine. When the British left, all these wars broke loose again, as was to be seen during the last century and after WWII. It is always said that colonialism has shattered Africa, but that is neither so simply, nor is it true. The continent was shattered before, and when European governing went away, the many rifts and tribal open bills became apparent again and also provoked an amount of corruption that today the hope of ever getting Africa sorted can be given up for sure.

Today, a Pax Americana - if only it would not base on the greed and profit interests of corporations, but the true ideals that were originally expressed by the American founding fathers, would be a blessing for the world.

Yes, you hear right. It will surprise people when it is Sky bird saying that, for I have my reputation of criticising the USA so unforgivingly. But I also always made it clear that I see the US of today not representative for the original idea that it once was, in the past. I always said that modern foreign politics for me are not representing the America as intended in the constitution and the Bill of Rights, but is actively, willingly ignoring these, and violating these. If the US would be like it claims to be, wants to be, and was meant to be, I would be it's convinced and willing ally. But as things are today, I must oppose it instead, at least for the most of occasions.

I also define the Western culture not only by what it is, but by what it is NOT. The heritage of our history leaves no room for excusing totalitarianism. we went beyond religious superstition and literal word-believing (at least most of us). We went beyond slavery. We do not beat our women anymore, and don't consider our children to be a possession of ours.

You are weaselling, Rykaird, not me. You must do so, for you are not able or willing to describe the cultural ground on which you stand and that would be needed as a basis in order to be able to separate between what is good and what is bad, for example concerning TV quality. Even more so, people like you I have talked to before and often concluded that for that way of arguing it even is not allowed to define any such base in values and cultural identity - that would mean to give up the illusion that all and everything must endlessly be put into relation to each other and considered to be of equal worth. It cannot be, what shall not be. What is better is being forced back into mediocrity, what is worse is being polished and blown up until it appears to be more than it is. The result is a flat terrain, wiothiut any heights, without any downs. I'm not impressed. It's what I call Flatland.

You will not find anything convincing that I say. Having no identity you defend yourself, no awareness of the cultural heritage on which your present life with all it's liberties and freedoms and possibilities is basing, and avoiding any hierarchical thinking at all cost, because "hierarchy" today is brandmarked as a bad word, you are not more than a leaf in the wind, and the one blowing the strongest will determine your fate. By that, you are of no value for the community, and do nothing to strengthen it's future chances - even when you a have a job and maybe do it well.

I never argued and will never argue that we have a right (or an obligation) to bring our culture to others, and enforce it upon them. Others need to learn their own way, and at their own speed, and if they want the tools and possibilities that we developed (our ancestors), they need to lay the needed cultural basis first, for it is not by random chance that it was the Western culture gaining these abilities. The unique European geography, and coexistence of both rivalry and geographic isolation led to the huge canon of different schools in thinking, economy, science, trade, etc. Tribes and people had to compete with the others in order to survive, but nevertheless the geographic isolation made it possible, that one was not only copying the other, but was forming one's own ways - because one did not know about a model which to copy. An incredibla diversity that in most recent times even nhas learned to peacefully coexist, was the result. More diversity than in any other place of thr world, and more peaceful coexstiance than in any other part of the world. Stammtisch-TV would not have made that possible, of this we can be sure...

We should resist all efforts and attempts from within to make us forget the roots of our present, the suffering as well as the triumph, and should also resist all people from the outside that wish to take our identity away from us, and force us to surrender to their inferior, but often more brutal ideas of "culture".

You are wrong, Rykaird. What is crap, and what not, can be defined very well, and I gave you a hint with all what I said above. If you try to make a list of paragraphs, you only will find out that your list will always, always be incomplete, and me - I am no bureaucrat, lists and counting paragraphs are not my thing. Better advise is to have standards and a background by which to judge the present issue individually, instead of just trying to find a matching category for it

And one thing is beyond doubt: in our own home, we have any right that can be imagined to say that in our home OUR standards are the rule of all, not those of others from somewhere else. We do not have the smallest obligation whatever to make us smaller in order to allow others appearing to be as great.


Hitman,

were you said that you have troubles to find the "culture" in the arts of Picasso, Miro, and others, you miss the important point. A piece of art alone does not make a culture. culture is the possibility, the freedom, that the huge treasury of many pieces of many kinds of arts can even appear. The general context in which the artist, the piece of art, and he audience is embedded - this is what culture is. not the individual painting. Of course this means that in such an environment, the audience has an obligation to make sure it is educated enough to make sense of what the artist is showing them. Damn, again this bad thing concerning qualitative hierarchies! It seems nature is filled with hierarchies. But when the general context that embraces and houses all this is unable to give the audience any standards to judge what is "good" in the meaning of fostering this culture, and what is "bad" in temrs of helping to forget or even to pervert it's identity, then this is not a sign of the amount of tolerance in "culture", but is culture that is denying itself and deconstruct itself. and last but not least, "arts" have something to do with craftsmanship of whatever a kind. A piece of arts is no random creation, it is not just throwing two dice and have this or that result that becasue of it's random, unrepeateble nature would be a piece of arts, too. It means that NOT EVERYBODY can do it in terms of compoetence, craftsmanship, knowledge, experience. Else the chaotic, noise-craving hammering of a 4-year old kid on the piano would be considered as cultural as is a Debussy-interpretation by Thiollier. This is what separates objects of arts that I like or at least tolerate, from objects that I consider to be crap (especially in "modern arts".). Throwing some paint bin at the wall - is no arts. It may result in a visual pattern that somebody likes, maybe even me, but it is no art. Everybody can put a huge piece of Butter onto a chair (the infamous "Fettstuhl"). Hammering a statue out of a stone that makes the audience standing in silence and admire the beauty in it - that is something that not everybody can do. Or in TV: everybody can make an ape out of himself in Big Brother, but not everybody is able to pick a role and play it in a way that the audience is convinced that it is no actor playing, but that the figure itself has come to life.

"the audience has an obligation to make sure it is educated enough to make sense of what the artist is showing them". If it does not do tht, cannot do that, does not want to do that, it should stay away and remain silent. So: feed the audience with crap, and it's education level will detoriate. By that, culture is destroyed. Tolerating crap is not tolerance, but is harmful and dmagaing and in the end: suicidal. This is where tolerance should end. - Classical music has become ridiculously cheap and affordable for every peter and Paul. Every supermarket offers partially high quality recordings, for just some cents. It led to this: masterpieces of classical music are being omnipresent now and are being used without any differentiations. You sell a new soap, and there is Prokofiev. You open a drupstaore, and you play Mozart. the audience does not separate between good and bad music, and even less so to differ between a good and a bad performance. every uneducated hillbilly now can be "en culture" by spending some pocket money that is left after having had his last beer. The overall quality of the classical market has suffered incredibly by this. even worse, hip hop rappers and wannabee-girlies whith screeching voices but no ability to hold a clear tone when singing pick up a classical peice and rape it to their liking. the result is crap, and the loss of quality means a detoriation of culture as well. People cannot appreciate what it is that they have. They can't estimate it's truevalue. It just like that bus driving by, that bike leaning at the wall, that dog doing it's business.

No more differing between good and bad, quality and crap, and even more: no more ability to understand why one maybe should wish that. Great.

German readers: anybody remembering Harpe Kerkelings unforgettable Verarschung of the audience when he and a pianist performed just nonsens on stage, and then managed to successfully lure the confused audience into a deep and profound discussion about how much culture there was in that performance of theirs...? One of the best and most clever comedy stunts I have seen in all my life. :rotfl: "Hurz...!"


These remarks necessarily are not complete, and cannot be without writing a whole book.