Cultural Ignorance

[Optimus_Prime_]

The racist hierarchy of Asian races really is amazing to me. How the Koreans think they're better than the Chinese, and the Japanese think they're better than everybody, etc.

What was even more shocking to me was how - as a white American - when asked to describe the differences in facial features of Japanese and Chinese, the first thing I thought was that the Japanese looked more Regal, while the Chinese looked more weathered, and working class.

To realize that that centuries-old Asia-based racism had subliminally carried over into America and my own mind was pretty incredible. In a bad way, of course.

The Japanese are better at tenticle-raping schoolgirls than anyone else. By far. We got Evil Dead tree rape, but the Japanese, man, they find the line and obliterate it.

Aww man. You mentioned Hitler and said that somebody killed more people than him. Somebody is going to come in this thread and focus on that and how you don't care about the Holocaust and all kinds of ****.

I think Hitler gets so much cred because he's European and we beat him, Superman and Captain America were there too, we all saw.

Whereas Mao seems cheeky and fun because we never really had any major incidents between him and us; in fact I think we had tried to negotiate trade agreements with him.

History is written by the winners, and then just cultural perspective. Stalin was our "friend", and nevermind that FDR was a raging racist prick, oh, and completely forget about all the Native Americans we've killed.

Notice how Andrew Jackson rarely comes up as a "war criminal" in the history books yet he fits the definition.

I mean the world is getting smaller. Back before the internet the huge cultural disconnect is probably what made it so easy for the segregated south (and racist as f*** North) to miss the obvious irony between disparaging one nation for killing one race, when we had killed and were still oppressing others.

But again, winners write history.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Anyone know if Chinese news stations reported about the school shooting in the US?

 

[CConn]

And here America is just hating them because they're filthy commies.

 

[cherokeesam]

I wonder how many Americans are even aware of similar events in other parts of the world, including Norway just last year, where a looney shot up a summer camp and killed 69 kids:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks

This, in a Scandinavian country with strict gun control laws. Main difference being that Utoya was labeled a terrorist attack. Hell, that's exactly what Newtown and Aurora and Columbine and Virginia Tech are, too: terrorist attacks.

 

[Tanin]

I wonder how many Americans are even aware of similar events in other parts of the world, including Norway just last year, where a looney shot up a summer camp and killed 69 kids:

I'm surprised the NRA aren't pounding stories like that into the media to prove taking guns away is bad.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Terrorist attacks are politically motivated.

Most shootings / massacres aren't. It's just someone going off the deep end.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I watch/listen to Al-Jazeera, and getting a different perspective is very illuminating.

Oh absolutely. My father and I used to watch WYSE TV and we both liked it because it covered so many stories from around the world that we normally wouldnt hear about.

But yeah, so often I hear people say "Who gives a crap?" when the subject turns to world events. The media is willing to broadcast world news in depth, the people (by and large) are uninterested.

 

[CConn]

I'm surprised the NRA aren't pounding stories like that into the media to prove taking guns away is bad.

That's probably because the NRA doesn't really have much control of the media.

 

[Anita18]

I think this happens all around the world, actually. People only know what they NEED to know. Just so happens that whatever occurs in America often has repercussions around the world (such as our election), so others know about it. Because they have to.

America is still viewed as the "top dog" in many respects, so we don't "need" to know as much about other countries as they feel they need to know about us.

 

[CConn]

None of that is really applicable to the examples I gave.

Mao and mass killings are totally different than presidential elections and "needed" information.

 

[Anita18]

None of that is really applicable to the examples I gave.

Mao and mass killings are totally different than presidential elections and "needed" information.

Well the title of your thread WAS "cultural ignorance."

That said, Americans don't "need" to know about mass murderers of other countries. It's the past, remember? And I wouldn't be surprised if even my parents didn't know the extent of Chairman Mao's atrocities. I mean, yeah, it must have been pretty bad if their parents fled China because of him. But the exact numbers and how he stacks up to Hitler and Stalin? Very doubtful.

 

[CConn]

Again, the necessity of it isn't the point. We don't need to know about Hitler anymore than Mao, YET WE DO. That's the point.

 

[Anita18]

We've always been more interested in Western history, because it more affects our own history.

Although with China taking over the global economy, people will probably be more interested in Chinese history.

 

[Mace Dolex]

I was thinking about this the other day too, when Mexican singer Jenni Rivera had died in a plane crash and all the Latin media was doing coverage on it that they pre-empted regular shows for it, of course some English news shows too but barely a mention on E! or TMZ, wanna know why? because the plane crash happened in Mexico not in the U.S.

 

[chamber-music]

And here America is just hating them because they're filthy commies.

Countries like China, Cuba, Vietnam and Burma have actually kind of embraced capitalism in recent years so they aren't even proper communists anymore.

North Korea is the like the last bastion of old school communism.

I wonder how many Americans are even aware of similar events in other parts of the world, including Norway just last year, where a looney shot up a summer camp and killed 69 kids:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks

This, in a Scandinavian country with strict gun control laws. Main difference being that Utoya was labeled a terrorist attack. Hell, that's exactly what Newtown and Aurora and Columbine and Virginia Tech are, too: terrorist attacks.

That guy also used bombs and was ideology driven. He had been planning for months.

He attacked the ruling norwegian goverment party. The summer camp was part of the youth wing of the norwegian labour party.

That is why he was labelled a terrorist. If he just attacked random strangers one day like some of these shooters at Virgina Tech, Aurora, ect he would just be another looney.

 

[Godzilla2000]

While tragedies abroad are a horrible thing, the United States has to deal with its own long neglected problems and focus on our own domestic issues. We have to make our country safe for our children. We should not be focused on other countries' problems.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

The Japanese are better at tenticle-raping schoolgirls than anyone else. By far. We got Evil Dead tree rape, but the Japanese, man, they find the line and obliterate it.

I think Hitler gets so much cred because he's European and we beat him, Superman and Captain America were there too, we all saw.

Whereas Mao seems cheeky and fun because we never really had any major incidents between him and us; in fact I think we had tried to negotiate trade agreements with him.

History is written by the winners, and then just cultural perspective. Stalin was our "friend", and nevermind that FDR was a raging racist prick, oh, and completely forget about all the Native Americans we've killed.

Notice how Andrew Jackson rarely comes up as a "war criminal" in the history books yet he fits the definition.

I mean the world is getting smaller. Back before the internet the huge cultural disconnect is probably what made it so easy for the segregated south (and racist as f*** North) to miss the obvious irony between disparaging one nation for killing one race, when we had killed and were still oppressing others.

But again, winners write history.

You hit the nail on the head. It's because we beat Nazi Germany. We were raised on the belief that the US saved Europe and the world from being conquered by Nazi Germany by entering the war on the side of the struggling allies.

At the same time Jesse Owens was quoted as saying that "Hitler didn't snub him, but FDR did".

Our history books differ by state and region, let alone by country. I honestly think its a bit much to expect people to know and learn international affairs when many people aren't even well versed in domestic affairs.

 

[Darthphere]

Again, the necessity of it isn't the point. We don't need to know about Hitler anymore than Mao, YET WE DO. That's the point.

So what are you suggesting?

 

[terry78]

You're fed whatever your news gives you. Every country is like this. Not every single inhabitant of a country is that well versed in what goes on outside their bubble, unless they do it individually.

 

[Darthphere]

Thought this was relevant to the topic.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/s...ys-tribute-to-school-shooting-victims?cc=5901

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I saw that Manchester United also wore black armbands in memorial of those who died.

You're fed whatever your news gives you. Every country is like this. Not every single inhabitant of a country is that well versed in what goes on outside their bubble, unless they do it individually.

Pretty much. We're raised so much on domestic affairs that we don't usually pay attention to world affairs. It was after 9/11 that I decided to pay more attention to world affairs and I was only 9 at the time and it grew from there.

Usually there's a reason people are into world affairs, whether they are immigrants, or ethnically from a country worldwide, or have been affected by tragedy.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

You hit the nail on the head. It's because we beat Nazi Germany. We were raised on the belief that the US saved Europe and the world from being conquered by Nazi Germany by entering the war on the side of the struggling allies.

At the same time Jesse Owens was quoted as saying that "Hitler didn't snub him, but FDR did".

Our history books differ by state and region, let alone by country. I honestly think its a bit much to expect people to know and learn international affairs when many people aren't even well versed in domestic affairs.

There's something to be said for relevancy. Normal people can hold normal high paying jobs without knowing who Mao (or Hitler) is.

There's also something to be said for practicality: science, math and foreign languages are practical areas of knowledge whereas history can be sort of jingoistic. Can you imagine writing a term paper "The Nazis were Right", no matter how thorough an argument made rest assured that's an F waiting to happen. However in other countries there are large movements that are Nazi sympathizers and there that same paper would be an A.

I begrudge people getting math problem wrong or having weird hang ups about foreign languages far more than "you don't know this story for another culture's history".

FDR only invited white Olympians to the White House following the games.

Birth of a Nation was Woodrow Wilson's favorite film.

 

[Shemtov]

The racist hierarchy of Asian races really is amazing to me. How the Koreans think they're better than the Chinese, and the Japanese think they're better than everybody, etc.

What was even more shocking to me was how - as a white American - when asked to describe the differences in facial features of Japanese and Chinese, the first thing I thought was that the Japanese looked more Regal, while the Chinese looked more weathered, and working class.

To realize that that centuries-old Asia-based racism had subliminally carried over into America and my own mind was pretty incredible. In a bad way, of course.

Though it my be more of subconscious "my race is better" racism, s the Japanese 's skin color is closer too European skin. Tht form of racism is equally bd, but not as shocking.

 

[the_ultimate_evil]

Personally and this is not a dig at anyone here it seems to me at least unless it happens in America or directly involves an American then most could not give a toss

The best example I can think of springs to mind back when the 9/11 films were coming out and a poster on here was ranting like hell about them

Myself and a bunch explained that if the families of the victims had given consent then they should go ahead

He responded to each of us, but personally told me in the usual crude troll way that I was a moron, had no idea how the world worked or had suffered any form of terrorism so had no right to say anything

My response was simply yeah because living my entire life in Northern Ireland I would have no idea what it was like to live with a constant threat of terrorism, or to not wear types of clothes in certain areas, being frisked going in and out of every shop in the city or pick up a ringing pay phone in case it was a trigger for a bomb or something

And he responded simply when the hell did this ever happen and if it was such a big deal it would have been reported.

My point is and now I'm not just getting at Americans the uk is just as bad, we think that due to all the better tech and news we're more connected and in the know when in truth we get fed so many false reports and half truth we know just as much as we always did.

 

[Hound55]

But, again, ask any American who the most evil person ever is, and Hitler is all you'll ever hear. Or maybe Stalin. Or Osama Bin Laden. Or something like that.

I'd have probably said Pol Pot.

The Red Emperor was a psychopath with no care for anything but himself and his country's bottom line, but you could at least see some kind of justification on his end where he was attempting to strengthen China and just didn't give a s*** how many people would have to die either by starvation, over-exhaustion or execution of the intelligentsia. Pol Pot meanwhile, while he had nowhere near the death toll didn't give a **** about anyone or anything other than solidifying his own power and would do similar things to what Mao and others did but without any care for whether it was actually sustainable or had any positive impact on his own country. It kept the people down and kept him in power.

Ditto Hitler, yes he was a scumbag but he was still enough of a nationalist that he did care about more than just himself.

It's a close one between Hitler an Mao, the death toll favours Mao in terms of being "more evil", but simultaneously he wasn't picky and didn't scapegoat anyone not belonging to an Aryan ideal... but simultaneously he was slaughtering anyone smart enough to potentially be able to motivate the masses. Both are cases of slaughtering innocents. But I'd still go with Pol Pot over both. A bigger piece of work who, fortunately, was never in as powerful a position as Mao or I don't think it would even be up for debate.