Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cultural Relativism Leaves Some Blind to Evil
Townhall.com ^ | October 15, 2001 | John Leo

Posted on 10/14/2001 9:25:18 PM PDT by tinymontgomery

The House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church put out a disgraceful statement on the terrorist attacks. After urging believers to "wage reconciliation" (i.e., not war), the bishops said: "The affluence of nations such as our own stands in stark contrast to other parts of the world wracked by crushing poverty which causes the death of 6,000 children in the course of a morning." The number 6,000 and the reference to a single morning, of course, are meant to evoke Sept. 11 in a spirit of moral equivalence. In plain English, the bishops seem to think that Americans are in no position to complain about the Manhattan massacre since 6,000 children around the world can die in a single day. The good bishops are apparently willing to tolerate 6,000 murders in New York because the West has failed to eliminate world poverty, and perhaps should be blamed for causing it. But the terrorist attack has nothing to do with world hunger or disease. And the bishops' statement is a moral mess. How many murders can Episcopalians now overlook because of the existence of crushing poverty? If 6,000, why not 60,000? This is a minor example of what could be a major problem over the long haul. A large number of our cultural and moral leaders are unable to say plainly that evil exists in the world and that it must be confronted. Instead they are content to babble about "cycles of violence" and how "an eye for an eye makes the world blind," as if the cop who stops the violent criminal is somehow guilty of crime, too. Part of this philosophy arises from the therapeutic culture: Accusing someone of being evil is bad thinking. There is no evil, no right and wrong, only misunderstandings that can fade if we withhold judgment and reach out emotionally to others. Everything can be mediated and talked out. More of it comes from the moral relativism at the heart of the multicultural philosophy that has dominated our schools for a generation. Multiculturalism goes way beyond tolerance and appreciation of other cultures and nations. It teaches that all cultures and all cultural expressions are equally valid. This sweeps away moral standards. Every culture (except America, of course) is correct by its own standards and unjudgeable by others. Teachers at all levels have been warning us for years about where this is headed. We are seeing large numbers of the young unable or unwilling to make the simplest distinctions between right and wrong. Even horrific acts -- mass human sacrifice by the Aztecs and genocide by the Nazis -- are declared to be unjudgeable. "Of course I dislike the Nazis," one upstate New York student told his professor. "But who is to say they are morally wrong?" The same argument, or non-argument, can apply to the terrorists of September as well. Only a minority of students think this way, but multiculturalism, with its radical cultural relativism, is becoming a serious problem. It leaves a great many students dubious about traditional American values and cynical about any sense of common purpose or solidarity. This is particularly so when the mantra of the cultural left that America is "racist-sexist-homophobic" is added to the mix. This hybrid philosophy -- no judgment of other cultures, but severe judgment of our own -- is already beginning to color many responses to the terrorist attacks. It peeks out from the behind the "root causes" argument and the need to "understand" the terrorists and to see their acts "in context." Often what is really meant by the root-cause people is that reckless and imperial America brought the attacks on itself. The philosophy also shines through many statements of concern about bias against Muslim Americans. Of course Muslims must not be singled out for attack or scorn. But a good many official statements about Sept. 11 made only brief reference to the horror of the attacks before launching long and lopsided attention to the possibility of anti-Muslim bias. Terrorism is the worst threat the nation has ever faced, and at the moment, Americans are solidly united to confront it. The multicultural-therapeutic left is small but concentrated in businesses that do most of the preaching to America: the universities, the press, the mainline churches and the entertainment industry. They will have to be pushed to move away from sloppy multiculturalism and all-purpose relativism. Let the pushing begin.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
hope this hasn't been posted yet; i searched and didn't find it. it just seems to boil everything down to the true crux of the matter.
1 posted on 10/14/2001 9:25:18 PM PDT by tinymontgomery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tinymontgomery
Yes.

Good post.

2 posted on 10/14/2001 9:27:21 PM PDT by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tinymontgomery
The House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church put out a disgraceful statement on the terrorist attacks. After urging believers to "wage reconciliation" (i.e., not war), the bishops said: "The affluence of nations such as our own stands in stark contrast to other parts of the world wracked by crushing poverty which causes the death of 6,000 children in the course of a morning." The number 6,000 and the reference to a single morning, of course, are meant to evoke Sept. 11 in a spirit of moral equivalence.

In plain English, the bishops seem to think that Americans are in no position to complain about the Manhattan massacre since 6,000 children around the world can die in a single day. The good bishops are apparently willing to tolerate 6,000 murders in New York because the West has failed to eliminate world poverty, and perhaps should be blamed for causing it. But the terrorist attack has nothing to do with world hunger or disease. And the bishops' statement is a moral mess. How many murders can Episcopalians now overlook because of the existence of crushing poverty? If 6,000, why not 60,000?

This is a minor example of what could be a major problem over the long haul. A large number of our cultural and moral leaders are unable to say plainly that evil exists in the world and that it must be confronted. Instead they are content to babble about "cycles of violence" and how "an eye for an eye makes the world blind," as if the cop who stops the violent criminal is somehow guilty of crime, too.

Part of this philosophy arises from the therapeutic culture: Accusing someone of being evil is bad thinking. There is no evil, no right and wrong, only misunderstandings that can fade if we withhold judgment and reach out emotionally to others. Everything can be mediated and talked out.

More of it comes from the moral relativism at the heart of the multicultural philosophy that has dominated our schools for a generation. Multiculturalism goes way beyond tolerance and appreciation of other cultures and nations. It teaches that all cultures and all cultural expressions are equally valid. This sweeps away moral standards. Every culture (except America, of course) is correct by its own standards and unjudgeable by others.

Teachers at all levels have been warning us for years about where this is headed. We are seeing large numbers of the young unable or unwilling to make the simplest distinctions between right and wrong. Even horrific acts -- mass human sacrifice by the Aztecs and genocide by the Nazis -- are declared to be unjudgeable. "Of course I dislike the Nazis," one upstate New York student told his professor. "But who is to say they are morally wrong?" The same argument, or non-argument, can apply to the terrorists of September as well.

Only a minority of students think this way, but multiculturalism, with its radical cultural relativism, is becoming a serious problem. It leaves a great many students dubious about traditional American values and cynical about any sense of common purpose or solidarity. This is particularly so when the mantra of the cultural left that America is "racist-sexist-homophobic" is added to the mix.

This hybrid philosophy -- no judgment of other cultures, but severe judgment of our own -- is already beginning to color many responses to the terrorist attacks. It peeks out from the behind the "root causes" argument and the need to "understand" the terrorists and to see their acts "in context." Often what is really meant by the root-cause people is that reckless and imperial America brought the attacks on itself.

The philosophy also shines through many statements of concern about bias against Muslim Americans. Of course Muslims must not be singled out for attack or scorn. But a good many official statements about Sept. 11 made only brief reference to the horror of the attacks before launching long and lopsided attention to the possibility of anti-Muslim bias.

Terrorism is the worst threat the nation has ever faced, and at the moment, Americans are solidly united to confront it. The multicultural-therapeutic left is small but concentrated in businesses that do most of the preaching to America: the universities, the press, the mainline churches and the entertainment industry. They will have to be pushed to move away from sloppy multiculturalism and all-purpose relativism. Let the pushing begin.

Contact John Leo

©2001 Universal Press Syndicate

3 posted on 10/14/2001 9:47:21 PM PDT by ArcLight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tinymontgomery
Contrast the sermon delivered by Fr. Franklyn McAffee at Barbara Olson's memorial Mass--he said it was evil, that it was Satanic--that Satan is called by Jesus both a Liar and a Murderer, that what we saw on September 11 was Nothing--absolute horror.
4 posted on 10/14/2001 9:55:08 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tinymontgomery
I've got a strong back and am ready, willing, and able to push.
5 posted on 10/15/2001 12:02:22 AM PDT by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tinymontgomery
Hey Episcopal nincompoops!

One problem - Bin Laden,
and his merry band of terrorist pilots, were not poor.
They lived pretty high on the hog!

BIN-LARDIN

:

6 posted on 10/15/2001 12:09:06 AM PDT by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tinymontgomery; ArcLight
Ah... the magic that is paragraphs.
7 posted on 10/15/2001 12:14:33 AM PDT by bootyist-monk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tinymontgomery
"After urging believers to 'wage reconciliation' (i.e., not war), the bishops said: 'The affluence of nations such as our own stands in stark contrast to other parts of the world wracked by crushing poverty which causes the death of 6,000 children in the course of a morning.'"

Considering the billions the Episcopal Church owns in real estate and other holdings, why don't they "practice what they preach" by selling their holdings to give to the poor of other countries? Then they come back and talk to me.

But, considering the continuing irrelevance of their hypocrisy and liberal views, as evidenced by declining attendance, it won't be long before their holdings and their existence are a thing of the past.

8 posted on 10/15/2001 12:20:06 AM PDT by A2J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tinymontgomery
BTTT
9 posted on 10/15/2001 11:33:52 AM PDT by Gritty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson