Daniel Barrett wrote:
> when i said "people" I was referring to middle to upper class America, and
> to a good extent, lower class as well. these were not universal statements,
> but rather arguments referring to a very small percentage about the world's
> population. they do not in any way refer to other portions of the world or
> segments of America's population.
>
> Besides the impossibility of making every statement universally
applicable.....
Well, I'd assume that the "ethnocentric" remark came about because
when you wrote what you wrote, you didn't let us know that you were
referring to any particular group of folk - we had no way of knowing
who you were referring to. And no one expects every statement to be
universally applicable. They don't need to be if you identify who
you're referring to.
Shalom
David Lind
Trickster@postmark.net
Daniel Barrett wrote:
>
> >i forgot whose post it was, but someone mentioned that humans dont wake up
> >excited about the prospects of being fed or clothed. that is a terribly
> >ethnocentric statement to make---more than 20% of the world's population
> >live
> >below the poverty line; that is, they don't have what is needed to satisfy
> >basic human needs for survival.
>
> <snip>
>
> > because of capitalistic
> >successes in this country, seemingly everyone reading this is able to move
> >past fulfilling basic needs and work towards self actualization. just
> >because that is the case for us, in no way entails it is the case for
> >others,
> >as one particular post suggested. perhaps tones of appreciation and
> >gratifacation would be more appropriate, for surely those sorts of
feelings
> >have better quality than those reflecting spoiled disenchantment.
>
>
>
> Ethnocentric?
>
> since it was my post you are referring to, I'll just offer up this defense,
> since being called ethnocentric is a first for me..
>
> in the posts I was referring to, there were mentions of : capitalism,
> mcdonald's, and consumer society. were these remarks ethnocentric, or
merely
> confined to a certain area of discussion?
>
> when i said "people" I was referring to middle to upper class America, and
> to a good extent, lower class as well. these were not universal statements,
> but rather arguments referring to a very small percentage about the world's
> population. they do not in any way refer to other portions of the world or
> segments of America's population.
>
> Besides the impossibility of making every statement universally applicable,
> I would also take issue with the "spoiled disenchantment" remark. was not
> this entire conversation about the effects of money? should I have to
> preface every line with "Although I'm very gald for my tv and house..."? It
> would sound pretty ridiculous after a while.
>
> I think everyone can agree that being in a country where we have the
ability
> to think about MOQ and not where food is coming from is a good thing, and
> since everyone receiving this is doing so on a computer, that statement
> should apply to everyone. i thin certain things should be able to go
without
> saying, and not be read into as ethnocentrism and a spoiled outlook.
>
> \
>
> --
> Daniel Barrett - dannydangerously@hotmail.com
> http://www.idrive.com/masao/web/welcome.html
>
> searching for the answers in life is like
> sticking out yor foot and tripping yourself.
> --
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
> MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:16 BST