Michael
Jan 18th 2009, 12:08 PM
This is a long article taken from a European source on the issue of culture - or 'culturalism' as the author of the article likes to say. Most of the local political references are to Denmark and Danish politics, but the issue under discussion is common to all of the western world.
Culturalism: Culture as political ideology (http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2009-01-09-eriksenstjernfelt-en.html)
One point the author makes a very good argument that the "culture wars" are particularly fierce because they consist of the same arguments standing on both sides. Both sides draw their support from similar sources. They are only differentiated by the 'content' of their cultural choices. And that's the key point the author raises here - that culture is ultimately chosen according to political ideology.
Here's one excerpt to illustrate the author's argument:
Culturalism, in its political and leftwing forms, is by no means a recent phenomenon. Its first appearance on the world stage came in 1947 when American anthropologists attempted to derail the UN Human Right's Charter. They refused to accept that it was possible to presume universal human rights, since this would suppress individual cultures. However, the Western Left – whether in its Communist, Social Democratic or social liberal variants – was at that time so international in its views that culturalism remained below the surface. Meanwhile, in the 80s and 90s a vacuum was created by the demise of Marxism and its role as a reference point for leftwing parties in the West. The profoundly conservative cultural ideas of culturalism subsequently and surreptitiously moved into this arena. The surprising thing is that this transformation took place largely without a blow being struck – although culturalism is in many respects diametrically opposed to Marxism. Whereas Marxism maintains that culture is a superstructure on social economic regularities, in contrast culturalism will say that the economy of a society depends on its culture and the value systems of that culture, or at least that the economy is indistinguishable from all other cultural features in the society in question.
I'm very much inclined to agree with this perspective. I've always viewed 'culture' as something that one 'chooses'. I have an uncle who has essentially become 'Scotish' through the agency of marrying a Scottish woman. He has fallen in love with that culture, decorates his house with tartans, drinks only the finest single-malts, holds characteristic Scottish political opinions on almost every topic - yet he's lived in Vancouver all his life, many thousands of miles from Scotland and not a drop of Scottish blood in him. A simple example, but illustrative of how people tend to 'create' their worlds around them. Certainly my uncle hasn't rejected the 'deep culture' of westernism that he was raised under and still adheres to, but still, 'surface culture' seems to be highly malleable and probably is driven by political ideology as the article asserts.
I find this topic to be very interesting and important - particularly in respect to the issue of immigration and cultural assimilation that seems to pose such enormous political problems on both sides of the Atlantic (mostly focused on Spanish in USA and Muslims in Europe). The issue of culture is intimately wound up with that of immigration and economics - and that means politics.
Culturalism: Culture as political ideology (http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2009-01-09-eriksenstjernfelt-en.html)
One point the author makes a very good argument that the "culture wars" are particularly fierce because they consist of the same arguments standing on both sides. Both sides draw their support from similar sources. They are only differentiated by the 'content' of their cultural choices. And that's the key point the author raises here - that culture is ultimately chosen according to political ideology.
Here's one excerpt to illustrate the author's argument:
Culturalism, in its political and leftwing forms, is by no means a recent phenomenon. Its first appearance on the world stage came in 1947 when American anthropologists attempted to derail the UN Human Right's Charter. They refused to accept that it was possible to presume universal human rights, since this would suppress individual cultures. However, the Western Left – whether in its Communist, Social Democratic or social liberal variants – was at that time so international in its views that culturalism remained below the surface. Meanwhile, in the 80s and 90s a vacuum was created by the demise of Marxism and its role as a reference point for leftwing parties in the West. The profoundly conservative cultural ideas of culturalism subsequently and surreptitiously moved into this arena. The surprising thing is that this transformation took place largely without a blow being struck – although culturalism is in many respects diametrically opposed to Marxism. Whereas Marxism maintains that culture is a superstructure on social economic regularities, in contrast culturalism will say that the economy of a society depends on its culture and the value systems of that culture, or at least that the economy is indistinguishable from all other cultural features in the society in question.
I'm very much inclined to agree with this perspective. I've always viewed 'culture' as something that one 'chooses'. I have an uncle who has essentially become 'Scotish' through the agency of marrying a Scottish woman. He has fallen in love with that culture, decorates his house with tartans, drinks only the finest single-malts, holds characteristic Scottish political opinions on almost every topic - yet he's lived in Vancouver all his life, many thousands of miles from Scotland and not a drop of Scottish blood in him. A simple example, but illustrative of how people tend to 'create' their worlds around them. Certainly my uncle hasn't rejected the 'deep culture' of westernism that he was raised under and still adheres to, but still, 'surface culture' seems to be highly malleable and probably is driven by political ideology as the article asserts.
I find this topic to be very interesting and important - particularly in respect to the issue of immigration and cultural assimilation that seems to pose such enormous political problems on both sides of the Atlantic (mostly focused on Spanish in USA and Muslims in Europe). The issue of culture is intimately wound up with that of immigration and economics - and that means politics.