Proud of our nat'l/ethnic heritages; should we equally be ashamed of the BAD stuff??

[Cyningablod]

The ongoing Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver got me thinking about this.

I am of the belief that everyone--everyone--should know, understand, and celebrate his/her own ethnic or national background(s). I come from a strong Anglo-Saxon background on my father's side, and have strong French roots, on my mother's. I appreciate (read: am proud of) and celebrate them both. (My screen name, Cyningablod [KOO-ning-ah-blohd], means "blood of kings" in Old English/Anglo-Saxon, btw.)

I suppose the "ought" contained in that first opening sentence is debatable in and of itself, but my actual question is this:

Without letting ourselves get bogged down in the peripherally-related but topically-irrelevant issue of racism,

If we are going to celebrate and take pride in our ethnic/national heritages, does that mean we must also "carry the guilt" for our ancestors' wicked deeds? Is there a kind of logical "carry-over" of sorts, from our respective "bragging points" into the things that we really would prefer not to acknowledge?

Does my pride in the accomplishments and culture of the English people, for example, logically entail that I should also be ashamed of their traditions of imperialism and slaveholding? Is it inconsistent to uphold and praise certain aspects of one's people/culture, while downplaying or ignoring the negative aspects?

I could provide other illustrations, but you get the idea.

I suppose in the interest of beginning an actual debate, per se, I should take a position. So I'll argue for the affirmative; I do in fact think that we need to acknowledge and possibly in some way "atone for" our ancestors' evil behaviours, for two reasons:

First, acknowledging, accepting, and understanding history--allhistory--helps to ensure that the bad parts won't be repeated; and second, it's just more intellectually consistent to take the bad with the good.

Have at me!

[Oakminster]

Who are you going to atone to? The victims are all dead.

Why are you going to atone? You did not set up any empires or hold any slaves.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Oakminster

Who are you going to atone to? The victims are all dead.

Why are you going to atone? You did not set up any empires or hold any slaves.

My take exactly. If I see an imbalance that I can correct, I'll do so, but not out of any guilt. Likewise, any accomplishments by my ancestors are theirs and theirs alone-interesting to read about, but nothing to take personal pride over.

[Cyningablod]

Allow me a brief parenthetical aside to explain how I view my nat'l/ethnic ancestry, lest I be accused of racism or of some sort of crass, supremacist nationalism:

I view my ancestral national and ethnic groups in much the same way as I view my immediate family. That is, I love them, and I'm proud of them, but I don't for one second think that we're better than anyone else, at anything.

There is NOTHING AT ALL inherently "better", "smarter", "stronger", or whatever, about the English or the French (or the Caucasian Europeans in general) than anyone else, anywhere in the world. Those who carry their cultural pride too far, into the area of supremacism, are only discrediting themselves and their peoples.

I am staunchly anti-racist, and a committed multi-culturalist. (I kinda have to be; I'm a linguist by training, albeit not by vocation.)

Jus' sayin'. Thanks.

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

My take exactly. If I see an imbalance that I can correct, I'll do so, but not out of any guilt. Likewise, any accomplishments by my ancestors are theirs and theirs alone-interesting to read about, but nothing to take personal pride over.

Holy Signs of the Zombiepocalypse, Batman!

The Saints have won the Super Bowl, and Czarcasm agrees with Oak in a GD thread?

Surely the final hours are upon us....

[Cyningablod]

Originally Posted by Oakminster

Who are you going to atone to? The victims are all dead.

Why are you going to atone? You did not set up any empires or hold any slaves.

That's a valid point. And a sensible one.

But doesn't that by logical extension mean that we can't really be proud of the good deeds of our ancestors, either?

That's kinda my whole question here: Why are we justified in being proud of our Constitution and our Emancipation Proclamation, for example, if we had nothing to do with those? Isn't it hypocritical to "pick and choose" which parts of our past, we acknowledge and talk about?

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Oakminster

Holy Signs of the Zombiepocalypse, Batman!

The Saints have won the Super Bowl, and Czarcasm agrees with Oak in a GD thread?

Surely the final hours are upon us....

You had to do something right eventually-I mean, nobody's perfect!

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by Cyningablod

That's kinda my whole question here: Why are we justified in being proud of our Constitution and our Emancipation Proclamation, for example, if we had nothing to do with those? Isn't it hypocritical to "pick and choose" which parts of our past, we acknowledge and talk about?

The Constitution remains in effect today. Slavery does not, due to Constitutional Amendment. We've moved on.

[Crotalus]

I have a hard time understanding ethnic pride except as a response to actual experiences of disrespect for one's ethnicity. I'm pretty sure that if I were a member of a discriminated against or disparaged ethnic group, I would feel some satisfaction in the successes of any member of that group. As an all-American mutt (German, Irish and Polish ancestors), I haven't experienced any negative toward my various ethnicities, though there have been some historical problems for all of them.

I subscribe to Mark Twain's view on this. When he was asked by an interviewer a question whose aim seemed to be to get Twain to say something racist about a black man, he said "It's enough for me to know that he's a man; he can't be any worse than that."

[Indistinguishable]

Originally Posted by Crotalus

I subscribe to Mark Twain's view on this. When he was asked by an interviewer a question whose aim seemed to be to get Twain to say something racist about a black man, he said "It's enough for me to know that he's a man; he can't be any worse than that."

Out of curiosity, do you have a cite for this? I'd be interested to read more about it.

[Marley23]

I don't think it makes sense to be proud or ashamed of things you had nothing to do with. I understand why people do it, but it really does not make sense. Many of us love searching the past for clues to our identities, but the reality is that our relationships to these people are mostly accidental. That's particularly true when we branch out from families and start talking about things like ethnic and national identities.

[DCnDC]

National/ethnic/cultural pride, the way I see it, is stupid and nonsensical. I find it utterly ridiculous how people latch onto and defend the elements of their identity that they had no choice or hand in. I think we'd all be better off if we took pride in personal accomplishments instead of givens.

[Cyningablod]

Originally Posted by Oakminster

The Constitution remains in effect today. Slavery does not, due to Constitutional Amendment. We've moved on.

True. But I fear this still doesn't address my point. (It's also highly debatable that we've really "moved on" away from racism, at least on a non-official level!)

Let me pick a less ambiguous example.

Think of the Magna Carta. Signed in the year 1215.

We are taught in school that this was a great advancement in the history of the rule of law in Europe. I think it could safely be said that we are, in not so many words, taught to admire it and uphold it as a noteworthy accomplishment of our intellectual, political (and in some cases, national) forbears.

If we are in any way "proud" of the achievement represented by the Magna Carta, on what logical basis do we then excuse ourselves from the burden of historical guilt represented by, I dunno...the Salem Witch Trials?

I'm really curious about this.

[Cyningablod]

Originally Posted by DCnDC

National/ethnic/cultural pride, the way I see it, is stupid and nonsensical. I find it utterly ridiculous how people latch onto and defend the elements of their identity that they had no choice or hand in. I think we'd all be better off if we took pride in personal accomplishments instead of givens.

That's a reasonable position. And a fair argument to make.

But I really wonder how far you personally take it, for example. Are you really, totally devoid of national pride, of whatever nation or tribe you call your own? When you watch your country's athletes on the gold medal podium and you hear your national anthem being played, are you truly completely unmoved? Do you shrug your shoulders and think, "Meh. Had to've been somebody."? Do you not take any pride at all in your country's thinkers, statesmen and women, artists, writers, leaders, etc.? In your national art, science, literature, or other cultural forms?

If you do (take even the slightest bit of pride in your nation's achievements), then I think your statement that "national pride is stupid and nonsensical" would be a bit of a disingenuous overstatement.

Note that I'm not saying that yours is a wrong attitude to hold; I'm genuinely curious how closely your true, deep sentiments follow your stated intellectual position.

[horhay_achoa]

Originally Posted by Cyningablod

True. But I fear this still doesn't address my point. (It's also highly debatable that we've really "moved on" away from racism, at least on a non-official level!)

Let me pick a less ambiguous example.

Think of the Magna Carta. Signed in the year 1215.

We are taught in school that this was a great advancement in the history of the rule of law in Europe. I think it could safely be said that we are, in not so many words, taught to admire it and uphold it as a noteworthy accomplishment of our intellectual, political (and in some cases, national) forbears.

If we are in any way "proud" of the achievement represented by the Magna Carta, on what logical basis do we then excuse ourselves from the burden of historical guilt represented by, I dunno...the Salem Witch Trials?

I'm really curious about this.

I wouldn't say I am "proud" of the constitution (or Magna Carta) because of ethnic/national pride. I can say that i believe in the sentiments of those documents, though. I don't see why a non-american can't believe in the sentiments of the constitution either. It is not "ours", it just is. The people who wrote the constitution can be proud of it, though. We had nothing to do with that.

[horhay_achoa]

Originally Posted by Cyningablod

That's a reasonable position. And a fair argument to make.

But I really wonder how far you personally take it, for example. Are you really, totally devoid of national pride, of whatever nation or tribe you call your own? When you watch your country's athletes on the gold medal podium and you hear your national anthem being played, are you truly completely unmoved? Do you shrug your shoulders and think, "Meh. Had to've been somebody."? Do you not take any pride at all in your country's thinkers, statesmen and women, artists, writers, leaders, etc.? In your national art, science, literature, or other cultural forms?

If you do (take even the slightest bit of pride in your nation's achievements), then I think your statement that "national pride is stupid and nonsensical" would be a bit of a disingenuous overstatement.

Note that I'm not saying that yours is a wrong attitude to hold; I'm genuinely curious how closely your true, deep sentiments follow your stated intellectual position.

This got me thinking. I wouldn't say that I am ever proud of my nationality/ethnicity. If my sports team wins the big game, I am happy, but not proud. I always think pride is reserved for my personal accomplishments, but I realized that is not necessarily true. I have been proud of my wife, my brother, my mom and dad, etc. I am not sure how far that circle of pride extends...I am thinking outside of my close family. It certainly ends before the national/ethnic group point, though.

[DCnDC]

Originally Posted by Cyningablod

When you watch your country's athletes on the gold medal podium and you hear your national anthem being played, are you truly completely unmoved? Do you shrug your shoulders and think, "Meh. Had to've been somebody."?

You pretty much nailed it. However I realize this is a difficult position to understand considering how much effort is made to instill such things in people from a young age, but I suppose I was just born a jaded cynic. I've always failed to grasp how one could take emotional satisfaction from the accomplishments of others, the same way I don't understand the appeal of tabloids/celebrity magazines. How can people care so much about strangers? I'll never get it.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Cyningablod

But I really wonder how far you personally take it, for example. Are you really, totally devoid of national pride, of whatever nation or tribe you call your own? When you watch your country's athletes on the gold medal podium and you hear your national anthem being played, are you truly completely unmoved? Do you shrug your shoulders and think, "Meh. Had to've been somebody."? Do you not take any pride at all in your country's thinkers, statesmen and women, artists, writers, leaders, etc.? In your national art, science, literature, or other cultural forms?

Answer for myself and not DCnDC: Pretty much, yes. I'll admit I feel some connection to people whose experiences are similar to my own, where I can put myself in their shoes, but based on flags alone? No.

And don't get me started on the Olympics. I'm a sports fan, I watch them, and I don't have any bias to U.S. teams. They're competing for themselves and it's enough to watch them do what they do. The international competition thing is mostly shtick (from top to bottom the whole thing is corrupt) and it does not do anything for me.

[GIGObuster]

Originally Posted by Indistinguishable

Out of curiosity, do you have a cite for this? I'd be interested to read more about it.

I'm not Crotalus, but I was curious too, I found the closest quote from Twain, he is not just referring to blacks specifically:

http://classiclit.about.com/od/markt...mtwain_hum.htm

http://marktwainhouse.blogspot.com/2...n-america.html

"I have no race prejudices, and I think I have no color prejudices or caste prejudices nor creed prejudices. Indeed I know it. I can stand any society. All that I care to know is that a man is a human being--that is enough for me; he can't be any worse"
- Mark Twain, Concerning the Jews

http://www.malaspina.org/twainm.htm

One of my theories is that the hearts of men are about alike, all over the world, whatever their skin-complexions may be.

Not particularly flattering to white people, he was mostly an equal opportunity offender; he had a lot of criticism about humans in general.

"There are times when one would like to hang the whole human race, and finish the farce."
- A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

[Crotalus]

Originally Posted by GIGObuster

I'm not Crotalus, but I was curious too, I found the closest quote from Twain, he is not just referring to blacks specifically:

http://classiclit.about.com/od/markt...mtwain_hum.htm

http://marktwainhouse.blogspot.com/2...n-america.html



http://www.malaspina.org/twainm.htm


Not particularly flattering to white people, he was mostly an equal opportunity offender; he had a lot of criticism about humans in general.

"There are times when one would like to hang the whole human race, and finish the farce."
- A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

Good find! My version of it is in one of several books on Twain that I have, so I would need to do some "optical scanning" to find it. I'm pretty sure that the author who quoted it in my book was trying to make a point about Twain in relation to black people. It would not be surprising for him to have used similar words in similar circumstances, or to have quoted or paraphrased himself in an interview. At the root of it is his general cynicism about humanity, regardless of ethnicity.

[kevlaw]

Originally Posted by DCnDC

National/ethnic/cultural pride, the way I see it, is stupid and nonsensical.

This (and other comments like it) made me think of Bones (in the TV series of the same name) where she is continually dismissing human emotions like love, jealousy, pride and so on because they are stupid and nonsensical. She doesn't understand why she is the only rational person around.

I take pride in my nation's history and achievements (both my native country's and my adopted country's). I still shiver at Henry V's Agincourt speech and am filled with awe at the "We hold these truths.." preamble. I feel entitled to reflect in their glow.

I am also ashamed of slavery and the indian genocides and plenty of other things in my nations' histories.

But ethnic pride...stupid and nonsensical.

[MrDibble]

Originally Posted by Cyningablod

But doesn't that by logical extension mean that we can't really be proud of the good deeds of our ancestors, either?

Basically, Yes. IMO, You can only legitimately be proud of things you, yourself, have done, or people you personally associate with and thus have, in some way, helped achieve their success (in some tiny measure), like a partner or child.

That's kinda my whole question here: Why are we justified in being proud of our Constitution and our Emancipation Proclamation, for example, if we had nothing to do with those?

You can be proud of those only in as much as you work today to sustain those ideals e.g working for continued democracy in your own and other countries, or supporting Amnesty Int. and other peace organisations.

Isn't it hypocritical to "pick and choose" which parts of our past, we acknowledge and talk about?

I think so. I mean, I'm quite chuffed at the Khoe-khoen part of my heritage, tiny as it is, because they were a fascinating people who never got up to much offensive in the world.

But actually, a larger part of my ancestry is Dutch, French, Swedish, Malay and English, and I should (and am starting to) embrace those too, both the good (culture, etc) and the bad (Empires), much more than I usually do.

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by Cyningablod

If we are going to celebrate and take pride in our ethnic/national heritages, does that mean we must also "carry the guilt" for our ancestors' wicked deeds?

Yes, which is why I don't do it. Celebrating the good stuff and ignoring the bad gives you a distorted idea of what the group you are celebrating is actually like. Which is very dangerous, especially if the group in question has any power.

[Chen019]

There is NOTHING AT ALL inherently "better", "smarter", "stronger", or whatever, about the English or the French (or the Caucasian Europeans in general) than anyone else, anywhere in the world. Those who carry their cultural pride too far, into the area of supremacism, are only discrediting themselves and their peoples.

You believe there are zero group differences despite groups following divergent evolutionary paths over 50,000 years? That is interesting.

Do you think western culture is superior to what the Taleban practice?

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by Chen019

You believe there are zero group differences despite groups following divergent evolutionary paths over 50,000 years? That is interesting.

Except that they've done no such thing. And more to the point; it doesn't matter if there are "zero" differences; just if they are signifcant ones. And even more to the point, people have been mixing their genes like mad for the last few centuries.

Originally Posted by Chen019

Do you think western culture is superior to what the Taleban practice?

Depends; what part of "Western Culture"? Nazism? Or the ACLU?

You are trying to compare a specific extreme group with a very broad and vague cultural catagory.

[Chen019]

Except that they've done no such thing. And more to the point; it doesn't matter if there are "zero" differences; just if they are signifcant ones. And even more to the point, people have been mixing their genes like mad for the last few centuries.

Not really. Take a look at the genome maps.

Represent each individual human by their DNA sequence. When aggregated, they cluster into readily identifiable groups. This has been known for 40 years now, although the technology and methods of analysis continue to improve. Below are results from 1966, 1978 and 2008.

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2009/06...-progress.html

From the conclusions of the Risch paper (Am. J. Hum. Genet. 76:268–275, 2005):

... A recent study (Rosenberg et al. 2002) examined 377 autosomal micro-satellite markers in 1,056 individuals from a global sample of 52 populations and found significant evidence of genetic clustering, largely along geographic (continental) lines. Consistent with prior studies, the major genetic clusters consisted of Europeans/West Asians (whites), sub-Saharan Africans, East Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans. ethnic groups living in the United States, with a discrepancy rate of only 0.14%.

As, Hsu comments: This clustering is a natural consequence of geographical isolation, inheritance and natural selection operating over the last 50k years since humans left Africa.


http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2007/01...nomes-and.html

Harpending says there are provocative implications from the study, published online Monday, Dec. 10 in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences:

"We aren't the same as people even 1,000 or 2,000 years ago," he says, which may explain, for example, part of the difference between Viking invaders and their peaceful Swedish descendants. "The dogma has been these are cultural fluctuations, but almost any Temperament trait you look at is under strong genetic influence."

"Human races are evolving away from each other," Harpending says. "Genes are evolving fast in Europe, Asia and Africa, but almost all of these are unique to their continent of origin. We are getting less alike, not merging into a single, mixed humanity." He says that is happening because humans dispersed from Africa to other regions 40,000 years ago, "and there has not been much flow of genes between the regions since then."

http://www.unews.utah.edu/p/?r=120607-1

Examples of some of the recent sweeps discussed here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/science/26human.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/08/sc...cnd-brain.html

Depends; what part of "Western Culture"? Nazism? Or the ACLU?

Secular democracy for starters.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Chen019

You believe there are zero group differences despite groups following divergent evolutionary paths over 50,000 years? That is interesting.

This thread is not about genetics, Chen019. Please drop this hijack or start a new thread.

[Chen019]

Ok, I'll drop it, back to the main topic:

Proud of our nat'l/ethnic heritages; should we equally be ashamed of the BAD stuff??

If we are going to celebrate and take pride in our ethnic/national heritages, does that mean we must also "carry the guilt" for our ancestors' wicked deeds? Is there a kind of logical "carry-over" of sorts, from our respective "bragging points" into the things that we really would prefer not to acknowledge?

Does my pride in the accomplishments and culture of the English people, for example, logically entail that I should also be ashamed of their traditions of imperialism and slaveholding? Is it inconsistent to uphold and praise certain aspects of one's people/culture, while downplaying or ignoring the negative aspects?

I could provide other illustrations, but you get the idea.

I suppose in the interest of beginning an actual debate, per se, I should take a position. So I'll argue for the affirmative; I do in fact think that we need to acknowledge and possibly in some way "atone for" our ancestors' evil behaviours, for two reasons:

First, acknowledging, accepting, and understanding history--allhistory--helps to ensure that the bad parts won't be repeated; and second, it's just more intellectually consistent to take the bad with the good.

You're making it sound like some kind of therapy "accept, acknowledge" etc. I think you should certainly be aware of history, and aim to understand the facts as much as possible. It's natural to some extent identify with your ancestors and in some cultures it is very much a part of who they are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whakapapa