3 ms·

technology changes the rules of free market. 300 years ago you couldn't move thousands of people across the planet in a day. Migration was slow and sustainable.

technology changes the rules of free market. 300 years ago you couldn't move thousands of people across the planet in a day. Migration was slow and sustainable. Technology + No borders can destroy entire cultures.

1996 7y ago
> Technology + No borders can destroy entire cultures. And that's a good thing. The strong cultures will survive. I don't care if it is mine or not. If it is better, it's in my interest that it wins, and that I adopt it. If you think differently, take a second to think about the implications: what exactly do you gain from a culture so weak that it can be destroyed by technology and a little immigration? Do you get some pride? Ok then, how much is that pride worth? What about for your children? When I look at Quebec and their desperate fight to try to impose french schooling, I conclude that people would naturally prefer to learn English and take the financial advantages that come with it - if not for them, for their children. This reeks of hypocrisy.
- mytherin 7y ago
  Stronger in what sense? Eradicating other cultures/people? Brainwashing/controlling people not to change their beliefs and stick to their culture? Are these properties you think are desirable in a culture?
  - 1996 7y ago
    Stronger in that it can survive, and that people adopt it because makes sense economically. Cultures have no inherent worth. Civilizations live and die.
    - devmunchies 7y ago
      >Cultures have no inherent worth peak nihilism. Then nothing has inherent worth. we choose whats valuable. Culture is valuable. >people adopt it because makes sense economically that depressing. A restaurant on every corner is also good for the GDP but I'd rather cook a meal with my family and friends.
- devmunchies 7y ago
  what exactly do you gain from a ______ so weak that it can be destroyed by technology and a little immigration? you can put anything in that blank. coral reefs, imagination, happiness, ecosystems... >a little immigration a little? no, before technology we had a little.

1996 7y ago

> Technology + No borders can destroy entire cultures. And that's a good thing. The strong cultures will survive. I don't care if it is mine or not. If it is better, it's in my interest that it wins, and that I adopt it. If you think differently, take a second to think about the implications: what exactly do you gain from a culture so weak that it can be destroyed by technology and a little immigration? Do you get some pride? Ok then, how much is that pride worth? What about for your children? When I look at Quebec and their desperate fight to try to impose french schooling, I conclude that people would naturally prefer to learn English and take the financial advantages that come with it - if not for them, for their children. This reeks of hypocrisy.

mytherin 7y ago
Stronger in what sense? Eradicating other cultures/people? Brainwashing/controlling people not to change their beliefs and stick to their culture? Are these properties you think are desirable in a culture?
- 1996 7y ago
  Stronger in that it can survive, and that people adopt it because makes sense economically. Cultures have no inherent worth. Civilizations live and die.
  - devmunchies 7y ago
    >Cultures have no inherent worth peak nihilism. Then nothing has inherent worth. we choose whats valuable. Culture is valuable. >people adopt it because makes sense economically that depressing. A restaurant on every corner is also good for the GDP but I'd rather cook a meal with my family and friends.
devmunchies 7y ago
what exactly do you gain from a ______ so weak that it can be destroyed by technology and a little immigration? you can put anything in that blank. coral reefs, imagination, happiness, ecosystems... >a little immigration a little? no, before technology we had a little.