7 ms·
Not impossible. Other countries could. Also remember that culture is a living thing, it's not static. It changes and adjusts and adapts and incorporates. My li
by Tor3 3y ago
Not impossible. Other countries could. Also remember that culture is a living thing, it's not static. It changes and adjusts and adapts and incorporates. My little hometown was just us "natives" in my childhood, now at the other end of time it has people and languages from more than a hundred countries, and we're all "natives" to this town. Very different from before, but much more interesting and I don't feel we have lost anything, culturally, from before.
- ddd00001 3y agoI don't have a dog in this fight, but you just said "not impossible", then admitted that culture would change with influx of migrants.
- Tor3 3y agoI didn't first realize that you were commenting my post - but I did say two things: 1) There's no such thing as a culture which doesn't change. Culture is a living thing. It changes, even if you never have a single immigrant. My parent's culture wasn't the same as mine, even back when there were no immigrants and hardly anyone coming from elsewhere in the country. 2) I also clarified in a later post that to me the culture is enhanced, i.e. there's more to it than before. I definitely don't have any feeling of loss of culture, I guess that's my point.
- rayiner 3y agoHeterogenous cultures all end up looking kind of the same. Chaotic, disorderly, no common rules, little common ground. Like New York City or London or Toronto. Great for people who like novelty. But utterly different from Tokyo, or Salt Lake City, or other places where cultural homogeneity enables a sophisticated set of shared rules and norms.
- Tor3 3y agoI don't know about that. In my experience, with smaller places I'm familiar with, the cultural input only enriches, there's no degradation (though I am of course aware of certain areas of certain countries where they failed to handle immigration correctly and created isolated ghettos - that never goes well. But it does not have to be that way). "sophisticated set of shared rules and norms" - I don't know what that's supposed to mean. I definitely get a bad feeling from a sentence like that though.
- rayiner 3y ago> “sophisticated set of shared rules and norms" - I don't know what that's supposed to mean. I definitely get a bad feeling from a sentence like that though Why?!
- Tor3 3y ago1) What does "sophisticated" mean in this context? What is a "sophisticated" rule, or a "sophisticated norm"? 2) If anything, "a [..] set of shared rules and norms" sounds like an environment which tries to enforce a strict template for how to behave and act and do. If that's really the case then it to me would be a terrible place to be. Like that backwater isolated village with some snooping crones keeping an eye on everything. If you meant something totally different, please explain. Particularly the "sophisticated" point.
- rayiner 3y ago> 1) What does "sophisticated" mean in this context? What is a "sophisticated" rule, or a "sophisticated norm"? The rules and norms are complex and encompass a wider and deeper range of behaviors. > 2) If anything, "a [..] set of shared rules and norms" sounds like an environment which tries to enforce a strict template for how to behave and act and do. If that's really the case then it to me would be a terrible place to be. Anti-social people don’t like it, to be sure. But it facilitates high trust societies that have lower social transaction costs. Paradoxically, it enables societies that have less formal policing and rule enforcement, because of the high level of informal policing and rule enforcement.