"in the case of deviant intercultural communication, which should be respected? the person or the culture he represents?"
and this was my answer:
indeed, what i should recognise and acknowledge is the person and not his belonging to another culture, and this is because each individual has his/her own dignity. his membership maybe a reason of pride, but may also be a cause of indignity.
astonishingly, this intercultural communication includes power relations that may be indignifying, especially when there are past incidents of humiliation. this will be clearer when those two parts are from America and the arab world. the former is urging the universality of americanisation, which is just another component of the overwhelming globalisation process, so intolerant of cultural diversities.
but who gave America this right to speak in the name of universal understanding?
arrogant America went out to Iraq not to spread democracy but to dominate and capture by violent force. at it heart is the humiliation of the victim. so, the victim introduces one dangerous element into his culture, which is revenge. and within this culture, it becomes hounorable, perfectly ligitimate and highly obligatory to heal this humiliation by killing and hating Americans. briefly, killing Americans becomes unfortunately a part of their culture. neither Katrina nor Rita is able to remove this part of their culture unless the victim's dignity is restored by empathic dialogue, sincere apology, and reconciliation. if all this were examined, then America might eventually come to realize that Nature's Nemesis is as much a teacher as a hanging judge, and that for its own good, it had best not harm the Earth and fellow humanbeings.
i hope art and the love for beauty will restore this tumult
My Birthday
