Quote:
Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Apr 21 2005, 07:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Apr 21 2005, 07:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Hakan@Apr 22 2005, 02:32 AM
It's a well documented fact that poverty predicates environmental degradation and pollution. It's about that simple.
|
So adoption of western norms in regards to explaining their inability to manage their own lands is okay, but expecting them to live up to those norms in regards to civic responsibilities is not right and racist?[/b][/quote]
Care to explain western norms? The poverty and environment issue is a global norm.
Your argument here is muddled, unclear and false. Using the dualist benefits - responsibility argument (in your case civic responsibilities) implies that there are benefits. But we were just talking about pollution and poverty on reserves. Therefore, why should they feel like they have responsibilities when the benefits are poverty as you seem to imply? Also by tying poverty and subsequent civic responsibilities to "western norms" [which is still confusing me] is a
false analogy.