The Value of Culture

The Culture War continues apace with the Christian Right and the Liberal coalition fighting their current conflict in North Carolina and Mississippi. Both states recently passed a version of a law that protects religious freedom by allowing businesses to discriminate against members of the LBGT community. The Democratic Governors of Washington State, New York, and Vermont have banned non-essential state-funded travel in an effort to pressure these two states to rescind their laws

Everyone involved in the fight agrees that culture is of unmeasurable importance. And not just any culture, but the right culture.

So what does it mean for a culture to be right, or valuable?

Culture can derive its value from four arguments. Not everyone will agree with each argument and there is quite a bit of space in each one, but hopefully everyone can recognize the point of view for each.

Everyone is born into a culture. Most likely their parents, grandparents, and ancestors were of this same culture. They value it for the family history it contains. They feel comforted by the food, the language, and the traditions that predate them. They act as their predecessors acted, speak as they spoke, and live as they lived. It is pleasure and memory wrapped together into nostalgia. There is nothing wrong with embracing the culture one is born into.  There is value in this, but its value may be superceded by other issues in the community.  It is possible that a culture is rotten, there are some of these across history, and they need to be repaired or rejected altogether.

What does it mean for a culture to be rotten?

Cultural beliefs influence ethical values. They support equality and justice or corruption and injustice. They aid wisdom and compassion, or duplicity and cruelty. There is no doubt culture can be a positive or a negative force for the moral development of a people. When a community embraces a horrific practice, later generations grow up not recognizing the terrible beliefs they hold. Without referencing the object of Godwin's law, everyone can think of a culture that held abominable beliefs, and which led to atrocious actions.  

Culture not only develops ethics, but also produces results. When citizens attempt to transform their culture they aim for the reformed institutions to produce results they desire. If a culture values education it will ensure all students, regardless of race, gender, or class, will attend schools that provide for an enduring life of learning. The community will ensure behavioral patterns in students to produce results. It is impossible to reconcile the statements: “everyone in our culture should be well educated” and “their cultures norms of behavior prevent them from achieving educational goals”, and “they shouldn't have to change, or be judged on how well they do in school”.  These three statements will create divisions and will not produce the desired result.  Sometimes people have to change so that society functions to the benefit of everyone.

Cultures that divide the citizens, that generate fear and hatred, or deny basic rights to everyone are rotten.

At this point, someone will raise their hand and say, “There is no such thing as a rotten culture. Sure, I might disagree with a community that commits ritual sacrifice, or oppresses minorities, but it doesn't mean it's wrong. It only means, I wouldn't want to live there.”

This person will say all cultures are equally valuable, basing their statement off of two beliefs.

The only value of culture is its historical and personal value. It is to be protected as a matter of record, just as one wants to preserve every language in the world. This is an emotional argument and the appeal simply won't do. There is little value in protecting something, just because it exists. If it is not harmful then there is nothing wrong, but if it fosters injustice then something must be done. This person will insist cultural ethics and cultural results, are subjective goals that have meaning for some individuals but not others.

Yet these same people will, rightly, call out the injustices of modern society and campaign, protest, and work for a culture that produces equal rights and justice for all. While decrying the moral basis of the other side, they develop a strategy to implement their own cultural norms. They know there are positive cultural objects and negative ones. I'm not saying I know what the optimal culture is. Nor am I claiming it is possible to construct the perfect culture using some evaluative procedure, but it's clear the citizens of the United States and the world have certain ethical values and goals for their society. They believe there is a best, even if it is only theoretical, but they will work to move toward that transcendental goal.

Unfortunately in their zeal and self-righteousness, culture warriors on both sides often engage in bullying. They paint their opponents as hideous regressives or progressive freaks. A favorite phrase used in the culture war is the “March of History”, or being on “The Right Side of History”. This a form of argument, and bullying, which carries no weight. Any student of history can see it is not a linear upward climb of equality for all mankind. Many ancient cultures preformed better in the areas of democracy, gender equality, and economic equality. The ancient civilizations were destroyed by barbarians, the Middle Ages couldn't compare to Aristotle or Cicero, and the modern world is the closest humanity has ever come to causing its own extinction.   No nation of modern times can point to a perfect history of improvement.

On the other hand, the short history of the United States does seem to be on a gradual path of inclusiveness.  It only seems so because of its limited existence and broad scope.  Examining the minutiae of American History would illuminate many setbacks on the current goal of equality.  Making a bet on the future improvement of humanity's culture would be nice, but a risky endeavor.  In fact, the only cultures that can declare a brighter future for mankind with any degree of certainty would be those who believe in a benevolent deity or some sort of mystical life-force. Even there the claim would mistake Gods'/God's ultimate care for humankind, for temporal equality. Certainly, no religious group can demonstrate a continual improvement of their society since its birth..

Cultures should be valued for the ethics they inspire and the results they produce, if those results are worthwhile.

A final feature of culture is its survivability. Superior cultures will have the resilience and flexibility to survive centuries of difficulty. Danger can come from within or without. If within, a marginalized group may have rejected the majorities beliefs or a significant event could be threatening old ideas. New cultural contact (which is rare now) often destabilized one or both of the combatants. Today, cultures that have been in conflict for decades still look to absorb or influence each other. One might not believe that survivability is of any value, but if a culture can not withstand the shock of conflict, it does not matter what else it contains.

As a final thought, the culture war of the United States is fair ground for both sides, but both should be clear about what they are fighting for and not obfuscate, nor claim that there is no moral basis for argument but engage in one anyways. If everyone speaks what they believe with truth, consideration, and a willingness to listen, the citizens of the United States will be better off.