The morality of interactions with the locals

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

We just need to be aware that such interactions can still have a negative or positive intention. To oversimplify, Romans conquered but incorporated. Denizens of new provinces had the ability to become citizens and rise up in the social, military and political ranks. Most of the victims of European imperialism were just that: victims. They were conquered, disenfranchised and we still see the negative effects of that everyday, worldwide.

It's happened both ways again and again throughout history. Most of us here are descended either genetically or culturally from the British isles and we'd all be much much different if they hadn't been invaded and incorporated several time thoughout their history.

On the other hand, I still seek to convert American cruisers, proselytizing to them every chance I get: socialized medicine and poutine...it's where it's at.

I'd say that eating too much poutine may wind up requiring socialized medicine! Agree with your other comments. Negative & positive effects from human history, with the primary commonality being an almost endless cycle of conquest and its consequences.

[jkindredpdx]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

We just need to be aware that such interactions can still have a negative or positive intention... I still seek to convert American cruisers, proselytizing to them every chance I get: socialized medicine and poutine...it's where it's at.

I did an extended snow skiing cruise to Eastern BC this winter. I found the locals to be incredibly friendly and helpful, albeit a bit naive and untouched by the realities of US civilization(?) My interactions with the locals were enlightening. Since returning I find my self craving fat cheesy foods, excessive amounts of beer, and ice hockey on the TV...

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by jkindredpdx

ince returning I find my self craving fat cheesy foods, excessive amounts of beer, and ice hockey on the TV...

Ice hockey...no self-respecting Canadian would ever refer to hockey as "ice hockey." Lol

[jkindredpdx]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

Ice hockey...no self-respecting Canadian would ever refer to hockey as "ice hockey." Lol

True, and no self respecting skier would call it "snow skiing", but since I was posting on an international sailing forum I took liberties. BTW, as much as I enjoy visiting, I'm not Canadian, I'm an Oregonian.

Rip City!

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

We just need to be aware that such interactions can still have a negative or positive intention. To oversimplify, Romans conquered but incorporated. Denizens of new provinces had the ability to become citizens and rise up in the social, military and political ranks. Most of the victims of European imperialism were just that: victims. They were conquered, disenfranchised and we still see the negative effects of that everyday, worldwide.

If you were an aristocrat from a losing country that didn't fight too hard or if you were a soldier who signed up for 30yr of harsh life in the legions, you could gain advantages...look at the puppet rulers of India while Britain was in charge or some of the military companies created from local populations. While not identical, it was a very similar approach.

The vast majority of conquered peoples got to join the Roman Empire via slavery... I doubt they would see it any different and quite likely as worse as there was no pretense it was anything else.

[chuckr]

Interesting reading - I have read most after I posted really early. It seems most want to discuss the "islanders or more remote areas". Interacting with locals goes way beyond - try fishing harbors along the Black Sea or the country of Georgia. Try Russia. How about Tunisia or Israel. Or maybe se Turkey or for that matter folks in Venice. Or let's say Colombia or Guatemala or Trinidad. We have sailed the San Blas and a lot of other islands.


All the above have different cultures and mores and each is unique. For us we never ever try to judge. We try to interact and not disrespect anyone. And that goes to our inland visits to places like Armenia and Macedonia (it has a new name now) or West Bank - we try to be humble and learning and greet each with a smile, firm hand shake and in English how nice it is to meet and how privileged we are to be in their country.


We have never been disappointed in our approach. Respect and kindness.

[wackerb]

To cherry pick an earlier post: "doing things which help peoples situation in life without turning them into dependents or overtly trying to change them or their culture (any interaction brings at least a small degree of change though). I think the best ways to do this are by assisting with healthcare, education, and creating employement/trade opportunities."

What gives us the right to impose any of these things on another culture just because we think they are some universal good? Only our arrogance allows us to say that modern healthcare is better than age-old local knowledge, to say nothing of the evolutionary consequences of survival and procreation of the weak. Education is but a thinly veiled indoctrination into consumerism, dissatisfaction with the status quo and, again, arrogance that what we consider knowledge is really "better" for them to learn. Employment and trade opportunities need no identification as modern concepts which create mortgages and a host of other dependencies on a heartless system and make big cities such vile places for many.

No doubt we have done incredible things, mostly through technology, to harness and abuse the power of the planet. On the other hand, we haven't learned to get along with each other, especially if they are different from ourselves.

As yachties we're probably in the upper echelon of modern humanity. Well educated, wealthy, technologically advanced, relatively free from the fetters of making a daily living, relatively independent, etc. Rather than worry about how our interactions inevitably change others we should be asking how the modern population, in general, can learn to live as well as some of them do before we've "improved" them out of existence. Right now the smart phone culture is winning.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by wackerb

What gives us the right to impose any of these things on another culture just because we think they are some universal good? Only our arrogance allows us to say that modern healthcare is better than age-old local knowledge, to say nothing of the evolutionary consequences of survival and procreation of the weak. Education is but a thinly veiled indoctrination into consumerism, dissatisfaction with the status quo and, again, arrogance that what we consider knowledge is really "better" for them to learn. Employment and trade opportunities need no identification as modern concepts which create mortgages and a host of other dependencies on a heartless system and make big cities such vile places for many.

Obviously, it depends on what specific actions and impacts we are talking about and lots of gray areas without easy answers but for example:
- If I want to wear a thong thru downtown (and really no one wants to see that anywhere ), it would be pretty tough to justify changing some cultures acceptance of that because its culturally acceptable on a french beach.
- But if I see a sick kid who appears likely to die...and I have medicine in my first aide kit and the know how to use it appropriately, my moral imperative says to heck with protecting the culture.

Some cultural practices are simply not morally acceptable...it's culturally acceptable in some countries that female babies are aborted or killed because culturally, there is a preference for male offspring. Are you going to say it's arrogance to say that is wrong to kill baby girls and the culture shouldn't be changed?

[CatNewBee]

Locals have their own moral. When you enter a foreign country you rise the courtesy flag announcing to be subject / obey to their laws and culture when in their waters.

Either respect it or go away.

They have their own value system, own democracy or autocracy, it is their way of life, you are a visitor and not entitled to object, vote, run for office or change the society.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

Locals have their own moral. When you enter a foreign country you rise the courtesy flag announcing to be subject / obey to their laws and culture when in their waters.

Either respect it or go away.

They have their own value system, own democracy or autocracy, it is their way of life, you are a visitor and not entitled to object, vote, run for office or change the society.

When you enter another county you are subject to their laws...not necessarily their culture. It's quite common for a country to have a law against morally reprehensible activities but because it's culturally accepted, no one ever enforces the law.

Again, it's very much dependent on the impact if we should respect it and there is no way to take our own morality out of the equation (if you can set aside your morals...you have none).

The Hindu Caste System is culturally accepted by portions of the local population even though it is illegal in India. So should we treat those from lower Castes poorly because that is the culturally acceptable thing to do?

Where reasonable, we should respect the local culture but at some point, you need to get a backbone and stand up for what is morally right.

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

When you enter another county you are subject to their laws...not necessarily their culture. It's quite common for a country to have a law against morally reprehensible activities but because it's culturally accepted, no one ever enforces the law.

Again, it's very much dependent on the impact if we should respect it and there is no way to take our own morality out of the equation (if you can set aside your morals...you have none).

The Hindu Caste System is culturally accepted by portions of the local population even though it is illegal in India. So should we treat those from lower Castes poorly because that is the culturally acceptable thing to do?

Where reasonable, we should respect the local culture but at some point, you need to get a backbone and stand up for what is morally right.

So you find your moral superior to the one of the locals and feel entitled to teach / missionary them. That is where racism and supremacy starts.

I am not saying, throw your moral over board, live to your values, but not try to impose / enforce them to others.

[boatman61]

Valhalla..
Maybe you do not realise it but we come under the heading off 'Untouchables' under the caste system so our thoughts and opinions don't count..

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

So you find your moral superior to the one of the locals and feel entitled to teach / missionary them. That is where racism and supremacy starts.

I am not saying, throw your moral over board, live to your values, but not try to impose / enforce them to others.

If it's that they consider it immodest to have their knees uncovered...my morals don't conflict with keeping my knees covered, so their is no reason I shouldn't be respectful. And this is probably 99% of of interactions with locals. Little things that keep the peace and make interactions more pleasant and comfortable for all but doesn't require you to set aside your morals.

But if there is a major conflict with your morals, yes you should stand up for them...even if someone implies it's racist to do so. If you don't stick to your morals, you don't have any morals.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Valhalla..
Maybe you do not realise it but we come under the heading off 'Untouchables' under the caste system so our thoughts and opinions don't count..

Maybe before they became subject to the queen....... but still a funny point

We had some discussions on the subject with our local contact when we went there a couple years back and westerners are really outside the system for most practical purposes. Yes, technically we would be not be among the Brahman but the whole system has gone much more subtle with laws officially prohibiting it. We could only get tiny glimpses as you saw different people's reactions but for the most part, the people we dealt with seemed to be trying. Out in the hinterlands...who knows.

[GordMay]

... (if you can set aside your morals...you have none)...

Well said!
There IS a difference between respect & (im)moral ambiguity.