Joe Jackson (shoeless@jazztbone.com)
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:41:59 -0500
> Certainly integration is
> dangerous to the purity of a culture or a family. So the question
> might be - how
> to associate but not contaminate?
I find it interesting that since supposed "pure" cultures are solely the
result of millenia of different cultures meshing and melding that anyone
would even consider the possiblity of segregation in the interest of keeping
their culture pure.
I imagine that there are plenty of folks of all races colors and creeds that
have some fear of "losing" their cultural identity through integration, but
the fact of the matter is that their cultural identity took form through
centuries of "contamination" (first person-to-person "contamination", then
family-to-family "contamination", then tribe/village-to-tribe/village
"contamination", etc.).
The "official" stance of American society is, of course, pro-integration, as
we have elected a government that will not allow a non-profit school to
operate if they are not open to all people regardless of race, color or
creed.
I may be an idealist, but I consider it the tradition of this nation that we
will continue, generation by generation, to throw out our old cultures and
form a new culture comprised of bits and pieces of the old. Each succeeding
generation loses a little more sight of the value of thowing up the walls...
-Joe J.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:10:45 EST