Comments

When I wrote the post 'White Culture' I didn’t expect everybody to have such different interpretations on what I felt was a fairly simple (albeit long) post. Nor did I expect anyone to reiterate what I have said using their own interpretation of the matter. Interpretations are regrettably and unavoidably going to differ between individuals, and in this case it has brought up a few noteworthy comments.

u've made a lot of generalisations on yr post. not everyone thinks their country is a shithole.

Regarding generalisations: the post was aimed at the ‘us’ and ‘we’ in MY life, i.e. myself and the friends I grew up with, not you, some random stranger I’ve never met. I do not speak in behalf of another person; I only speak for myself and for my observations of the people around me.

I have never said that everybody thinks that their country is a shithole. I said ‘Asia is a shit place to live in terms of the quality of life, from long and strenuous working hours to low remuneration and an almost non-existent welfare system’, all of which is true. That makes Asia a difficult place to live in for many many people who are not privileged enough to have a monthly income (or parents) to support them.

...we never bought designer clothes from the west or owned a psp of any sort... western capitalism failed to capture us.

It does not mean that NOT owning these items leaves you out of the question. What about going to the movies, hanging out at shopping malls, watching the telly, surfing the Internet, eating spaghetti or hamburgers... all of which are creations of the West? If you do these things, does it not mean that you too, like me, embrace these items?

...if anything. we were quite content back then just to do things the malaysian way

I was quite happy to eat Roti Canai and play sepak takraw as a kid, but it did not prevent me from liking Crème brule or baseball. You said it ‘failed’ to capture you, yet you contradict yourself both in your comment and in the conversations I have with you on MSN; I do recall that you, Mr. K, are a Malaysian studying in Cambridge doing a degree there and refusing to come back upon its completion because you’ve ‘found’ yourself there. If there’s any better example to illustrate my point about the lure of the West to a Malaysian like myself, this is it.

In fact, it's not a post about the globalisation at all. It's a personal account of a cross-cultural encounter...

That's right; the post wasn’t about globalization. Nor was it about capitalism, or which country was better than another. The post is not venerating ‘White Culture’ and belittling my own. In fact, the post was talking about my initial understanding about what White Culture was (from the viewpoint of someone who grew up in an environment where White Culture was venerated), and then progression into the actual first hand experience I had in Melbourne.

@MarcelProust -- You say the article betrays 'apparent assumption that "the development of a truly modern globalised world" is a good thing', but that interpretation is difficult to sustain, given the rest of the sentence is: "it does not put them high up on a pedestal where everybody else can just look at from below for envy."

This is what Daniel wrote. I did not say that White people or their culture were to be worshipped, and Daniel illustrates this perfectly.

The capacity of Australia and other 'white' societies to protect the prosperity of ordinary people is in many ways financed by their privileged position on the rich side of the globalisation divide… Limited shopping hours are actually a result of social welfare legislation...

I am fully aware of the laws that cause limited shopping hours, and probably know more than you will ever imagine I’d know about the way the system works, and why it works the way it does. So thanks but explaining it to me is not going to boost my knowledge any further.

...but I don't agree with, for example, the importance he attaches to shopping

You are allowed to disagree with what I say. However you should also realise that the reason I even mention shopping was because it illustrates my frustration beautifully, not because I feel it is very ‘important’ to me. I did not come to Australia JUST because I wanted to shop. It may be an activity I engage myself in, essential in some respects, but it does not mean I hold it to such high regard.

Question: what's wrong with the author's analysis, and what's wrong with the original text, that you felt it necessary to replace both with your own words?

This is what Daniel said to marcelproust. I find this quite true, because I too feel that Marcelproust has read the article singling out words and ideas that fit his own description of what the issue at hand should be rather than what is said, later quoting me as though I share such beliefs. The mere fact he has singled out ‘globalisation’ as the key issue says a whole lot. Again, this post is NOT about globalisation. So do get over your itch and stop pushing this issue.

I don't know if we should be messing up his blog with mutual "Duh"s or the equivalent.

I’d like to add too, I don’t think you should be messing up my blog by putting words into my mouth, especially words that contradict whatever I feel or say.