chairman bill wrote:Are Asian countries morally inferior? No. Is there a preponderance of morally corrupt, authoritarian regimes in Asian countries? Yes. But India is the world's largest democracy, and there are plenty (probably a majority) of Asians who want democracy too, but suffer under what are frequently Western backed authoritarian regimes. As far as I am aware, Japan is democratic, South Korea is democratic & Aung San Suu Kyi was democratically elected to lead Burma until the military decided to not give up power to the people after all. Seems to me that people in the East are as keen on democracy as anyone, but like South America until relatively recently, is still chock full of dictators & military juntas.

NineOneFour wrote:Authoritarian people actually do have morally inferior values, no matter where they are from.

YanShen wrote:

Doesn't say they are inferior, just says they reject Western standards.

Yes but you've decided to title your thread, "Are Asian Countries Morally Inferior to the West".

Beatsong wrote:

NineOneFour wrote:Authoritarian people actually do have morally inferior values, no matter where they are from.

Why?

blackarmada wrote:I see the crux of the article seems to be Japan refraining from criticizing and putting pressure on Burma on their dictatorial regime.

How different is it from the Europeans and Americans molly coddling the various dictators in the Middle East and South America though? Is the West so much morally superior in this regard? Or do they simply talk more about democracy and freedom on the grassroot level but are no different from the East Asian countries on the national level.

The title seems intented to spark controvsy and focuses more on Japan than the other countries in the regime

NineOneFour wrote:

Beatsong wrote:

NineOneFour wrote:Authoritarian people actually do have morally inferior values, no matter where they are from.

Why?

Because they are interested in suppressing others.

advaitya wrote:Seeing how moral standards are by nature arbitrary it militates against reason how another moral standard could be deemed inferior. Western notions of morality might be dominant but by no means are they "reasoned" or ordained by some divinity.

cavarka9 wrote:

advaitya wrote:Seeing how moral standards are by nature arbitrary it militates against reason how another moral standard could be deemed inferior. Western notions of morality might be dominant but by no means are they "reasoned" or ordained by some divinity.

moral standards are arbitrary?. Are you saying that female infanticide or female feticide is better or no different than not being biased towards one sex. Or are you saying that burning women on their husbands funeral is alright?. Or are you saying that discrimination based on caste cannot be considered as being morally inferior than not doing so?.

cavarka9 wrote:

moral standards are arbitrary?.

quixotecoyote wrote:

cavarka9 wrote:

advaitya wrote:Seeing how moral standards are by nature arbitrary it militates against reason how another moral standard could be deemed inferior. Western notions of morality might be dominant but by no means are they "reasoned" or ordained by some divinity.

moral standards are arbitrary?. Are you saying that female infanticide or female feticide is better or no different than not being biased towards one sex. Or are you saying that burning women on their husbands funeral is alright?. Or are you saying that discrimination based on caste cannot be considered as being morally inferior than not doing so?.

Are you saying your values are superior and that everyone who thinks differently is barbarian scum? Are you saying that you'd be justified in imposing your morality on the lesser cultures who don't live up to the master culture's standards?

I love the "are you saying" game.

advaitya wrote:

cavarka9 wrote:

moral standards are arbitrary?.

Yes they are.

Why don't you study some literature on morality and its nature before spouting nonsense here.