Isolated groups (religious, indigenous, etc.,) should be de-isolated.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Isolated groups (religious, indigenous, etc.,) should be de-isolated.

blue squares: Sep 28, 2007

Isolated groups, such as indigenous tribes in the Amazon Rain Forest or religious communities such as the Amish in the United States, should no longer be allowed to remain isolated from society.

This is an argument I began thinking about a few days ago and have brought up with some colleagues, most of whom instantly disagreed. I myself was not on either side, but found it an intriguing problem to consider. Obviously, it sounds wrong from the start. Of course people should be allowed to isolate themselves if they wish, especially if they belong to a culture that has been doing so for hundreds or thousands of years. Right?

I'm not so sure.

From the United Nations' "Universal Declaration of Human Rights:'

Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

My argument against isolation is focused on education. The first two items in the list argue in favor of education for all children, but the last is problematic. Given that education is a huge determining factor in life possibility (i.e., a child educated in the Rain Forest her entire life is less likely to become a doctor than one educated in an urban area), why are parents allowed to limit their children? Parents do not have the right to control 100% of the lives of their children. Why is education not one of those things parents have no say in?

All children, no matter where they are born, should be provided an equal opportunity to achieve whatever they may dream of. Children in isolated communities lack such an opportunity. This is unfair to these children.

I am sure there could be many more arguments against isolation. Just as there could be many arguments in favor of it. I'd like to hear them.

# ¿ Oct 4, 2015 03:12

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 18:21

blue squares: Sep 28, 2007

Also, I think we should avoid this thread turning into a condemnation of past colonialist/imperialistic crimes against native peoples. Clearly, there have been many atrocities committed in the name of "civilizing savages." I'm not advocating in favor of that. The past is the past. Let's debate the present.

# ¿ Oct 4, 2015 03:15

blue squares: Sep 28, 2007

Typo posted:

So in practice how would this be any different than the history of taking kids away from aboriginal parents and putting them in boarding schools?

You could bring the schools to them? Have regional schools.

Aside from the practicality, how do you feel about the issue itself?

# ¿ Oct 4, 2015 03:27

blue squares: Sep 28, 2007

I'd like to thank everyone who contributed thus far. Like I said, I was not convinced of either position being a moral good (leaving aside practicality).

After reading everything, I'm now convinced that the proposal in my OP would be immoral. It rested on the premise that modern, industrialized society is inherently better, and that is a shaky premise at best.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 02:33

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Isolated groups (religious, indigenous, etc.,) should be de-isolated.