Tell it to Steven Hawking. A person's physical stature does not limit his/her potential for work that does not rely on his/her physical stature (e.g., English teaching, as well as physics). The cultural attitude that those who are discriminated against because they do not fit the culturally desired norm should be outcast or should be provided for by special environments that can be sold as entertainment venues to those who will not deal with their own prejudices is a cultural attitude that perpetuates discrimination against all who are 'different'. The problem here, as elsewhere, is a matter of dehumanizing those who are 'different' - prejudicial culture that regiments anything that deviates from its standards, rather than dealing with the prejudice itself. Why not have a theme park within which 'foreigners', with all their funny habits, can be kept, so that they do not disturb the 'normality' of cultural prejudices? Actually, there could be many: one for 'black people', one for Tibetans, one for Japanese, one for gay people, one for Han Chinese people who have given up their 'traditional' clothing for 'western-style' clothing (e.g., the great majority of Chinese, over the past century or so) - in fact we could subdivide and subdivide until nothing was left but mutual nonrecognition. All these would help to maintain the narrow identities of 'normality' that can be relied upon to advance support the cultural attitudes that promote the continuing inability of people to recognize each other as human, and to celebrate and accept their differences - not as entertainment items, no matter how 'cute', but as full human beings. How different is all this from apartheid?
This effort to maintain prejudice can, of course, be profitable to those who invest in it, and convenient for social engineers and political elites who want to maintain an elite power status by reliance on it.
The place is an insult to our common humanity and a spotlight on cultural attitudes of exclusion. Those who find that they enjoy such displays should take a good look at the nature of the culture that has formed them so narrowly. Cultures change; cultures have always changed; cultures are presently changing and will continue to do so; there is nothing sacred about cultural attitudes. Our common humanity is an ongoing project, and those who imagine they are not part of such a project are simply contributing their own blindness to it, and limiting themselves in the process. It's not the 'dwarves' who are the problem, its the people who will not accept them as within the boundaries of 'us'.
A look at Yunnan's evolving anti-drug strategy
Posted byDon't quite understand - do you want the state to make/keep some, or all, of these drugs illegal? If so, note how legalization of alcohol in the US, after 10 years of prohibition, drove gangsters out of the illegal booze industry. Seems to me legalization of pot in some US states is likely to do the same with the illegal marijuana industry. What would happen to the gangsters' profits in dealing other (now illegal) drugs if they were made legal?
I'm not advocating anything concerning the drugs in the article, just asking your opinion.
A look at Yunnan's evolving anti-drug strategy
Posted byAnd we have been getting off the point, as the article doesnn't mention marijuana.
A look at Yunnan's evolving anti-drug strategy
Posted byRight - so you're saying at least some of these drugs should be made legal, like alcohol and tobacco are? If so I've been partially misunderstanding you.
A look at Yunnan's evolving anti-drug strategy
Posted byPlus cigarette smoking is a lot more likely to give you lung cancer than marijuana smoking does - marijuana smoking can give you bronchial irritations, tho, if you over do it.
A look at Yunnan's evolving anti-drug strategy
Posted by@vicar: And any fool who smokes both tobacco and weed knows clearly that it's nicotine that is the really addictive drug.