Friday, March 30, 2007

Preserving dying civilisations

There has always been this outcry for the preserving of dying civilisations, claiming that the 'polutions' of the modern world, would contaminate their thinking, obseleting their habits.

In my opinion that's just an act of selfish, ZOOing act on other slow developing civilisations.

What's the need to actually doing so? So that we can travel with our kids on holiday trips to experience a wholly different world? Ok, the claim to preserve them as to allow our kids to have a glimpse of what are their daily livings like? What for?

The Mayan civilisations died out, so did the Ankhor Wat, so Wat? They did not have an impact on our current society. Your child wouldn't end up dumb and dumber just because they could not catch a glimpse of an aborigine throwing a boomerang, killing a Kangaroo on the way back and biting off the Kangaroo's testiscles to be able to carry on living his life dominated by Play Stations or Barbies right?

Is it because the current world order dominated by Western values have to feel sorry for their acts over the past few centuries? The conquering of Albuquerque on the Malacca Straits, the Opium war, the massacres of Red Indians rendered their off springs to have a different way of down pressing other civilisations? In short, ZOOing them?

Let these civilisations adapt to the changing world, let them have a chance to play World of War Craft, oh, maybe you don't want your kid being bullied on Warnet by an aborigine do you?
I suppose that smart photo of a bunch of African Lawyers had ancestors just like the pictures above right? Give them a break.

No comments: