What does the outcry for U.N. involvement in Darfur say about the civilization there?

[Bing321]

I previously asked a question about whether the U.S. should get involved in Darfur. The answer was a resounding "no," and it was uniformly suggested that the U.N. should intervene. Fair enough.

But what does it say about the civilizations in that region of the world when they actually need the U.N. to step in? Is it that politically incorrect to quit defending the cultures that act so barbaric and uncivilized by saying it's just cultural relativism? The culture there is nothing more than barbarian tribesmen who aren't capable of acting civilized. They're Killing families with machetes, raping and killing children in front of their parents... there's no defense for this. The fact that they need someone to step in shows how incapable they are of acting remotely civilized. For those who believe in cultural relativism, I'd like to hear you defend this culture.

*for the sake of disclosure, I was a soc major who bought into all this "all cultures are equal" garbage when I was in school. Obviously, I've since changed my views. All cultures aren't equal; some are better than others.

 

[shadow_incognito]

Indeed, not all cultures are equal. Heck, some cultures are definitely better than others. But, it needs to be emphasized that the community themselves need to step up and start defending/thinking about themselves. The thought that we are "superior" and we need to fix all the world's problem is the one that got us into this mess in Iraq, or in this case, Somalia, Vietnam, and others. It is painful to see unnecessary death, yet who are we to say that we have the authority to fix all those problems?