Your article clearly describes that as a concept that as been put forward for debate but hasn’t been generally accepted. And it shouldn’t be accepted. It’s just an attempt to use people’s rightful aversion to prejudice based on skin color to Trojan Horse cultural relativism through the gate. Cultural relativism is not morally required. People’s attitudes, beliefs, customs, habits, and ways of looking at the world substantively impact the societies people create. And we can judge cultures on that basis. In the Star Trek future, people of all ethnicities think and act like Anglo-Americans, not like Bangladeshis.

▲

mullingitover an hour ago | parent [-]

> In the Star Trek future, people of all ethnicities think and act like Anglo-Americans, not like Bangladeshis.

That's a weird way to cap off an endorsement of cultural racism? A series of fictional stories about the future, by and for Americans, tells a story that Americans would want to hear: QED, monolithic American culture is obviously the future. Let's get this paper submitted for peer review.

▲

rayiner 28 minutes ago | parent [-]

That term isn’t an accepted thing, as your own article points out. Your idea is also itself racist by treating race and culture as linked. I guess that in your version of Star Trek the Desi characters would be showing up hours late to dinner. You’d have bridge scenes where face saving communications and excessive deference to seniority impedes information flow and gets everyone killed. I think the actual Star Trek paints a much more optimistic and hopeful vision of a post-racial society where everyone in the Federation adopts Anglo-American culture and values.

	▲	mullingitover a minute ago \| parent [-]
		> That term isn’t an accepted thing, as your own article points out. Gravity and the spherical shape of the earth also aren't 'accepted things,' this 'I don't like it so it's not real' argument isn't really a coherent counterpoint.