This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Do we have any nation where minority rights are as important as the rights of the majority?
The TED talk 'Danger of a Single Story' by Chimamanda Adichie is quite insightful.
But let us consider a democracy; in a democracy it is the decision of the majority that shapes the society. The media targets the majority and tries to please them.
Is it possible for it to be otherwise?
An effect of the media is that the voice of the majority is presented as the decent and right choice. A sort of societal face.
Only a few African nations have a prosperous majority. Some African states are dysfunctional; there are those who seem to be constantly at war.
So, I believe that some stories are believable than others; some things are easy to find in a certain place than in some other place;
some things are usual and common in certain places. There may be a few dots on a white wall, but if the dots are not significant in size we will still call it a white wall.
This affects storytellers and the audience in various way. Is it possible to avoid the art, social and media classification called 'mainstream'?
Maria Dimengo
David Hamilton 50+
Hendrix, Marvin Gaye, Al Gree, Sam Cooke, Louis Armstrong, this could become an enourmouse list very quickly, that certainly represents ten percent of hit songs.
I think Donald Trump is an idiot, but I once heard him give an answer to a dumb question, that was absolutely brilliant. Stephen Colbert "What's the most popular thing in the world?" Donald Trump "Music". I think the voice of minorities is still relatively well represented, as a percentage of society... but often times the images are not positive. What is popular in modern rap music would be a great example of this. Back then though, despite enormous social problems, African Americans really had a prominent and positive voice in modern culture, that was not based on stereotypes or white walling... in my humble opinion.
Culture should evolve to a place where everyones voices can be heard in various art forms and still reach the mainstream. I don't just want to hear American stories... Those are just the stories that get marketed to me most often. Obviously other cultures appreciate some of our films and music. Kurosawa, the Japanese film maker is almost universally seen as one of the greatest to ever live. If you haven't seen "Ikiru", "Seven Samurai", or "Record of a Living Being" they are all wonderful.
Canada is incredibly multi cultural. New Zealand and Australia do pretty well. China is very diverse internally. I think the whole world is getting closer to finding the proper balance of power between majority and minority, it has been too slow and painful a process, of course.
Jake Maddox
Debra Smith 200+
I hate the uninformed view that emotions are entirely separate from reason - nothing could be further from scientific truth.
Here is the BEST:
http://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_listening_to_shame.html
In the financial field:
http://www.ted.com/talks/halla_tomasdottir.html
I doubt you can receive this from an artist but it is a profoundly interesting scientific finding:
http://www.ted.com/talks/john_walker_re_creates_great_performances.html
Emotional connection is what changes the world - even the scientific world:
http://www.ted.com/talks/dean_kamen_the_emotion_behind_invention.html
Jake Maddox
Debra Smith 200+
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
This is exactly my point. Hotel Rwanda is about families fleeing from war; Blood Diamonds is about the Sierra Leonean civil war, Tears of the Sun is about the Nigerian Civil War; Roots and Amistad are about slavery; and The Colour Purple is about a dysfunctional African American family.
This is my point. There is a tendency for films about minorities to focus on their 'struggles' and 'sufferings' as if all minorities do is struggle and suffer. Of course a lot of minority groups are suffering; and so many African nations are at war.
What happens to a storyteller who (against expectation) does not focus of the 'struggles' and 'sufferings' in his or her story?
Jake Maddox
David Hamilton 50+
"You mean you want to make it about civil rights? That was going on at the time, we could do that, but it would change the story a lot" my friend replied.
"No... It's just, this is a really simple story about a working class guy... Why can't he just be black, and we don't change anything? There were cities where black men just went to work in the 70's..." I replied.
"He can't be black.... Not unless it's what the story is about" said my friend, and looked a bit depressed. He had actually worked in big budget affairs, where I mostly worked on small projects with my friends, so I had no idea what he was talking about.
"Of course he can... Why couldn't he? There's no story, that you can't write, about any race of person anymore?" I claimed.
"No, you don't understand.... These are not my words... I have been in this pitch meeting, and old Hollywood, is still in charge. You are not allowed to make a film with an African American lead, unless the plot has something to do with being black in America... That is the only formula they have proven they can sell"
"How the hell do they still get away with that?" I exclaimed, furiously.
"One side, says "white people won't go to see it"... Another side says "It's inauthentic"... The other side says "It's racist for anyone who isn't black to write that story". So you can't write a major Hollywood film with an African American lead, without that being part of the story, and him overcoming it."
It was a dumbfounding and depressing conversation, to say the least.
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
When there is a story about rich black Africans living in the nice neighbourhoods of Abuja, Lekki(Lagos) ; isn't there a tendency for most people who are familiar with the images of the poor Africa to disbelieve the story of rich Africans and ask for the 'authentic' African story?
Mackenzie Andersen
Sean Champ
If the mainstream is a market, and if people with goods and services to sell (to the mainstream) are the industry, the industry would naturally seek a market, even in the sense of ideas. People may look for narratives that seem familiar. So, when familiarized with "Mainstream thinking," people may seek just the same.
Not all life may occur in any one cultural mainstream, though. No industry is an island to itself.
In a more personal comment, I think it's safe to say that Diversity keeps the mainstream afloat
Luke Hobbs
John Frum 30+
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
John Frum 30+
Let's take the example of food instead of films. I haven't been to South Africa, so let's assume South Africa has one 'authentic' local cuisine. Let's also assume that South African Indians have their own cuisine which has evolved to use the ingredients available in South Africa, but prepared in a manner distinctly preferred by South African Indians, but neither by other South Africans nor by 'proper' Indians. Would you claim that South African Indian food 'right to be eaten'? What action would you propose be taken against people who do not want to eat it because they prefer 'authentic' South African food?
I'd probably watch a film about South African Indians, if it were well made. But I'd find it absurd, and even a bit distastefully imposing, if the maker insists that *he* has a right that *I* watch the movie.
Christopher Tiller
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
elizabeth muncey 10+
Elizabeth Gu 30+
It's possible "to avoid the art, social and media classification called 'mainstream' ", if you ask me.
Sometimes very few, and weak people's opinion can be regarded as a crucial opinion in a society.
And quite often, their opinion is likely to tell people the truth whereas the majority of people are often wrong about many things—needless to say.
If the society we live in pursues individual's happiness, social media wouldn't ignore, but rather value minority's rights.
If we pretend that we're satisfied with the fact that at least the majority of us are happy even though the minority is unhappy and miserable, we, the majority is lying to ourselves considering that there's always a possibility that we can also be part of the minority groups. It directly indicates that we're insecure because of this probable, yet fairly dreadful possibility.
Provided that we can always speak up even if we are just weak minority groups and our rights are valued no matter what, our guaranteed happiness is neither conditional nor superficial since we know that our rights wouldn't be undermined.
Nations and societies including social media have to consider minority's right to be as important as majority's because ultimately, it's for all of us for sure.
I guess justice is not just some kind of noble idea, but fundamentally for all of people, or should I say, all of individuals…? It’s quite important to acknowledge that everyone deserves to be considered important.
Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
The majority is only not a tyranny when it is well informed.
Rick Ryan 10+
And being a "modern capitalistic" democracy isn't the determining factor, nor should it be. Don't confuse "democracy" with "republic". A democracy means the citizens get to vote for their leaders. But in a "Republic" government, once the voter grants their vote to a given candidate, the voter has granted that candidate the "right" to make decisions FOR the voter...not to only make decisions the voter AGREES with.
I totally agree that most people don't use "critical thinking" in their everyday decision-making. But to say that journalism alone is responsible for "free people" not having access to factual unbiased information is not accurate. I choose where I want to get my information from. If I could NOT do that, it is quite possible TED would not even exist here.
Your "fear (that) most 'free people' no longer think through critical ISSUES on their own" appears invalid. Everybody thinks through issues on their own prior to making any decision about them. But I will agree that if they allow themselves to be manipulated in their own final decision by any outside influence like special interest groups, advertising, or group-think associated with membership in a organization they belong to (or other factors), then they may not be using good individual critical thinking skills.
This discussion centers around "rights". To introduce "modern capatalist democracies" into the discussion as a negative factor affecting the rights of either the majority or minority appears off-topic. Last time I checked, the minority has just as much "right" to get rich as the majority does.
Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
I would agree with you that modern democracies are synonymous with capitalism..and not long ago moderated a conversation on that there at TED..Income equality was never expressed as a goal of our society. No expression of freedom from want, human dignity, safety and security in old age, right to a quality education, stewardship for earth was included in the constitutions of modern democracies, nor in the world's first democracy in Greece.
Feyisayo, who I know from other conversations here at TED to be a very wise and deeply insightful man, is asking a key question about what we mean by freedom and democracy in asking what impacts and costs, what losses are associated with the"majority narrative" and its reflection in mainstream culture..art, architecture, music etc.
In my community we often say there is no unity without diversity. We mean by this a unity that is very different from the main stream narrative, the tyranny of the majority..it is more about how a truly inclusive society, where all voices and cultures and traditions are in the narrative of a nation what emerges is a co-intelligence a common wisdom that is about humanity, about earth, about serving life.
Thang Tran
I really dislike this loathing of a "biased journalism." ALL JOURNALISM, IN FACT, ALL texts have biases. It's the first thing they teach you in a liberal college education. As long as the text was written by a person with an opinion, there is a bias in the text, either in what they choose to say or what they choose not to say. This post has a bias, the post above me has a bias. With this in mind, to accuse journalists of bias is absurd. False reporting or blatant lies might be what you are looking for. Welcome to the rhetorical world!
Debra Smith 200+
Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
We have had many in depth conversations here at TED on the decline of the 4th estate and its implications for democracy , freedom. and human rights. I refer you in particular to two we had last year with Alisa Miller of NPR . See Also Alisa's Ted Talk which describes the structural changes which result in in complete and inaccurate reporting..ege fewer news bureaus, fewer personnel, more reliance on fewer sources who control the flow of information.
When the control of information is specifically about manipulating the opinions of the majority, lulling the majority into a detachment from reality which gives the plutonomy free reign, . A recent example
was main stream media coverage of the Egyptian uprising. and the Libyan Civil War.
When I refer to the "tyranny of the majority", I am referring principally to a majority who are alienated, disenfranchised, and not engaged in the hard work of being an engaged, informed vigilant citizen in a free nation. majority who are easily manipulated into compliance with an agenda that doesn't serve humanity, doesn't serve life, doesn't serve earth.
Without the tyranny of a disenfranchised disengaged majority it would not be possible for plutonomy to hold control over all of us..it would not be possible for virtually every modern democracy to be a corporatocracy instead of a conviviocracy.
In part, classrooms are part of the problem. Schools don't teach critical thinking..hey don't "grow" and cultivate individual empowerment or foster an inner alinement with service to humanity, to earths people now and in the future, to earth herself now and in the future.. Main stream education grooms future generations into compliance and complacency.
Rick Ryan 10+
The Constitution allows for each individual's rights, and there are numerous examples of where the "majority vote" instituted a law (or some other activity) which was reversed by the Supreme Court as being unconstitutional. One recent example was a State where the majority of voters, through petition and getting the issue placed on a ballot, voted to mandate "Intellignet Design" be taught in public schools. This was ultimately disallowed as being unconstitutional towards an individual U.S. citizen, whether they were in the majority or minority. And according to most surveys, "non-theists" would be in the minority in the U.S.
Overall, in my opinion, the U.S. has a fairly good record of making sure the minority gets a fair deal, even if the majority wants it a different way. Especially when it comes down to individual's rights protecting the basic freedoms of the individual citizen. There are also numerous instances where the minority was protected from the wishes of the majority in the 6 areas of discrimination.
Is it perfect? Of course not. It can be slow, costly, and confrontational to protect minority rights when the majority chooses otherwise. But I believe it answers "Yes" to the original subject question of this discussion.
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
Rick Ryan 10+
Your original question asked about the "importance" of the majority vs the minority. That is a "thought process" decision...a philosophical one. Implementing a system to protect the rights of the minority, and executing the processes to make that happen, will always be much more difficult.
Debra Smith 200+
Rick Ryan 10+
The Court did not rule that lying was ALWAYS fine and should be tolerated. They only ruled it was not unconstitutional in the circumstances surrounding the case presented to them. It many cases it is impossible to make a "one size fits all" ruling when you are concerned with the rights of over 300 million people.
The Court's ruling still leaves many circumstances where lying or "making a false statement" is illegal. If I take an oath as a witness to testify in court, then I lie during my testimony, I will be held in contempt of court and subject to prosecution. If I sign a legal document (like in the military) that has the warning on it that if I provide false information I am subject to prosecution and imprisonment, I can still suffer those consequences for "lying" on the document.
What the Court could NOT allow to happen was make EVERY lie told by 300 million+ people a crime. You would have chaos. If you asked me if I bought you a birthday present for your birthday next week (hypothetical) and I said "no" so I could surprise you, should I be subject to prosecution? Would I be being unconstitutional if I lied to you that way? A worse scenario..."Innocent until proven guilty" is a foundation of our Justice system. I can not be forced to testify against myself. It is the prosecution's responsibility to produce evidence to convict me. If they ask me, "Did you do it?" and I say "No", should I face a higher punishement because I lied even if I knew I had done it?
People lie. Human nature. I agree if I lie then my own integrity is in question. But not all lies result in a loss of justice that should be handled through government-supported prosecution. The Court's ruling supported that justice.
Debra Smith 200+
Can you understand how and why this so deeply upsets the world and why as an advocate for the USA it makes my position untenable?
BTW I TAd critical thinking for 5 different profs.
Rick Ryan 10+
Absolutely, Debra. But I learned a long time ago I cannot please the entire world as a whole. There are just too many variables (people?) who will have opposing views.
Believe me, I share your frustrations on many things I have read in your posts. Your example of Canada allowing many of our airplanes to divert and land on 9/11, and the Canadian people treating the passengers so well. Regardless of how humane you are (as an individual or an entire nation), you will not receive the gratitude you deserve for that from everybody. At the LEAST, the terrorists would think you had done wrong. And I agree there are probably some Americans who would not think you deserved gratitude for it. But not all of us would feel that way. I try not to judge an entire country (or any group for that matter) based solely on the actions of some individual members.
One of your posts struck a chord in me that I have also had to share a personal frustration about. You mentioned in it that you felt America did not appreciate nor recognize the military contributions of Canada in (if I remember correctly) WW2. Well, I can't speak for my country as a whole, nor any leadership (or lack of) that may have contributed to that. But as an individual, I am well aware of that type of frustration. One of the most personally moving videos I found on TED since I have been here was this one:
http://www.ted.com/talks/peter_van_uhm_why_i_chose_a_gun.html
Of course, not everyone will agree with what is said in it. Sometimes it isn't always an easy, and arguably even, a "moral" process to achieve a better world. But it was why I "Chose the Gun" too for my 25 years I served in the military. I, as an individual, recognize the contributions of Canada throughout history in also trying to achieve that better world.
Debra Smith 200+
I have tried to diaogue on this very sight, respectfully, I assure you, with military people. They ususally do not stay long despite almost kid glove treatment. Canadians have an excellent relationship with the Dutch. They do remember. it is not just that all of your people do not remember, RIck- your people are viciously self righteous about it towards us and NO AMERICAN I EVER met remembers but they all give me that same crap about our hiding in your shadow. I think you know how I feel about that especially since the world has been very polite and quiet about the American version of WW2 since WW2. Both the Dutch and members of the British royal famlly spent the war in Canada. Our capital has a Tulip festival EVERY year because the Dutch still send tulips to us. Maybe you are still ticked by the fact that red coats including Canadians burned down your White house in the war of 1812 for daring to invade us?
http://youtu.be/Pf-nZZg3iBw
Do you remember how suddenly we were the BAD GUYS on all your TV shows when we refused to join you in IRAQ? Did you ever apologize to the FRENCH for the disrespect they were shown at that time? Yep, the big vilian on LOST was from Toronto! We were even the bad guys on Home Improvements and I called my son and daughter in law in Saudi Arabia at the embassy to warn them and they said the number one TV show in Saudi was a Canadian show.
I do not expect everyone to love me, Rick. My stance here is not exactly popular and I do know what happened to the Dixie Chicks- which was WAY beyond what any fair nation would do to any artists. Your nation magnified Toby Keith (who does have a great voice) so that you could kick the stuffing out of the wrong nation. That is just wrong headed thinking.
Rick Ryan 10+
No American you ever met said anything good about Canada? Strange. I spent 4 of my 25 Air Force years working in Cheyenne Mt, Colorado Springs, alongside numerous Canadians stationed there too as part of NORAD. We got along fine and respected each other and what we were trying to achieve. No Canadian I met there told me my country was...whatever.
As for the television show references, I try not to form my world opinions based on those. In fact, I try not to watch the shows you referenced at all. In any case, I have no control over the content of what the writers, producers, directors, and sponsors of those shows propogate. They feed the mass audiences who watch them with what those audiences tell them to feed them. It's sad, but I just Googled the "Top 10 TV Shows of 2012" ratings. There is not ONE dedicated educational show listed, despite the plethora of cable TV accessability to the public. Honestly...I'm only here now because I don't want to vomit watching "Beavis and Butthead" or "The Real Housewives of Atlanta". But as long as the majority of the population wants to watch "Dancing With the Stars" instead of the Science or Discovery Channels, I'm kinda stuck. My Constitution prevents me from forcing my way into their homes, tying them to their chairs, and changing their channels.
By the way...I think the Dixie Chicks got screwed too. But it wasn't my "nation" that did it. It was a sub-section of the population who got enough people to believe that Freedom of Speech was less important than personal agendas so they would quit buying the Chicks music or threaten radio stations to quit playing it.
And I really like Celine Dion and Shania Twain, so maybe we have things in common yet. Although I had to pay $260 American Dollars to get a decent seat at Celine's Las Vegas show here. Did she have to pay any Canadian income tax on that American money?
Scott Koenraadt
Purshotam Singh
walter crockett
Debra Smith 200+
James Zhang 30+
Gail . 50+
Gail . 50+
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
Gail . 50+
It is the job of citizens to inform themselves rather than become sheeple who are controlled by those with money interests that cause harm to both the majority and the minority. It's all smoke and mirrors with them.
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
Ken brown 30+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
But more to the point, I don't know that I would say that the voice of the media here presents "the voice of the majority as the right and decent choice." There are tremendous disagreements about so many key issues, including opinions of what is right and decent, that no one could accurately think that there is some near homogeneous majority view on right and wrong. About 150 million people disagree with the other 150 million.
James Zhang 30+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
It is often only OTHER people who are mainstream in a person's eyes.
James Zhang 30+
"It is often only OTHER people who are mainstream in a person's eyes."
Hmm, I'll have to think about this one...
Max Gutapfel
That being said id go back on topic and say that as far as i know there cant be in the form politics currently works,... politicians are trying to get votes and some smaller parties (in germany) seem to try gettign support from the minorities as the majority elects the same party again and again anyways.
In a democracy of massmedia (the media votes for people ... or makes them vote/not vote) minorities just cant shout loud enough.
James Zhang 30+
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Hornby cites Wilson's swift summation of cultural snobbery:
It's always other people following crowds, whereas my own taste reflects my specialness
(This is in reference to the idea that people tend not easily to see themselves as mainstream but easily attach that label to others.)
James Zhang 30+
James Zhang 30+
No it isn't, because 'mainstream' is the standard, it is the thing that everything else reacts to. If there was no such thing as 'mainstream' then there would be no standard, and the Nujabes-style hip hop wouldn't be considered "underground" (which is a term used to basically describe anti-mainstream) anymore.
If there were no such thing as "bad" music, how can we tell if certain music is good or phenomenally great?
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
Dont forget that the fact that an idea or a practice has popular support does not mean such can not be wrong.
James Zhang 30+
Something that's bad is subjective. If enough people believe the thing is bad, then that thing is the new mainstream standard for "bad". So if enough people think something is good, that becomes mainstream, as you have said, enough people have painted the wall white. What makes something mainstream and standard is the number of people who use/believe in it. I personally don't like mainstream music, but I am only one of a handful of guys who want to paint the wall black.
"Dont forget that the fact that an idea or a practice has popular support does not mean such can not be wrong."
True dat, mainstream is directly correlated to popularity, and independent of what's good/bad or right/wrong.
Debra Smith 200+
BTW I am not bragging about this= we are just good at keeping track of the ways we screw up and try hard to make sure we never forget so you will often see our national failures on infomercials where we remind ourselves of things we did well and ways we screwed up - like the way we built our national railroads.
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
Debra Smith 200+
http://youtu.be/o87MgkGAqeU
Part of the Canadian spirit we are proud of comes from what we were notL
http://youtu.be/5zlnoH5lCsk
Underground railroad from the USA ended in my little town where I raised my kids.
http://youtu.be/fCy-c4EQVWQ
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
I know the importance of focussing on the story first, but filmmaking is capital intensive, and it would seem a filmmaker has to observe the audience's tastes and make something that would sell.
Debra Smith 200+
Jake Maddox
Fritzie Reisner 100+
That prohibition was lifted maybe fifty years ago.
Debra Smith 200+
Here is another Canadian moment:
http://youtu.be/cJSta2LPi2Y
The good thing in this one is that is shows the Canadian propensity to always remember a kindness.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
A storyteller who aims at maximum social impact would prefer the mainstream media to the museum.
Fritzie Reisner 100+
Debra Smith 200+
Ken brown 30+
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/dieppe-remembered-70-years-later-through-a-grandfathers-red-leather-journal/article4487961/?cmpid=rss1&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheGlobeAndMail-Front+%28The+Globe+and+Mail+-+Latest+News%29
http://docalexander.wordpress.com/
What a way to remember and pay homage to a family member
Debra Smith 200+
Debra Smith 200+
an uncle on my mother's side explained to me that my father's brother was a hero who helped to liberate Holland during the 2nd world war. I was an adult and I never knew because no one ever talked about it. I found this on Wikipedia:
The regiment landed in Italy on 19 December 1943 at Naples and saw action soon and frequently thereafter. The bloody battles of Cassino and the Liri Valley, the Metfa Crossing, Ceprano, The Gothic Line, Missano Ridge, Coriano, the Lamone River Crossing, and Coventello were grim testimony to the regiment’s fighting effectiveness. In February 1945, the Hussars sailed from Italy to Southern France, and then moved by rail to Northwest Europe. After refitting the tanks, the regiment went into action in Holland, breaking through to Putten in mid-April. The regiment then moved north for the final actions of the war at the Delfzijl Pocket where 3,000 German soldiers surrendered to the regiment. On 26 January 1946, the regiment arrived in Halifax and the next day reached Sussex, New Brunswick where it was demobilized.