Guest or customer?

CJM555 · Post by **CJM555** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:37 pm

LTO wrote:I don't think the guest/customer analogy is particularly good for exploring whether tourists/expats should openly criticize the foreign country they are in. The guest analogy makes sense. 'Guests' do not criticize their host out of courtesy and respect, and that may be analogous to why some argue foreigners should not criticize the ways/foreign country they are in. The other half of the dichotomy seems less applicable to the problem. 'Customers' can criticize because they have paid for a something/some service and therefore have the right to complain if they don't get what they paid for. But is that analogous to what give foreigners the right to criticize the foreign country they are in? That we pay to be here? As if our right/duty to criticize was a function of ownership/having indirectly paid for it. I don't think so. The right to criticize, if there is one, does not derive from having paid for it, whether directly or indirectly. While the 'we are customers' analogy does serve to weaken the 'we are guests' analogy, and correctly so, it does not provide a analogous basis for why we do have the right/duty to criticize.

It's a philosophical question, really, is criticism from a national more meaningful than criticism from a non-national, and why?
This is a key question I think, and points at the basis for the right/duty to criticize. Criticism from the national is more meaningful than from the non-national. The national has a greater right to criticize, to criticize more deeply and vigorously and to be considered more meaningful, not because he has paid for it like a customer, but because, unlike the non-national, he has a much greater, perhaps even unavoidable stake in the country and in the consequences. If the non-national causes too much trouble or change or gets bored with it all, he can always leave and go home. The national OTOH is home and must live with the consequences, and as such the national's stake is not just greater but is categorically different than the non-national. His right to criticize is therefore fundamentally greater and more meaningful than the non-national, though there are plenty of foreign busybodies around who seem think their criticism should be equal to or greater than the national, often for very neo-colonial sounding reasons.

though there are plenty of foreign busybodies around who seem think their criticism should be equal to or greater than the national, often for very neo-colonial sounding reasons.

[/quote]

Feckin hell
'Save as'... File - LTO Bullshit'.

vladimir · Post by **vladimir** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 6:45 pm

Well said.

I'm just amazed he thinks so many people don't see through this BS.

benone · Post by **benone** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 7:26 pm

That appeared to be a well reasoned argument to me. I guess it wasn't though, but rather than just dismiss it as

without any justification, can you tell me why it's BS, or give a counter argument as too why a non nationals criticisms should be viewed the same as a nationals.

Kampong Spooner · Post by **Kampong Spooner** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 7:41 pm

On the flipside though, which British person likes it when...

"Those bloody muslims come over wearing their funny clothes and only speak durka-durka and start with all that Sharia law and making women wear burqas and changing the name of Christmas cos it offends them and banning piggy banks and making chickens halal and blowing up buses and decapitating off-duty soldiers and building mosques with muslamic rayguns and stuff from the Daily Mail and that"?

Nobody.

vladimir · Post by **vladimir** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 9:44 pm

I think the average sane person understands the difference between constructive criticism and decapitation.

How are the voices, lately?

vladimir · Post by **vladimir** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 9:57 pm

benone wrote:can you tell me why it's BS, or give a counter argument as too why a non nationals criticisms should be viewed the same as a nationals.

Are you familiar with the concept of equality?

Equal rights for all, irrespective of race, creed, religion, sexual orientation etc?

Do you think that one should deny someone else the right to criticise something he thinks is wrong, simply because was not born in his country of residence?

Kind of nationalistic logic. Do you like extreme nationalism?

Perhaps you could start by explaining why one human being is of lesser value simply by virtue of a piece of paper, or accident of birth.

Because with equal value come equal rights, otherwise it's just talk.

Next time some idiot drives like a lunatic and kills a few kids with impunity, next time some cop stiffs you for an imaginary driving offence, please: don't complain. We are guests.

Sound sensible?

CJM555 · Post by **CJM555** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 10:09 pm

benone wrote:That appeared to be a well reasoned argument to me. I guess it wasn't though, but rather than just dismiss it as without any justification, can you tell me why it's BS, or give a counter argument as too why a non nationals criticisms should be viewed the same as a nationals.

Scooby, what is the argument being put forward and supported by you ?
Why do you term folk as 'non-national' ?
Do you mean foreigners ?

Kampong Spooner · Post by **Kampong Spooner** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 10:18 pm

My voices are fine. But, really what's the difference between a Wahsabi Paki telling you that alcohol is evil and girls shouldn't dress like total sluts to white do-gooders banging on about human rights and transparency.

*yeah stupid question.

Isn't that the cultural divide? Our logic is totally alien to other's logic (each having pros/cons).

Sure we can complain, liberal natives may agree, but can we, and do we have the right to change a reasonably functioning society?

*italics and bold for Vlad, to make sure the irony is semi-recognised.

CJM555 · Post by **CJM555** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 10:36 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXW-sL5gzHQ

LTO · Post by **LTO** » Sat Jun 20, 2015 11:01 pm

CJM555 wrote:Why do you term folk as 'non-national' ?
Do you mean foreigners ?

vlad coined the term earlier in this thread. I assume he meant non-citizen foreigners. Following his lead, that's how I used it.

Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Re: Guest or customer?

Who is online

Register/Login to CEO with your Social Media Account: