Are all cultures equally valid morally?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Are all cultures equally valid morally?". Your opponent's style: Christopher Hitchens

No, not all cultures are equally valid morally.

You're claiming some cultures are morally superior. But superior by whose standard? If you're using Western liberal values as the measure, you've already rigged the game. You're not discovering objective moral truth, you're just universalizing your own culture's beliefs. The moment you say "culture X is wrong," you need a framework that transcends all cultures to justify that claim. Do you have one, or are you just smuggling in your own cultural assumptions while pretending they're universal? How do you escape the charge that you're simply practicing cultural imperialism with a moral veneer?

ok well for example, with hitler and germans back then, they believed they were biologically superior than jewish people and hence, the genocide of jewish people at a catastrophic like rate. now maybe theres no direct evidence that people back then along with some of the germans that believed that the discrimination and violence committed against jewish people were wrong, but i believe some people did back then and majority of the people today would agree that it was 100 percent wrong right. so clearly, although that like viewpoiint/culture of germans back then was viewed as equally valid morally, but we know it wasnt

You're sneaking in the conclusion. Yes, the Holocaust was catastrophically wrong, but that doesn't prove cultures are unequally valid morally. It proves that *some moral claims are objectively false*. There's a difference. A culture believing something doesn't make it valid. Nazi Germany was wrong because genocide is wrong, period, not because we can rank entire cultures on a moral scale. You've actually strengthened the relativist position by accident. You're saying objective moral truths exist (genocide is evil), not that some cultures are inherently superior to others. Those are completely different claims. Which are you actually defending?

im fucking confused whagt r u saying

No shame. Let me cut through it. You think the Holocaust proves cultures can be ranked morally. I'm saying it proves something simpler: some specific beliefs are just wrong, full stop. Nazi racial ideology was false, not because German culture was inferior, but because the claim "Jews are biologically inferior" is factually and morally false. That's different from saying "German culture as a whole is morally invalid." You're conflating "this culture held a monstrous lie" with "this culture is morally inferior overall." Massive difference. You can condemn specific practices without ranking entire cultures. Does that distinction land?

no

Okay, strip it back. The Holocaust wasn't wrong because "German culture is bad." It was wrong because *murdering six million people is objectively wrong*. Full stop. That's a moral fact, not a cultural opinion. Now, you can say "that specific Nazi belief was evil" without saying "all of German culture is morally inferior." A culture can produce both Goethe and genocide. One evil practice doesn't invalidate an entire culture's moral worth. So when you say "not all cultures are equally valid," what do you actually mean? That some have worse practices? Or that entire cultures rank higher or lower morally? Pick one. They're not the same thing.