Should we tolerate other cultures?

Ever since David asked the aforementioned question, I can't help but ponder all the various reasons the Spanish and the British give to justify their intolerance of other cultures. Some of the reasons are familiar to me, consistent with the atrocities explained to us in our history classes. I am not surprised that the Spanish believed that those who could not be converted to Christianity were less than human and deserved whatever punishment the Spanish desired to give them. Similarly, I would not be surprised to read that lands were occupied and lives taken due to differences in race or ethnicity. I've heard these stories before, whether they were derived from antiquity or the 20th century. And while I know that America has had her share of intolerant behavior towards other cultures, I take solace in the fact that in the 21st century it's harder for American foreign policy to subjugate other cultures and nations based on their religions, races, ethnicities and other cultural practices. It's not an impossible occurrence, but in this day and age, one's party platform would not include institutional discrimination against an entire culture. I like to think that we have come a long way since "The Requirement."

But Spenser's "A View of the State of Ireland" presents different reasons for Britain's intolerance of Irish culture, reasons that more closely resemble modern concerns. Spenser, as represented by Irenaeus, explains to Eudoxus that the British government should send military forces to Ireland to dominate the Irish because the Irish are so "barbaric" that even British laws cannot civilize them. While Spenser goes to great lengths to exemplify the Irish's barbaric behaviors, what it all comes down to on page 20 is one's ability to support a particular form of government and follow that government's rules. This doesn't seem different from modern concerns. Aren't the Americans the defenders of democracy? It's seems less outrageous for our country to militarily occupy another country if they don't believe in democracy than it does for us to occupy a country because the people practice a different religion. Take Nazi Germany for example. That's an obvious historical example in which a nation did not follow the principles of democracy and it was evident, at a certain point, that the US needed to intervene. But what about in today's world? Can we continue to justify our time in Iraq and other Middle Eastern nations because of their lack of democracy? Do we have the right to be there? And if we stay, do we commit to nation building or is that a lost cause (as some politicians would have it)? It bothers me that Spenser called for Britain to invade and occupy Ireland, but didn't Britain feel threatened? Don't nations have a right to protect themselves? These are things to consider as we move forward in the class.