No, you talked extensively about what you think culture or heritage does but you never clearly say what it is. Rambling references over many posts where you constantly change terminology and use exaggeration to wildly different degrees are not a definition. It’s like saying cigarettes cause cancer and thinking you defined cigarettes. Provide a clear concise definition of heritage in your own words, because you haven’t done that.
“You even recognize I gave you my definitions in our past” no I didn’t because the definition that you made up is exclusively in your head which is why I’m trying to get you to say it explicitly and clearly. and I suspect that you are realizing that you don’t have a coherent notion of what culture or heritage are which is why your terminology has changed so much and why everything is vague allusions about how it’s so bad without ever saying what it is.
“Please provide me an example of a culture which does not apply peer pressure to enforce its heritage on the people living inside it.”. Not relevant. I didn’t say that society doesn’t apply pressure I said it’s a matter of the degree of the pressure. Please provide an example of a culture without heritage… after you actually define what you think heritage is
"If two peoples with different heritages meet what do you think happen? " When I met my Sihk neighbor we had a short but pleasant chat. I wave to him when I see him on walks in the neighborhood.
“Even if one despises aspects of his own heritage? Who is fiddling with definitions now?” You are because you added that question to change the target being despised.
“I stated multiple times that heritages can have positive aspects” cool then your protip was bullshit and you are backsliding on your stance exactly like I said.