A critical question in the field of comparative politics seems to be that of the role of cultural and ethnic differences in society. On the one hand, Huntington argues that the immobility of culture makes it a permanent obstacle to unity. On the other, Collier's research seems to show that ethnically diverse societies are less likely to devolve into internal conflict than homogenous ones. While these theories would appear to contradict one another, they ultimately demonstrate an important about the importance of cultural diversity to the success of a society.
Huntington is indeed correct that one cannot change his culture as easily as he could his political or economic positions. But Huntington is perhaps too hasty in his assumption that cultural diversity is an obstacle to society unity. Rather, in an age where in many parts of the world, lines between cultures are being blurred by increased travel, communication, and even intermarriage, societies are moving farther and farther away from defining themselves in strictly ethnic or cultural terms.
Societies that define themselves along ethnic boundaries have a certain security in that Huntington is correct, culture is immovable.The problem that inevitably arises, however, is that culture does not, particularly in modern society, determine ideology.If societies are established on an ethnic foundation alone, ideological conflicts would almost inevitably lead to unrest.In contrast, if ethnically diverse societies were to form based on a common ideology, as Collier suggests, then that society is much less likely to deteriorate into civil unrest.
Ultimately, while the role of cultural diversity in society can and will continue to be debated, the evidence put forth by Collier and Huntington leads to the conclusion that cultural diversity is to the betterment of society – rather than its detriment.
No comments:
Post a Comment