Сoexistence

The peace imperative is significant as cultures affect the way people communicate with one another. It is also significant in the sense that it calls for learning about people, norms, similarities, and differences so that populations may better coexist. When coming across certain norms, people tend to be able to better relate to and respect others. With different backgrounds applying to us all individually, we all develop our own identities. In spite of the peace imperative’s purpose, history suggests that conflict between groups based on different cultural aspects such as genders and races has been increasing worldwide. An example of that would be Canada having difficulties with establishing a cultural identity when American media dominates all fields of media. Canada in turn resents being culturally dominated at the expense of U.S. popular culture continuously penetrating all forms of content.

According to Martin and Nakayama (2018), “It would be naive to assume that simply understanding the issues of intercultural communication would end war and intercultural conflict, but these problems do underscore the need for individuals to learn more about social groups other than their own” (p. 28). The peace imperative reaches out for comprehension as well as taking action. However, when it comes to popular culture the only action that can be carried out would be that of maintaining it through intercultural contact. What comes of maintaining it is resistance, that is, resistance to indulging in misleading representations of various social and cultural groups. We as people are always entangled in our identities, which helps in guiding, or decoding, our interpretations of them. Encoding then plays its part in the consumption and resistance of popular culture as it relies on the formation of identities.

As soon as people decide to largely view other cultures through the lens of popular culture, that is when power relations embedded in the dynamics of popular culture play out and negatively impact people of different groups as their racial, ethnic, or even religious beliefs and norms are targeted. Ultimately, the acquisition of peace itself is at stake when societal members themselves reinforce negative prejudices and uphold stereotypes. Martin and Nakayama (2018) found, “negative portrayals are remembered more than positive portrayals, are more arousing and therefore are more influential in the development of stereotypes” (p. 375). Although representations are problematic, it is through popular culture that relations around the world are explained, that we as people try to understand the fundamentals of other cultures, and that we become aware of issues in other nations. 4. Identities are developed through our communicative interactions with others through the means of having messages between people negotiated, reinforced, and challenged.

Hecht and Choi (2011) claims that “individuals internalize social interactions, relationships, and a sense of self into identities through communication. In turn, identity is expressed or enacted through communication” (p. 139). Abiding by social conduct, members will share an aspect of their group; be it a language, belief, or norm with another member within that same group that is then recognized as the sense of selfhood. For instance, people that identify with hispanic ethnicity or the spanish language in itself share the aspect of speaking spanish; a marker of outsider status. When exercising that same aspect elsewhere, say in the workplace, it involves the individuals trying to manage their interactions by making components of their cultural identities more or less visible to others. They choose to do this so that they may limit the amount of backlash they would be facing in settings including but not limited to the workplace: exclusion, harassment, and discrimination. When you speak a language that is outside of a dominant group and it is not validated, that part of your identity alone becomes the aspect that defines you.

Ethnocentrism and classism then come into play as a power differentiation is established, which then results in the more powerful treating the less powerful as inferior. Due to the fact that out-groups are more susceptible to negative experiences, their mental and physical health deteriorate, their work attitudes and behavior are weakened, and their economic and organizational status are maintained at the lower levels and thus forces members of minority groups into being socialized with having less in comparison to majority groups. In consonance with Bergman (2008) “language conveys sociocultural norms and values and is used to socialize individuals into societal roles” (p. 43).We as people create our own identities through the use of linguistics; language shapes reality. Martin and Nakayama (2018) address that, “according to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, language defines our experience” (p. 227). Overall, the relation between identity and language is as follows; language is the mold that encompasses our identities as it defines the ethnic group we belong to, our social status, and our place in society. 6. The difference between the individualistic culture and the collectivist culture is that one focuses on looking after one’s self while the other gears more toward establishing in-groups so that the success and survival of the individuals involved is ensured in exchange for their loyalty. According to Martin and Nakayama (2018) “individualism, often cited as a value held by European Americans, places importance on individuals rather than on families, work teams, or other groups” (p. 99).

On the other hand, Martin and Nakayama (2018) claim that “people from more collectivistic societies, like those in Central and South America, Asia, and many Arab societies, place a great deal of importance on extended families and group loyalty” (p.99). One culture that is strongly individualistic would be Europe. The qualities embedded into this culture that indicates that it is more individualistic than it is collectivistic is that of its psychological consequences of perceived wealth disparities, its distinct model of selfhood characterised by commitment to others and egalitarian values that are dynamic, its adoption of the autonomy-embeddedness dimension, it’s identity being largely seen as White and of Christian heritage, and as reported by Mikucka (2014), “in Europe individualism correlates with higher well-being cost of own unemployment” (p. 1). As far as being unemployed goes, it is a sign of a lack of success and therefore allows for the individualistic culture to increase the well-being cost that comes with unemployment.

It is not so far-fetched to think that the individualistic culture embedded in Europe itself moderates the well-being consequences of unemployment through the use of expectations and social norms. Particularly, the well-being cost of unemployment is higher in individualistic countries within Europe due to receiving less social support and undergoing overwhelming social pressure and ostracism targeted towards the unemployed. Gobel (2018) states, “indeed, in the European context, existing cultures and their influence are defined by different historical, political and economic circumstances, and multiple and distinct majority cultures often co-exist within the same country” (p. 3). In spite of the fact of there being some European cultures that share distinctive features, there is still a substantial enough diversity that exists across these same cultures.