This week’s topic was a bit scattered across the articles, but it was still really interesting. I want to share the parts I found most fascinating.
One article challenged the traditional idea that North Americans are individualistic. It argued that they’re actually more group-oriented compared to the rest of the world. This changes the way we see the common West = individualism and East = collectivism idea. According to the article, North Americans focus on intergroup competition and identity, while East Asians are more about intragroup harmony. These terms were new to me and helped fill some gaps in my understanding of collectivism. The article also debunked the myth that individualistic societies lack social connections. Instead, it explained that their group ties are just different, not less important. The text also mentioned trust. Americans are more likely to trust a stranger from their ingroup than someone from an outgroup. In contrast, Japanese participants care more about whether they have a direct or indirect relationship with the stranger. While not being sure I think Turkish people would have done what Americans did but the more interesting part is how Turkey seems to be quite in the middle in most of these East vs West discussions since the beginning of lecture just like its geographical position.
Another concept I found interesting was relational mobility. This refers to how easily people can form and leave groups in a society. In high-mobility societies people can switch groups more freely, which encourages competition between groups. In low mobility societies like East Asia relationships are more stable and long term, focusing on harmony within the group.
The social identity theory was another key point. It says that just being aware of belonging to a different group is enough to create prejudice. This highlights how small things can trigger intergroup bias and shows our psychological need for belonging. It’s a reminder of how easily tensions between groups can rise, even without big conflicts. History also plays a big role in shaping cultural identity. The shared knowledge and interpretations of history influence intergroup relations. History helps legitimize group identities but also keep conflicts alive. This can of course be understood from many things but in my opinion one of the best and funniest ways to see it to visit any forum or internet media related to the Balkans. It is fascinating to see how easily a conflict can be started between neighbor countries of the region.
Lastly, the idea of “enemyship” was fascinating. This refers to a personal relationship of hate and a desire to see someone fail. It’s a foreign concept for Western cultures where having enemies isn’t seen as normal and might even seem paranoid. But in Ghana, it’s considered natural partly because close relationships can create tension, but also due to the low relational mobility.
Leave a Reply