Cultures Without Borders

In Dr. Weaver’s speech, on The Evolution of International Communications as a Field of Study in 2007, he introduces the seemingly obvious idea that domestic and international issues are interrelated. We won’t have success going abroad and representing our country, as diplomats, soldiers or tourists, if we don’t understand our own culture and what is going on within it. Businesses won’t have success if they assume that doing things the American way (or the white, male way) is the best and only way to do business.

Weaver showed support for the fact that Cross Cultural Communication training helps reduce the dropout rate for government and businesses alike, saving time and money and increasing efficiency. In the past 50 years, it’s become increasingly obvious how international communications must be linked with international relations and international economics. It has also become clearer just how much our communication can impact cultures all over the world. In some cases, as Margaret Mead’s study concluded, what communication technology we introduced was absorbed, giving people knowledge or opportunities they did not have before. In other cases it was rejected (the radio was the example, and if the battery ran out, well, it’ll be a lovely box the children can play with) or it destroyed. Weaver explains that many people outside of the US, view modernization as “Americanization,” which should give us reason to pause when we eagerly wish to impart our technological advances and democratic ideals to developing countries.

With all our knowledge about other cultures and how they mix or stay separate, we should have a greater understanding of how important our culture becomes to us. Of course, there is no “We Are the World” moment, because globalization makes people more protective of their own culture and increases their awareness of it, but it can also increase our ability to see beyond ourselves and our borders. The unfortunate flip side, Weaver notes, is that the more one absorbs about the world, the increased chance there is that fear will be a likely outcome. Samuel Huntington’s Clash of the Civilizations is a good example of this. His fear of multiculturalism brings to light people’s confusion about how presently the United States is walking the line between assimilation and acculturation—being absorbed wholly or keeping both cultures (speaking English in the public sphere, and Spanish in the private sphere, for example).

Because our cultural differences don’t disappear upon contact or after extended periods of exposure, our need to understand and effectively communicate comes in to play. And the focus must be on communicating with people. Our solutions might be great for some ideas, but not necessarily for all, which is why Weaver ends by suggesting that the US needs to listen and contemplate input from other countries in order to move forward successfully.