CULTURAL SECURITY
Dr Monika Gabriela Bartoszewicz | MASARYK UNIVERISTY
AUTUMN 2018
ROADMAP:
• Week 1: Introduction to the course. What is cultural security.
• Week 2: : History and theories of cultural security.
• Week 3: Identity and belonging.
• Week 4: Nationalisation of culture.
• Week 5: Cultural universalism.
• Week 6: Religion as a security issue.
• Week 7: Globalisation of culture.
• Week 8: The West and the Rest: non-Western approaches to culture in world affairs.
• Week 9: European Community – multicultural policies in contemporary Europe.
• Week 10: Clash of cultures.
• Week 11: Culture and Violence: cultural underpinnings of conflicts.
• Week 12: Main cultural security challenges.
• Week 13: Consolidation and summary.
RECAP:
• What is culture what is civilisation;
• Two traditions;
• Characteristic features of culture;
• Culture and space – four ways of interaction;
• Cultural diffusion - characteristic;
• National culture as a cultural fact;
• Epos;
• Genos;
• Logos;
• Ethos;
• Topos;
• Political culture and civic culture.
TODAY (AND NEXT WEEK):
• Culture and Security. Theoretical approaches:
a) Factors and variables
a) “The End of History”- Francis Fukuyama
b) “Clash of Civilisations”- Samuel P. Huntington
c) “Jihad versus McWorld” - Benjamin R. Barber
d) The Third Wave" – Alvin and Heidi Toffler
e) ”Global ecumene” - Ulf Hannerz
f) “Global cultural flows” - Arjun Appadurai
g) “Multiple modernities” - Shmuel Eisenstadt
h) “Glocalisation” - Roland Robertson
i) “Collage of cultures” - Ryszard Kapuściński
CULTURE AND POLITICAL SCIENCES
Culture is:
• A space where political processes take place;
• the subject of political action;
• determinant of international affairs (political and economic);
• warrant/basis of ethnic/national sovereignty;
• The importance of culture in two aspects:
• A determinant of political action;
• an object of political decisions.
CULTURE AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
Political affairs can be conceptualised as:
• Every deliberate and organised activity directed abroad
• Be it political, economic or cultural in nature,
• between the participants, i.e. organized entities
• Conscious,
• respecting (or seeking to create new) rules and principles.
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
• norms and rules of conduct are generally negotiated;
• Currently: Western civilization (international law);
• space of international relations;
• Actions more or less culturally determined;
• cultural factor is a crucial factor.
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
• A facilitator of cooperation
• Factor hampering cooperation
• Neutral element for international cooperation
• culture as a sign of existence and recognition
CULTURE AS AN OBJECT OF POLITICAL DECISIONS
(DEPENDENT VARIABLE)
• cultural policy or export/exchange
• sector of international cooperation;
• constant evolution;
• The impact of policy on culture.
CULTURE AS AN OBJECT OF POLITICAL DECISIONS
(DEPENDENT VARIABLE)
• One of the tasks of the state is to create a national culture.
• a support for artistic activity (narrow approach), and/or maintainenance or
patterns of behavior, values, norms and sanctions (wide approach);
• Culture is export goods (soft power).
SIGNIFICANT POLITICAL FACTORS
• Various types of state influence on the culture
• Cultural relativism
• Cultural diplomacy
• Culture in EU policy
• Policies towards national and ethnic minorities
SOCIETAL FACTORS
• Democratization of social life;
• Increased cultural competences;
• active participation;
• cultural institutions;
• Democratisation of culture;
• The audience is unlimited;
• Mass culture and mass media.
ECONOMIC FACTORS
• The need for sponsorship;
• the state and private sources;
• The scale of the funding;
• Adequate financial resources.
• Culture as the source of income/profit.
TECHNOLOGICAL FACTORS
• Breakthroughs :
• Printing press:
• Radio;
• Cinema and television;
• Internet;
• Transport and communication.
MAIN THEORIES OF CULTURAL
SECURITY
MAIN THEORIES OF CULTURAL SECURITY
• Selected important theses:
• Leading theories agree on three things:
• They agree on the cultural diversity of the world;
• Believe in the possibility of overcoming the difficulties arising from the existing
cultural differences;
• State’s interests, culture, morality as primary.
END OF HISTORY – FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
• At first an essay in 1989, then a book (End of History and a Last
Man, 1992);
• what is essential and what is contingent or accidental in world
history;
• History with capital „H”;
• The triumph of the West,;
• Universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form
of human government.
END OF HISTORY – FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
• Not an original concept;
• Mankind has progressed through a series of stages;
• Each stage = concrete forms of social organization;
• History culminates;
• Man as a product of concrete historical and social
environment.
END OF HISTORY – FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
• End of history means the end of violence;
• Contradictions drive history;
• The role of ideas.
END OF HISTORY – FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
„This consciousness may not be explicit and self-aware, as are
modern political doctrines, but may rather take the form of
religion or simple cultural and moral habits. And yet this realm of
consciousness in the long run necessarily becomes manifest in
the material world, indeed create the material world in its own
image. Consciousness is cause not effect…”
Fukuyama, 1989
• Goes against school of deterministic materialism.
END OF HISTORY – FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
• no need for generals or statesmen; what remains is primarily
economic activity;
• The roots lie in the realm of consciousness and culture;
• consciousness will remake the material world in its own image;
• Both economics and politics presuppose an autonomous prior
state of consciousness that makes them possible.
END OF HISTORY – FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
• Fukuyama: Are there any fundamental "contradictions" in
human life that cannot be resolved in the context of modern
liberalism, that would be resolvable by an alternative politicaleconomic
structure?
• Both fascism and communism proved to be failed projects;
• Religion and nationalism?
END OF HISTORY – FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
• Nationalism not one single phenomenon;
• Nationalist movements do not have a universal political
program;
• historical and a post-historical world;
„The end of history will be a very sad time. The struggle for
recognition, the willingness to risk one's life for a purely abstract
goal, the worldwide ideological struggle that called forth
daring, courage, imagination, and idealism, will be replaced by
economic calculation, the endless solving of technical
problems, environmental concerns, and the satisfaction of
sophisticated consumer demands. In the post-historical period
there will be neither art nor philosophy, just the perpetual
caretaking of the museum of human history.” (Fukuyama, 1989)
CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS –
SAMUEL P. HUNTINGTON
BASIC THEORIES
CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS - HUNTINGTON
• First an essay then a book;
• Culture as the fundamental source of conflict in the new
world;
• Nation states vs civilisations;
• The clash of civilisations:
• Western, Confucian (China is a civilisation pretending to be a
state – Lucian Pye), Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic Orthodox,
Latin American and (possibly) African.
CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS - HUNTINGTON
• First, Second, and Third World no longer relevant;
• Countries grouped in terms of their culture and civilisation;
• The highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level
of cultural identity people have;
• common objective elements and by the subjective self-
identification.
CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS - HUNTINGTON
• Blending and overlapping;
• Sharp but real;
• Dynamic;
• human history have been the history of civilisations.
WHY CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS?
1. Differences among civilisations:
• God and man;
• Man and society;
• Man and the state;
• Inside families;
• Rights and responsibilities, liberty and authority,
equality and hierarchy.
WHY CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS?
2. Globalisation.
3. Economic modernisation.
Revival of religion and ”religious fundamentalists”.
WHY CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS?
4. Dual role of the West:
Antioccidentalism – antiamericanism?
elites versus the populaces
WHY CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS?
5. Cultural characteristics/differences less mutable
Religion vs ethnicity
6. Economic regionalism is increasing.
CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS - HUNTINGTON
Occurs at two levels: (1) micro and (2) macro.
1. Along the fault lines between civilisations.
2. States from different civilisations.
“The Iron Curtain of ideology has been replaced by the Velvet
Curtain of culture as the most significant dividing line.”
CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS - HUNTINGTON
• the West and Islam;
• 1000 years of history (Islam has bloody borders);
• Western democracy strengthens anti-Western political forces;
• Demography;
• Symmetry.
CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS - HUNTINGTON
• cultural balancing and bandwagoning;
• limited but with the potential to spread;
• There is nothing like „the world community” (the West and the
Rest, Kihone Mahbubani);
„The next world war, if there is one, will be a war between
civilisations .” Huntington, 1993: 39
JIHAD VS. MCWORLD –
BENJAMIN R. BARBER
BASIC THEORIES
JIHAD VS. MCWORLD – BARBER
• Interaction between the West and „the Rest”;
• World trapped between two eternities: race and soul
• tribalism and reactionary fundamentalism and the forces of
modernization and economic and cultural globalization .
• cultural monism (McWorld) and cultural fundamentalism
(Jihad).
JIHAD
„The first scenario rooted in race holds out the grim prospect of
a retribalization of large swaths of humankind by war and
bloodshed: a threatened balkanization of nation-states in which
culture is pitted against culture, people against people, tribe
against tribe, a Jihad in the name of a hundred narrowly
conceived faiths against every kind of interdependence, every
kind of artifcial social cooperation and mutuality: against
technology, against pop culture, and against integrated
markets; against modernity itself as well as the future in which
modernity issues.”
Barber (1995, 34:35)
MCWORLD
„The second paints that future in shimmering pastels, a busy
portrait of onrushing economic, technological, and ecological
forces that demand integration and uniformity and that
mesmerize peoples everywhere with fast music, fast computers,
and fast food—MTV, Macintosh, and McDonald’s— pressing
nations into one homogenous global theme park, one McWorld
tied together by communications, information, entertainment,
and commerce.”
(Barber 1995: 35)
JIHAD VS. MCWORLD – BARBER
• „Caught between Babel and Disneyland, the planet is falling
precipitously apart and coming reluctantly together at the
very same moment. (…) The apparent truth, which speaks to
the paradox at the core of this book, is that the tendencies of
both Jihad and McWorld are at work, both visible sometimes in
the same country at the very same instant.”.
(Barber, 1995:35)
Two motifs:
- End of history as a victory of science and reason;
- Apocalypse, i.e. the end of the world as we know it.
THIRD VAWE – ALVIN AND HEIDI TOFFLER
• „Creating a New Civilization: The Politics of the Third Wave”, 1995;
• Economy-centric theory;
• Thesis: economic transformations have an impact on cultural processes
• three “waves”:
1. The agrarian wave
2. The industrial wave
3. The third wave is connected with new technologies.
THIRD VAWE – ALVIN AND HEIDI TOFFLER
• The new civilisation means „a new style of family life, changes in how we work
and how we interact with each other, a new shape of economy, new political
conflicts, and most of all – new awareness” [Toffler 1996, p. 17];
• The waves are not consecutive;
• In present times many states feel the „pressure of two or even three waves of
changes, each of different character and pace, and strength” [Toffler 1996, p.
20-21].
• Clashing waves;
THIRD VAWE – ALVIN AND HEIDI TOFFLER
• “the geographical boundaries of these civilisations cannot be delineated by
referencing the traditional definitions” [Toffler 1996, p. 27-28];
• Civilisation – a concept “encompassing issues as dramatically different as:
technology, family life, religion, culture, politics, economy, social structure,
hierarchy of authority, values, sexual ethics and epistemology” [Toffler 1996, p.
29];
• The modern world has been shaped by the three waves.
GLOBAL ECUMENE - ULF HANNERZ
• Global ecumene = the total amount of cultural relations and interactions in the
world.
• Thesis 1: don’t look at singular “cultures” but cultural diffusion of various
elements;
• Thesis 2: Contemporary cultures transcend beyond their temporal and spatial
dimensions;
• Thesis 3: Cultural exchanges are asymmetrical;
• Thesis 4: In every era there are specialised centres;
• Thesis 5: There are four scenarios for the future of the global ecumene:
GLOBAL ECUMENE - ULF HANNERZ
1. Global homogenity (monism)
2. Cultural Saturation
3. Cultural deformation:
a) filtering;
b) adaptation;
4. Cultural amalgam/Creolisation (hybridisation):
GLOBAL CULTURAL FLOWS – ARJUN APPADURAI
• „Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization” (1996);
• Globalization as a game changer
• Deterritorialization (media and mass migrations);
• Globalization does not mean westernization;
• Local contexts;
• This applies to music, art, patterns, housing, consumption patterns, politics and
others.
GLOBAL CULTURAL FLOWS – ARJUN APPADURAI
• Not Americanization, but the expansion of regional centers as a threat;
• Diaspora and multiculturalism;
• The role of migration and media;
• ethnolandscapes;
• Metropolises;
• reality of "cultural flows" rather than the "melting pot".
RONALD ROBERTSON - GLOCALISATION
• A term derived from the Japanese word dochakuka;
• marketing strategy;
• Glocalisation = global + local;
• homogenisation (unification) and heterogenisation (differentiation) occur
simultaneously;
• inseparable.
MULTIPLE MODENRITIES - SHMUEL EISENSTADT
• “Utopia and modernity” – comparative analysis of civilisations;
• Civilizations are constantly changing;
• There is no one “modern Western civilization” (polemic with Fukuyama and
Huntington);
• The expansion of the West has different effects on the world:
a) the moment insulation ended
b) level of development
c) the strength of local culture and elite;
d) attitude towards changes.
COLLAGE OF CULTURES– RYSZARD KAPUŚCIŃSKI
Chosen theses:
1. the crisis of imagination;
2. rejection of the Other;
3. learning about other cultures;
4. the history of European relations with the Other can be divided into 4 periods:
• Merchants and envoys era;
• the era of great geographical discoveries;
• The humanist era;
• the Enlightenment era.
5. Western civilisation comes to an end:
COLLAGE OF CULTURES– RYSZARD KAPUŚCIŃSKI
• Kapuściński is closest to Benjamin Barber and Arjun Appadurai:
• The mechanism around which the modernity revolves (...) is the struggle of two
great forces on the global scales: the forces of desintegration and the forces of
integration [Kapuściński 2007, p. 133];
• the concept of the world as a rich "collage of cultures"
• persistence of cultural patterns;
• Rebuttal to Fukuyama and Huntington
IDENTITY
BASIC CONCEPTS
WHY IDENTITY?
• the „unexplained variance” (Goldstein 1993);
• Definition?
• Lack of consensus
• Often taken for granted.
IDENTITY
• a reservoir of belief and value patterns (Eiser 1995, p. 161 cited in
O’Riordan 2001);
• a set of definitions and roles (Baumeister 1986, p. 13);
• affective, normative and cognitive mechanisms;
• social identity (sociological perspectve) determined by primarily
group membership (Kelly & Breinlinger 1996, p. 87);
• the influence of culture;
• influence the political behaviour (Arena, M. P. & Arigo 2006).
BELONGING:
• Beloning: emotional attachment, feeling safe and “at home”,
act of self-identification AND identification by others, a
dynamic process, not a reified fixity (Yuval-Davies 2006)
• Where the border between ‚us’ and the „Other’ is?
• What is its shape and how the line is drawn?
• Who is included and who is excluded and why?
• How easy is to join the group?
IDENTITY AND BELONGING:
• continuum from the personal to the social
• perceive and define who are the ‚us’, and therefore, by
contrast, who we are not (Bruter 2003, p. 1150);
• ‚the dirty work of boundary maintenance’ (Crowley 1999)
• „The relationship between the social categories to which
individuals perceive themselves to belong and other social
categories is crucial.” (Herriot 2009, p. 165).
APPROACHES TO IDENTITY:
I-We-Them Triangle (Cherni 2001)
Four levels of analysis (DeVos 1983):
- Subjective experience of identity;
- Patterns of behaviour; Multidimensional circles (Liebkiend 1983)
- The social-structural level;
- Patterns of social interactions.
ID 1
ID 2
ID 3
ONE OR MANY IDENTITES?
INDIVIDUAL OR COLLECTIVE IDENTITY?
CONSTRUCTED AND RECONSTRUCTED
• constructed and hence
mutable, and malleable.
• shaped and reshaped.
PERHAPS CREATED?
Religious identity can be created anew.
SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL
• the binding temporal dimension
• A continuous process
• Different in various corners of the world.
NOMINAL OR REAL?
• authentic and consistent way.
• How does the variation happen between the same beliefs
which ultimately lead to different actions?
• more differences than similarities? Or are the differences
irrelevant in view of the commonalities?
• Can an identity that is only ascribed to you be meaningful in
any way?
NESTED IDENTITIES (MATRYOSHKA)
conceptualised as concentric
circles
CROSS-CUTTING IDENTITIES
• some, but not all, members of one identity group are also
members of another identity group
OVERLAPPING IDENTITIES
identities cannot be analysed
as items that are added up
but rather a constituting each
other (Yuval-Davies 2006)
IDENTITY HATS
No gradation of importance.
HIERARCHY OF IDENTITIES
What happens when conflict
occurs?
MASTER ROLE?
the principal, dominant identity
(Richard Travisiano 1970 basing on
Parsons’ representative role concept
1951).
MASTER ROLE
• Subordination or elimination of other roles and identities
• reconciles different aspects of the self
• maintains unity of the “real self.”
• Stands in direct opposition to compartmentalisation (Staples and Mauss 1987).
• in-group vs out-group dynamics (Henri Tajfel 1974).
IMPLICATIONS
• specific events vs particular social settings
• Varying strengths
• which one of them is chosen and why;
• affects the actions but also interprets the reality
POLITICS OR CULTURE?
Demos, ethnos or not?
In essence the debate revolves around two
assumptions that identity either can or cannot
be secondary to political structure.
NEXT WEEK:
FROM CULTURE WARS AND CULTURAL DOMINATION
TO SOFT POWER