
|
Cross-Cultural Mediation
IMMIGRANTS, DISPUTES AND RESOLUTION
Canadian society is composed of people from many different cultural
backgrounds. Its population represents a multitude of cultural and
national groups. At the turn of the century, the Canadian
population was made up largely of people represented by two major
ethnic groups; the French and the British (Mackie, 1990: 1). New
successful waves of immigrants from different countries have
resulted in a more ethnically diverse country. According to
Statistics Canada (1990:14), for the last two decades, more
immigrants have immigrated to Canada from non-European countries,
such as Asia, Africa and the Caribbean, than from European
countries. Many of these new immigrants have come to Canada with
their traditional values and their lifestyles.
The demographic change of the Canadian population has resulted in
social and cultural conflicts between the recent immigrants and
the majority of Canadians, primarily with Canadians of European
background. These new immigrants tend to assimilate into the
Canadian "mainstream" after three generations. The outcome of this
process of assimilation has not been a homogenous society, but
rather, a diverse society. However, there is widespread agreement
among sociologists that immigrants can not easily assimilate and
integrate into "mainstream" Canadian society (Hale, 1990: 423).
Sociological studies on the socialization of immigrants have
revealed that immigrants can only assimilate quickly and
effectively when immigrants come from social and a cultural
background similar to that of majority of the society in which
they intend to immigrate. For example, many Canadians have been
part of Canadian society for more than 100 years, but still feel
isolated and rejected by the majority of Canadians.
This feeling
is shared by most immigrants whose background is neither French
nor English. It is therefore, important to realize that there is
always a potential conflict among Canadians and this potential
conflict requires social mechanisms to deal with it. In reference
to John Porter's study on Canadian society, Sylvia Hale argues that
ethnically and racially mixed societies, such as Canada, are
inherently unstable and prone to division and conflict. In his
book entitled The Vertical Mosaic, John Porter pointed out that it
is unrealistic to expect minority, ethnic groups to assimilate into
Canadian society. In many cases, these differences have become
sources of conflict (Porter, 1975: 67).
The intensity of the conflict is greater among low-income Canadians
and recent immigrants, than among any other combination of groups.
Recent research has shown people in the low-income bracket tend to
resist the accommodation of new immigrants. On the other hand,
immigrants see the dominant culture as a threat to their social
identity. A well-documented study, conducted by William Robin, has
revealed that negative perceptions that arises between two social
groups often lead to violence and conflict (Williams, 1973: 255).
In his studies on inter-group tension, Robin suggested three
factors that contribute to the development of inter-group hostility
between the immigrants and the mainstream society. These are as
follows; firstly, a high level of frustration arising from poor
housing, low income, distribution of family life and lack of
community membership; secondly, the rapid differential chance
income level of the two groups, (the non-immigrants who receive
less income tend to express hostile attitudes towards members of
immigrant groups); thirdly, massive immigration of a new group
triggering hostility among locals, in part because the dominant
group perceives the new group as a threat to their identity.
The immigrant population experiences a great deal of rejection from
the dominant culture. Sociologists have argued that a social group
that seeks to rise from a lower to higher cultural level, such as
immigrants who seek to settle in a foreign community, meet with
discrimination and prejudice because they are identified with
their physical, or national, identities. These identities are
looked upon by the dominant culture as inferior, mainly because
these identities are so different from the identities of the
dominant culture. In his interesting study on Race Relations,
researcher Robert Park (1931: 104) has pointed out that members of
a minority group in dominant culture suffer what he referred to as
a "social inferiority" complex.
He writes:
... as a matter of fact, most cultural
conflict and the racial conflict in which
they find expression, whatever their ultimate
sources and origin may be, are precipitated by
the fact that some exceptional and otherwise
amenable individual was snubbed and
ill-treated, not because of his individual
assets, but simply because he was identified
with some racial and cultural minority
regarded as inferior--all right in it's place,
perhaps, but constituting in the eyes of the
dominant people as an inferior caste
(Park, 1931: 106).
However, every society is made up of individual and group members
who interact with each other. This interaction can come in many
different forms - economic interaction, social interaction (such as
marriage), etc. Each of the participants in this social interaction
responds to the other in terms of his/her perception of others. In
others words, our willingness to interact with others is influenced
by our perception and cognition (Kriesberg, 1989: 15). The
interaction between groups, whether it is positive or negative,
contributes to development of discord between individuals and
groups.The interaction between these different groups has led to
social conflict that sometimes has escalated to violence.
Interpersonal relationships within a culture or between cultures
have been the main focus of an important school of sociologists
known "Symbolic Interactionists". The scholars of this theory have
written a great deal about the process of socialization. They are
interested in showing that an individual's personality and thinking
habits develop through social interaction. Charles Cooley (1978:
42), a leading scholar of this theory, argues it is a mistake to
see the individual as limited by the demands and the rules of
his/her social community. He argues that society is made up of
many interdependent parts. Thus, this interdependence becomes a
source of conflict. George Simmel (1904) pointed out that
interaction is necessary for the survival of the society:
Society exists where a number of individuals
enter into interaction. This interaction
always arises on the basis of certain drives
or for the sake of certain purposes. Erotic,
religious, or merely associative impulses; and
purposes of defense, attack, play, gain, aid,
or institution-these and countless others
cause man to live with other men to act for
them, with them, against them, and thus to
correlate his condition with theirs
(Kriesberg 1989: 49).
It has been argued that in any heterogeneous society (i.e. one with
different cultural groups and sub-groups) there is likely to be
conflict among its members. Interaction with different cultural
groups usually leads to anxiety and apprehension, in part, because
our perception of other groups is based on negative expectations.
A number of sociological studies have indicated that anticipated
interaction with a member of a different ethnic group leads to
anxiety. In their classical study on inter-group anxiety among
Asian-American and Hispanic-Americans, researchers Meltor Stephen
and Cookie Stephen (1989:210:), have found that interaction between
two different ethnic social groups or individuals often create
negative stereotypes and group hostility.
In their study, Cookie Stephen and Melter Stephen proposed four
types of negative consequences which occur when people interact
with strangers. Firstly, we tend to fear negative consequences for
our self-concept (i.e. we worry about feeling confused and/or
incompetent and thus, are less willing to interact with others).
Each participant in a social interaction responds to the other in
terms of his/her perception and cognition of the others.
Interaction with a stranger tends to create a great deal of anxiety
between the interacting parties. Secondly, we fear the consequences
of negative behaviour that may result from interacting with
strangers. We tend to feel that others will exploit us, take
advantage of us. Not only do we tend to fear the consequences of
our/their behaviour, but we also fear that physical harm may be
done to us. Thirdly, we fear that others may reject us on the basis
of our physical appearance and thus stereotype us.(2) Fourthly, when
interacting with strangers, we fear negative, behavioural
consequences will be placed on us by our own group. Their research
suggested that people tend to disassociate themselves from the
"stranger" (members of other groups) in anticipation that the
members of their in-group will disapprove of their action.
According to in-group references, association with the out-group
(others) constitutes breaking the norms of the in-group and this
could eventually lead to community sanctions. This fear of others
greatly influences our perception of conflict and how we perceive
the behaviour of the others.
1. 1 Though Black Slaves came to Canada in the early part of the seventeen hundred, the community still feels
that they are not accepted by the dominant culture. The same goes for the Chinese and Japanese communities in
Canada.
2. 2 Though, the interaction between the in-group (one's group) and the out-group causes misperception and
negative stereotyped, it is not sufficient enough to cause conflict. In Africa and the Middle East interaction between
different groups often lead to bonding and closeness.
|