Chapter 1

Proglomena: Globalisation, Cultural Identity

and Diversity

Jānis Tālivaldis Ozoliņš

Abstract Globalisation and the mass communication revolution of the last 40

years has made the world a much smaller place. It has brought diverse cultures,
traditions and languages in far greater contact than was previously possible. The
expansion of the free market economy and the growth of transnational corporations
has also brought both East and West, as well as North and South in closer contact.
While the potential for mutual understanding is great, so is the potential for conflict.
The forces which shape cultural identity are varied and the challenge is to appreciate
the influences that shape our values and beliefs so that we can understand ourselves.
In doing so, we are in a better position to value diverse cultures, religions, languages
and traditions and recognise their preciousness. This is important if globalisation is
not to result in the growth of a monoculture that destroys the rich diversity of culture
as well as our individual cultural identities.

Keywords Culture • Tradition • Values • Pluralism • Cultural identity • Globalisation

One aspect of the modern world has been the communication revolution which has
seen the possibility of diverse peoples being able to encounter one another and the
variety of faiths, cultures and traditions that they have. As a result, we have become
aware of the diversity of ways in which different cultures and traditions have
addressed common human questions. It is also obvious that a particular way in
which the world is described and understood will be in part determined by the
language in which it is expressed. Language is not restricted to oral utterances or to
texts, but will also include a myriad bodily cues and cultural practices. In asserting
that language expresses a ‘form of life’, that is, that to imagine a language is to
imagine a form of life, Wittgenstein emphasises the role of language in forming the

J. Tālivaldis Ozoliņš (*)

School of Philosophy, Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia
Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
e-mail: john.ozolins@acu.edu.au

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 1

J. Tālivaldis Ozoliņš (ed.), Religion and Culture in Dialogue,
Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures 15,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-25724-2_1
2 J. Tālivaldis Ozoliņš

world which we inhabit. Wittgenstein (1953, para. 19) Adding to this insight,
Gadamer acknowledges the importance of cultural tradition as the foundation of
thought, arguing that thinking takes place against a background that includes
morals, law and religion (Gadamer 1989, 235–236). Both of these views need to be
taken into account if we are to understand what is communicated to us through our
encounters with peoples of other nations, languages and cultures.
Globalisation has undoubtedly been both a blessing and a curse. At the same
time as it has enabled us to appreciate, through a variety of means, the existence of
cultures and traditions different from our own, it has also led to the rise of mass
culture. What is to be resisted is that globalisation has resulted in a mutual
understanding of ideas, values and practices that are the common currency of global
discourse. Without some awareness of the differences between cultures and respect
for the cultural and linguistic practices that each culture and language brings to
global dialogue we risk failing to see new and novel perspectives on the global
problems that we face. In this essay we firstly briefly discuss the possibility of
mutual understanding, secondly, what we might mean by cultural identity, exploring
the influences which form our sense of cultural identity and thirdly, consider the
interaction between globalisation and cultural identity. We propose that without
some consciousness of the influences that shape our lives we can fail to be open to
new and innovative ideas to which different cultures expose us.
Although globalisation has led to some convergences, such as the rise of mass
culture and the almost ubiquitous acceptance of the market economy, it has also
exacerbated the differences among different religions and cultures so that in
Huntington’s famous phrase, there is a “clash of civilizations”.1 Huntington argued
that future conflicts in world politics would be between different cultures or civili-
sations rather than because of ideological or economic differences between nation
states. A glance around the globe suggests that the situation is more complex.2
While Huntington sees the clash of civilisations as problematic, it can also be seen
as having some positives. The clash of civilisations also results in creative tensions

1
Huntington, Samuel P. (1996). The phrase “clash of civilisations” is not Huntington’s, but it was
popularised as a result of Huntington’s 1993 paper and was more fully developed as a theory about
the behaviour of nations in conflicts. After 9/11, his theory appeared to be vindicated, though it has
been subjected to wide-ranging criticism. See Huntington (1993). Some of his critics include the
following. Acharya (2002), Camroux (1996), Fukuyama (1992), Groves (1998), Mazarr (1996).
2
There are very large number of conflicts raging around the world. In Africa, there are conflicts in
North Africa, such as occurring in Libya and in Sub-Saharan Africa. Their origins are far from
obvious. In some cases, they appear to be ethnic, in others, religious and ideological. In Nigeria,
for instance, Boko Haram, a militant Islamist group is massacring people indiscriminately, but also
singling out Christians, for particular attention. Conflict in the Middle East also appears to be
based on ethnic, religious and ideological grounds, but economic grounds cannot be excluded. The
conflict between Russia and Ukraine appears to be more clearly on geopolitical and economic
grounds, though one argument has been the need to protect ethnic Russians outside the borders of
Russia. It is not our intention to provide an analysis here, simply to note that the reasons for con-
flict are very complex and multi-faceted. What is striking is that the conflicts appear to be within
states and not between the West (broadly understood) and the East. See Fenton (2004) for some
analysis and discussion of ethnic conflict.
1 Proglomena: Globalisation, Cultural Identity and Diversity 3

between one particular cultural perspective on human life and another. It also results
in different conceptions of what it means to be a human person and so affects very
concretely our conceptions of who we are as persons. The clash of civilisations does
not need to imply a conflict to be feared, but rather an opportunity to learn about the
perspectives of different cultures, values and traditions on such disparate human
questions as conceptions of God, of human nature and human values. Openness to
other values and beliefs, however, needs to be cultivated, even as the inculcation of
our own cultures and traditions occurs. In being open to different outlooks, there is
much to be learned about ourselves and our values. For example, if we are a Christian
or a Muslim, in considering the Jewish conception of God, we become aware of
common origins, of having beliefs shaped by being Abrahamic faiths, but also of
profound differences. The commonalities enable monotheists to stand on common
ground, but it is through the discussion of differences that our identities as adherents
of a particular faith emerge. It is through knowing and interacting with the other
that we know ourselves.3 Similarly, those from the same faith but from a different
cultural background will also offer different insights to their fellow believers.
When we investigate the values which guide our moral choices and decisions
about moral actions, we will also discover that cultures and traditions will have
quite diverse ways of arriving at similar conclusions. If we consider, for example,
approaches to the virtues in Confucian culture and compare these to Western culture,
at first glance, there appear to be profound differences. In Confucian philosophy, the
four main virtues are benevolence (仁, rén), dutifulness (rightness) (義, yì), propriety
(rites) (礼, lĭ) and wisdom (智, zhì). There are also a number of secondary virtues,
such as filial piety, (xiàoxīn, 孝心), which enjoins children to respect and honour
their parents. A person displaying benevolence is respectful (gōng 恭), magnani-
mous (kuān 寬), honest or truthful (xìn 信), hardworking or diligent (mǐn 敏) and
gracious (huì 惠). 孔子, Kǒngzǐ, says in the 论语, Lún Yǔ, or Analects, that the
benevolent person (君子, jūnzǐ) considers rightness (義) to be essential in every-
thing, practising it by acting according to the rules of propriety (礼), humbly and
with sincerity, both important virtues (Confucius 1971, The Analects, Book 15, Ch.
XVII). In contrast, the virtues that are listed by Aristotle are courage, temperance,
prudence or practical wisdom, justice, as well as liberality, magnificence, magna-
nimity, patience, truthfulness and friendliness, amongst others (Aristotle 1976,
Book II, vii [1107b18-20]). Aquinas, following Aristotle, also includes amongst his
secondary virtues euboulia (deliberating well), filial piety, perseverance, modesty,
abstinence and sobriety (Aquinas 1981, Summa Theologica (hereinafter ST) II-II,
Q.51, Art.1; Q.101, Arts. 1–4; Q137, Art.1; Q.146, Arts. 1–2; Q.149, Arts. 1–2;
Q.160, Arts. 1–2.). He also introduces the three theological virtues of faith, hope
and charity (ST, I-II, Q.1, Q.62). Modern lists of virtues include compassion, hon-
esty, conscientiousness, care, integrity and respectfulness, which echo the classical
lists of virtues. In all cases, the virtues are the means by which human beings are to
reach their ultimate goal, which is happiness. In both the Confucian and the Thomist

3
This thought recurs throughout Ricoeur’s work and philosophical anthropology is a major theme
throughout. For Ricoeur’s clearest statement on this see Ricoeur (1992).
4 J. Tālivaldis Ozoliņš

case, there is the possibility of a transcendent happiness which is being re-united

with Heaven (天, Tiān) or God.4
The lesson to be drawn from this brief excursus into virtue ethics is to recognise
that though there are commonalities among human beings, since they all desire the
same end, that culture and tradition result in different ways of understanding the
means by which the end is to be attained. The virtues, whatever way they are
described, are to bring about the upright, virtuous human being, who having attained
virtue, will also attain happiness. It is evident that there are very similar lists of
virtues in different traditions,5 but it is equally obvious that there are different
emphases on which virtues are seen to be the more important. Filial piety, for
example, is very significant in Confucian culture, reflecting its origins in ancestor
worship. Aristotle extols liberality, that is, the right use of wealth, whereas this
has disappeared as a virtue in the modern world. This does not mean that no one
practises liberality, for instance, but means that the virtue has been subsumed under
another virtue of which it is a part.
It would wrong to suppose that the task of understanding another culture or
tradition is easy, however. Prejudice, ideology and self-interest act to blind us, as
well as our preconceptions, values and traditions. Although MacIntyre is primarily
addressing rival philosophical traditions of inquiry, he argues that debates between
two such traditions are inevitably inconclusive because each makes its judgements
about the other from its own standpoint and, moreover, one will regard the other as
irrefutably wrong (MacIntyre 1990, 7.). For this reason, not only do we need to
investigate the philosophical and theological foundations that shape our own culture
and tradition, but also to try to stand in the place of the other, so that we are able to
see ourselves from their perspective. It should not be supposed that this is unprob-
lematic, as MacIntyre points out, since diversity of language, culture and tradition
are significant barriers.
Despite the difficulties, we should not suppose that we are irremediably locked
into our ways of thinking. Cultures, languages and traditions are not museum pieces,
forever fixing our perspectives, but are fluid, always changing and in constant
ferment, since each generation has to interpret traditions and culture anew. Language
also changes under the influence of new experiences, encounters with people with
other languages and cultures, new discoveries and changing patterns of life. Human
beings adapt and change. New experiences result in fresh ideas that are expressed in
novel words, sometimes borrowed from another language or culture.6

4
This is not to suppose that the Confucian Heaven is the same as Aquinas’s Christian God, nor, that
the thought that the Confucian Heaven is transcendent is accepted without dispute.
5
Buddhist virtues, for example, will include compassion and kindness, right thought, right speech,
right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. Importantly,
the cultivation and retention of these virtues requires habituation. An elaboration of these will
show overlaps with other lists of virtues. See Irwin 2013.
6
The view that language and thought are connected is not particularly new. See Whorf 1956. Whorf
argues that different languages yield different conceptions of the world. Michael Dummett also
holds that language is logically prior to thought. Those holding that thought is prior to language
include Paul Grice and Jerry Fodor.
1 Proglomena: Globalisation, Cultural Identity and Diversity 5

Although there are large divergences among the many diverse people and cultures
of the world, this need not imply complete incommensurability and untranslatability
of ideas between and among them.7 It is a common experience of those travelling in
a country where they do not speak the language that when necessary, they are able
to make themselves understood. Admittedly this will be in a very limited manner
and the danger of misunderstanding is high, nevertheless, this would not be possible
at all if human beings did not share some common experiences and so have ways of
communicating these. Empirically, languages and cultures are not completely
incommensurable nor are ideas within them completely untranslatable. Hunger,
thirst, being cold or hot, the need for shelter are all basic needs that all human beings
require, but not only these. Human beings also need love, comfort in grief and the
dignity that work can provide. They need an environment in which they can appreci-
ate beauty and joy in the company of others and much more besides. These basic
necessities are common needs that human beings share and so we can expect to find
descriptions of these in different languages that we can recognise as referring to
those basic necessities. While it is a matter of empirical evidence whether this is the
case, if it is the case, then the possibility of communication exists. Since we can
make ourselves understood, at least in a rudimentary way, basic communication is
possible and incommensurability ruled out. Actions by people in other cultures
are intelligible to us.
Before the communication age, individual identity was shaped by the language,
culture and tradition of the village to which individuals belonged. Perspectives and
values reflected the community in which people lived their lives and the encounters
with strangers from different parts of the country, let alone the world were limited.
Lacking experience of other cultures and traditions, people encountering strangers
would have had difficulty in understanding them, perhaps regarding their customs
as exotic and incomprehensible. Globalisation, made possible through rapid travel,
trade and communication technology, has enabled far greater encounter with diverse
cultures and has also brought with it the threat of cultural colonisation in which a
dominant culture overpowers an indigenous minority culture. Intelligibility of another
culture is a two-edged sword, enabling us to have comprehension of another culture,
but also making it easier for an ascendant culture to weaken and finally eliminate the
traditions and values of another, resulting in the creation of a monoculture.8 Despite
this threat, a diversity of languages, cultures and traditions remain and contribute to
the shaping of the identities and characters of individuals.9

7
Davidson says that one of the problems with the idea of there being incommensurable languages
is not that we could not understand them, but that the criteria for what would make languages
incommensurable are not clear. See Davidson (1973, 13–14.).
8
The loss of diversity can be observed through the dominance of transnational corporations in a
variety of enterprises. Large shopping complexes in major cities whether they are in the United
States or in China or anywhere in between tend to look the same and contain the same kinds of
retail outlets. In order to experience the cultural diversity in a particular country we are forced to
go further afield than the major cities.
9
It should also be noted that there is also resistance to the creation of monocultures, so that minority
cultures consciously work to preserve their cultures and identities.
6 J. Tālivaldis Ozoliņš

1.1 Cultural Identity

An understanding of cultural identity is important if we are to understand the deeper

motivations and influences that shape the perspectives and values of different
individuals, including ourselves. This will be particularly so if we are seeking to
understand what motivates individuals or explain statements or actions that mystify
us. To say, for example, that someone is a Jewish writer is not simply to place an
ethnic label on the individual, but to identify the tradition and the cultural perspective
from which he or she writes. Moreover, it provides a key to interpreting his or her
understanding of a particular problem or issue with which his or her writing is concerned.
In practical terms, awareness of the nuanced understanding of putatively shared
concepts that cultural identity brings enables us to appreciate that the concepts with
which we construct our arguments and draw our conclusions may be understood by
others very differently from how we understand and use them ourselves.
Cultural influences are observed, for example, when we consider what we mean
by globalisation, another, just as difficult, is what we mean by human rights. In the
West, globalisation is generally seen in positive terms and one definition of it is as
the multidimensional and interactive processes of political, economic and cultural
change across the world resulting in increased social interconnectedness among
different peoples (Twiss 2004). This is by no means the only definition, but in places
where the experience of globalisation is one of a renewal of domination by
International interests, it is synonymous with oppression and colonisation.10 Culture,
affected by experience, will colour how globalisation is understood. The exploitation
of resources by foreign powers is not a positive experience, so that what is meant by
globalisation in that context signifies something very different from the Western
context.11 The arrival of a multinational corporation in a country may bring jobs
and prosperity, but it may be at the expense of family life and the destruction of a
community. Similarly, human rights, although universally acknowledged as impor-
tant, are also contested because they are understood differently in different cultures.
In cultures, for example, where family and community values are more important
than individual values, group rights will be more important than individual human
rights.12

10
Martin Khor once said that globalisation was what those in the Third World have for centuries
called colonisation. Khor (1995), quoted in Kukoc 2006, 375. Khor is known for his anti-capitalist
and anti-globalisation views.
11
I do not wish to single out the West in this regard. China, now the largest economy in the world,
can equally be said to see globalisation as a process of furthering Chinese interests and so a positive
process that leads to economic growth for everyone. Those who see themselves as oppressed by
foreign powers will not distinguish between Western or Chinese forms of globalisation.
12
See for example, Eagleton’s essay on the interplay between culture and politics, and the universal
versus the local in the understanding of ourselves and hence of human rights. Eagleton (2002). See
also Kymlicka’s discussion of minority rights, contrasting communitarian views with liberal
views. Our point here is that the reality is that these conflicting views about the nature of human
rights are not just due to philosophical differences, but also in cultural differences in the under-
standing of the relationship between individuals and their communities. Kymlicka (2001).
1 Proglomena: Globalisation, Cultural Identity and Diversity 7

A number of factors, human dignity included, affect our sense of who we are.
Cultural identity is one of these, but it is not easy providing some account of it.
Proposing that it includes such things as attitudes, religion and religious practices,
dietary habits and traditional dress is not particularly helpful, though some of these
may well be outward signs of a particular cultural identity (Gupta and Bhugra 2009,
334). A more promising approach, especially since we want to bring out the cultural
influences at play in the contributions in this volume, is to draw on a biography of
Isaak Babel, a Russian Jewish writer born in Odessa in 1894 and executed by Stalin
in 1941. The biography illustrates how ethnicity, language and culture interact
in the development of cultural identity. In large measure a product of the social,
cultural and political conditions existing in Tsarist Russia, his writing exemplifies
the interplay between his identity as Jew and as a Russian.
The biographical account outlines the way in which Babel’s cultural identity
affected what he thought and wrote and he is described as having a “Russo-Jewish
identity” (Sicher 2012, 12). What is salient is the description of Babel as having
the identity of a Soviet writer and secondly as someone who passionately loved
Yiddish. Later, Babel comes to be seen quintessentially as a Russian-Jewish
writer, who retained his Jewishness, as well as his sense of belonging to Russia,
since he could not bear to live outside Soviet Russia (Sicher, 13). Cultural iden-
tity, it is suggested, is shaped by the individual, but grows out of a literary, linguis-
tic and ethnic context. Its construction is always in process (Sicher, 14). Babel’s
identity was shaped by the re-awakening of Jewish consciousness following the
Kishinev pogroms of 1903 and 1905 (Pasachoff and Littman 1995, Ch. 73;
Penkower 2004, 187–225), and by events following the Russian revolution that
enabled Jews to break free of the restrictions placed on them in Tsarist Russia
(Sicher, 15). Kishinev provided the motivation for Jews throughout Tsarist Russia
to organise themselves into self-defence groups, emigrate to the United States and
to settlements in Palestine, laying the foundations for the modern state of Israel.
Babel’s formative years were spent in Odessa, a thriving Jewish centre of culture
during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Odessa was unusual for cities
in the Russian Empire because it placed no restrictions on Jews; they were free to
worship, enter the professions and to contribute to the cultural and civic life of the
city. (Sicher, 109) Babel’s early literary work identifies him as a Jew from cosmo-
politan Odessa, influenced by the mix of cultures, Jewish, Greek, Russian,
Ukrainian, for example, to be found in the city during the early part of the twenti-
eth century (Sicher, 16). This vibrant cosmopolitanism was later to be extin-
guished by the dead hand of 70 years of Soviet rule.
Babel was the first Jewish writer to write in Russian. His cultural identity is
revealed through his published works and his innovative style of writing marks him
as an author able to see Russia from the outside, though at the same time he was no
outsider, since he was also immersed in Russian language and culture. Part of the
puzzle of cultural identity, it is suggested, could lie in the intertextuality of modern-
ism, that is, the text makes use of various motifs and references that constitute a
8 J. Tālivaldis Ozoliņš

subtext that will be understood by a particular cultural group, but not necessarily a
general audience. Sicher, his biographer, claims that the Yiddish language breathes
in the coded subtext of Babel’s Russian prose (Sicher, 20–21). The use of motifs
and cultural references understood only by a particular group is a common device
used where an oppressed minority is repressed by a majority culture as means of
fighting back at their oppressors. More significantly, what this reveals is that one
way in which we can understand the cultural identity of an individual is through the
text that he or she writes, since through the analysis of the text we are able to detect
the particular cultural references and motifs that he or she uses. These will often
point to his or her cultural identity. Paradoxically, Sicher comments, that attempts
by other Jewish writers during the twenties and thirties of the twentieth century to
sever their ties with their Jewishness and to exhibit their loyalty to Soviet Russia,
did not solve the problem of identity. This was because despite cutting their ties
with their ethnic past, even changing their names, did not dispel in the eyes of the
Soviet regime, the suspicion that they were still ultimately loyal to their Jewish
origins and not to Soviet ideology and the State (Sicher, 23–25).
Text will be only a guide to cultural identity, however, because in the case of
Babel, it was clear that he was Jewish as well as Russian, so it is not surprising to
find an element of Jewishness emerging in his writing. The existence of particular
cultural references and motifs will not necessarily enable us to identify individuals
as having a particular cultural identity. For example, a keen Latin scholar will have
an excellent knowledge of Latin and his writing may be sprinkled with Latin phrases
and words, as well as references to Roman literature. This will not mean that we will
identify him as having a Roman cultural identity. Similarly, an English scholar who
works extensively in German philosophy may make significant use of German
phrases and ideas in expressing philosophical ideas, but will not be culturally
identifiable as German.
A further complication to the use of text as a means of identifying cultural
identity is not only that linguistic phrases and motifs may be the result of extensive
scholarship in a particular culture or language, but also the purpose in the mind of
the writer of the text. In many cases, the intention is not to convey a covert message
that only those belonging to the particular language and culture will understand, but
to borrow ideas that help to elucidate a particular issue. Someone interested in
Heidegger, for example, may borrow his conception of Dasein, in order to make a
philosophical point, but this should not be taken to mean her cultural identity is
partially German. Neither does it mean that there is a coded subtextual narrative
meant for a particular audience.
Equally, however, a text may not make use of any culturally specific linguistic
phrases and motifs, but nevertheless be written in such a way that it is evident that
the ideas come from a particular cultural perspective. It is common, for example,
that philosophical papers (amongst other scholarly papers) are written in English,
but not all are written by those belonging to an Anglo-American, English speaking
culture. An obvious clue to this is the way in which certain ideas are put together
and how they are expressed. In speech, those for whom English is a second lan-
guage, will often be recognisable because of their accents and forms of expression
1 Proglomena: Globalisation, Cultural Identity and Diversity 9

translated from their own native languages. In text, although no accent can be heard,
the structure of the sentences in English will often echo a writer’s native language.
It takes significant mastery of a second language to avoid expressing ideas accord-
ing to the syntax of a person’s native language. Similarly, the subtleties of semantic
import of words and expressions can be missed by a non-native speaker. In some
cases, the expressions used to convey ideas point to novel meanings that do not exist
in English itself. A phrase such as “human rights”, for example, within Western
culture has to be conceived within a context of the nature of the human person,
human dignity and the duties owed to human beings. A translation from another
culture may convey something with a very different context and so different
meaning, as we have already said.
Consideration of the foregoing discussion enables us to conclude that cultural
identity is not simply a matter of having mastery of languages other than our native
tongue or a knowledge of cultures other than our native culture. This does not mean
that we cannot have a cultural identity that spans more than one tradition or culture.
Babel, who lived within a Jewish and Russian culture, is ample illustration that
cultural identity is a complex interplay of upbringing, language and tradition set
within a particular social milieu. It is not, however, simply constructed through
these, but is also rooted in the physical reality of his birth into a Jewish family. He
did not choose his Jewishness, it was what he inherited from his parents. In addressing
the question of the nature of cultural identity, it is important to acknowledge the role
played by nature. It is nature which provides the foundation for cultural identity,
even though it is nurture, language, tradition and a particular community which
shapes the our cultural identity.
This enables us to see why it is not possible to claim a particular cultural identity
just because we have immersed ourselves in a culture not our own. Knowing how
to speak English or French, for example, is insufficient to claim that our cultural
identity is partially English or French. Babel, born a Jew, lived his life within a
particular cultural milieu and it was this, as well as his ethnic origin, that was forma-
tive of his cultural identity. Scholars of other languages and cultures remain outside
those languages and cultures because they are not formed in them; they do not live
within them in the way in which someone like Babel does.
The development of cultural identity is a formative process that takes time and
begins in childhood, though it is evident that it remains fluid and influenced by a
variety of factors, including individuals themselves. It is possible, for example, for
persons to repudiate their ethnic origins and to live their lives consciously within a
host culture, identifying as closely as possible with the dominant culture. The
tragedy for Jews in Europe has been the denial of their assimilation into a majority
culture, as the Holocaust and other persecutions attest. This is not an isolated
example, however, since ethnic and cultural tensions are, unfortunately, quite
common. If we accept a constructionist view that cultural identity is constructed
through the interplay of individuals and others, then the identification by others of
the individual as of a particular ethnicity, suggests that cultural identity is based on
ethnicity. Although we agree it is a component of cultural identity, indeed a basic
one, it is not necessarily the defining characteristic.
10 J. Tālivaldis Ozoliņš

Consideration of the example of Babel, lead us to conclude that cultural identity

is fluid and that there are a number of factors which are involved in its development.
(i) Ethnic origin; (ii) language; (iii) culture; (iv) customs and traditions, including
religion; (v) individual preferences; (vi) family, community and social milieu;
(vii) place, including nation, and time, that is, the period of history in which the
individual was born and in which he or she lives. These are by no means equally
influential on the formation of individual cultural identity, but are all factors that
need to be taken into account in its formation. Ethnic origin, for example, is impos-
sible to deny especially if persons fit a particular stereotype. Nevertheless, someone
who is ethnically Asian, for instance, may be very far from being culturally Asian
and so her ethnic origin plays a very minor part in her cultural identity. Language is
important, since this is one of lenses through which people see the world, as
Wittgenstein noted. The analysis of Babel’s work shows the influences of Yiddish,
even though he writes in Russian and provides us with a unique window to the
world in which he lived. Culture is clearly important, since this will include art,
architecture, music and the expression of a way of life, including dress. Customs
and traditions will include rituals, manners and particular kinds of livelihoods. In a
maritime nation, for example, it might include fishing and various other maritime
occupations. Religion also plays a significant role in establishing cultural identity
and there will be a clear difference between a Russian Jew, Russian Christian and a
Russian Muslim, though they might share other commonalities.
Individual preferences will also be an important guide in the development of a
cultural identity. Someone who wishes to suppress his ethnic origins will con-
sciously try to live in a different culture, repudiating the customs and traditions of
his ethnic culture, seeking to assimilate into the other culture. This is a common
experience for the children of immigrants, who are forced by circumstance to live
in two cultures. The influence of family, community and social milieu is also clear.
Someone might want to see herself as belonging to a particular ethnic group, but
those around her might have a different view. Someone might regard herself as
Asian, for example, but an Asian community might regard her as a foreigner, since
she does not come from that community. Babel’s origins in Odessa during the last
few years of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century provided him with
an environment that encouraged Jewish Russian writers to explore ideas and themes
in a very free manner, an opportunity to given to others. The time in which he was
born and the place in which he lived had provided the context in which he was able
to develop as a writer and to form his cultural identity.

1.2 Globalisation and Identity

Globalisation, whether for good or ill, is a means whereby there is increased social
interconnectedness between people. It can also be taken to mean an increased
awareness that all human beings and their activities do not occur in isolation, but
have effects on those living elsewhere, both human and animal. Globalisation
1 Proglomena: Globalisation, Cultural Identity and Diversity 11

therefore extends beyond political, economic and cultural processes and includes
broader social, ethical and environmental questions that impinge on the way in
which human beings interact with one another. Increased interconnectedness, the
result of globalisation, requires all human beings to be concerned with the impact
that human activity has on the future well-being of humankind and the planet on
which they live. This is not to suggest that globalisation does not bring benefits, but
to highlight the responsibility that human beings have for the world in which they
live. This will mean using its resources wisely, looking after all living things and
taking care of the environment. Globalisation also brings awareness that many
problems are not regional, but are global and require a united effort on the part of all
people to remedy.13
Focussing on the social processes that affect our identities, globalisation
influences our understanding of ourselves, just as colonisation in the nineteenth
century affected how different people saw themselves. Colonialists from the Western
world saw themselves as superior to the peoples that they enslaved and the enslaved
also saw themselves as inferior. The logic of dominance ensures that the dominated
come to see themselves as inferior, so that unconsciously they identify their own
cultures as primitive and lacking value. As a result, their cultural identity itself takes
on the appearances of that of their colonial masters, diminishing, if not destroying
their sense of identification with their own culture.14 Globalisation, as well as
regionalisation, where it involves a major culture can act to colonise a smaller
culture, destroying its uniqueness and hence affecting the identities of individuals
within that culture. There is good reason for distrust of a globalisation where the
benefits seem to flow mostly to a major power and which result in centuries old
customs and traditions being eroded.
Because of globalisation, cultures are no longer insulated from contact with each
other, though this does not mean that every culture is in contact with every other in
the same way or to the same degree. Communication technology and social media
have made it possible, however, for there to be much more frequent contacts
between those cultures to whom such technology and social media are available.15
Television, at least of a basic variety, is almost universally available and enables
even those in the most remote and impoverished regions of the world to have a window
on the world. The growth in mobile phones and the technology which supports their

13
There are a multitude of global problems that require international co-operation. Alleviation
of poverty, the elimination of slavery, prevention of terrorism, the fight against illegal drugs, the
resettlement of refugees and asylum seekers and so on are all problems that are global.
Environmental destruction, pollution, endangerment and extinction of species are further problems
that are not merely local, but global.
14
Freire’s argues very strongly that one of the important aims of education is to enable oppressed
people to become aware that they have accepted the prevailing dominant culture’s view of them as
inferior. In order to fight this, people need to take control of their lives and to critically assess the
prevailing orthodoxy that devalues their culture and hence, devalues them. Once they are able to do
this, according to Freire, they in a position to improve their conditions of life. See Freire (2000).
15
Chen and Zhang argue that the convergence of globalisation and new media has resulted in the
transformation of cultural identity. See Chen and Zhang (2010, 795–796).
12 J. Tālivaldis Ozoliņš

use has meant that even the most underprivileged people in the world can have
access to social media and other information through the Internet. This is not to
suggest that there are not wide variations in the quality of access or that there may
not be severe limitations to the extent to which people have contact with social
media and information about other cultures, but it is safe to say that it is much more
extensive now than at any time in the past.16
The language of globalisation itself is increasingly English, especially in
economic and financial matters, though it is also true of much academic work
(Johnson 2009). There are numerous good reasons offered for using English, rather
than another language such as Chinese or Spanish, to name two. One of the most
obvious is that it makes it easier for transnational corporations located in different
countries to converse with each other and to have a common perspective on their
aims and goals. While this is not necessarily sinister, and has the practical result that
people from different cultures are able to converse with each other in a common
language, one unwanted consequence is the effect on culture, cultural traditions and
cultural identity. For all those working in a common language, their own culture
needs to be set aside and a new, common perspective from another point of view
adopted. In doing this, there is a concomitant change in cultural identity, because it
is not possible to quarantine one culture from another so that neither affects the
other. The common language of discourse brings with it a particular perspective of
the world, as Wittgenstein argued. As a result, the more the necessity to converse in
a common language of discourse, the more the specific cultures of the individual
participants recede, unless, of course, they belong to an English speaking culture.
Although it is true that cultures and languages are affected by the common,
global language of discourse and are subsequently infiltrated by the culture from
which the common language originates, they too, will leave their trace on the
common culture. Babel’s Jewishness, for example, affected the way in which he
portrayed Russian culture and hence, left its imprint on it. Babel’s Jewishness is
absorbed by the Russian culture, but at the same time, its consciousness of itself is
altered by its absorption. That is, Yiddish language and culture become interwoven
into Russian culture. Similarly, common global culture, although dominated by
English speaking culture, is also altered by its contact with other cultures, so that
they are interwoven to differing degrees in it. Traces of these cultures can be
identified in the common culture through the manner in which concepts change as a
result of their different perspectives.
Global culture, national and local culture are in dynamic interaction and as a
result, cultural identity itself is never fixed. It will ebb and flow according to how
important new experiences are in their influence on individuals in the formation of
their sense of themselves. New ideas and modes of thought often emerge from a
particular local culture and through rapid global communication, spread through the
global community. Their rapid dispersion can occur through social media, but also

16
The most recent statistics reveal that 34.3 % of the world’s total population have used the
internet, with the largest percentage of internet users being in Asia. See URL: http://www.internet-
worldstats.com/stats.htm. Accessed: 3/6/2014.
1 Proglomena: Globalisation, Cultural Identity and Diversity 13

through interactions among corporations, academics and others in more formal

settings. Cultural identity is, as a consequence, fluid.
The foregoing discussion enables us to recognise the dynamic nature of the inter-
action between peoples, their languages, cultures and traditions. The possibility of
interactions, it is proposed, are founded on the common nature of human beings
and hence the intelligibility of their basic needs, wants and desires. It was noted,
however, that these may be expressed very differently in different languages and
cultures. Diversity need not imply a clash of cultures or civilisations, though clearly,
it is not ruled out.
New ideas and concepts stemming from a global culture, or indeed, any other,
can influence our perceptions of who we are and can result in us developing a
different conception of ourselves. The variety of ideas, approaches from different
cultures, philosophical and theological traditions bring quite diverse voices to a
broad conversation between cultures, religions and traditions. It is a dialogue of
many parts. An appreciation of the diversity of cultures, traditions and languages,
and variety of rich perspectives and cultural identities to which they give rise, leads
us to acknowledge the importance of their preservation, while at the same time
celebrating the opportunities for dialogue that globalisation brings.

References

Acharya, Amitav. 2002. State -society relations: Asian and world order after 11 September. In
Worlds in collision: Terror and the future of global order, ed. Ken Booth and Tim Dunne.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Aquinas, T. 1981. Summa Theologica. Tr. Dominican Fathers of the English Province, originally pub-
lished 1911, revised edition published 1948. Benziger Brothers. Westminster: Christian Classics.
Aristotle. 1976. Nichomachean Ethics. Trans. J.A.K. Thompson. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Camroux, David. 1996. Huntington: Scénarios controversés pour le future. Etudes, Juin: 735–746.
Chen, G.M., and K. Zhang. 2010. New media and cultural identity in the global society. In
Handbook of research on discourse behavior and digital communication: Language structures
and social interaction, ed. R. Taiwo, 795–809. Hershey: Idea Group Inc.
Confucius. 1971. Confucius: Confucian Analects, The Great Learning and The Doctrine of the
Mean. Trans. James Legge. London: Dover, originally published 1893 by Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Davidson, Donald. 1973. On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. Proceedings and Addresses of
the American Philosophical Association 47:5–20.
Eagleton, T. 2002. Local and global. In The politics of human rights, ed. Savic Obrad, 258–267.
London: Verso.
Fenton, S. 2004. Beyond ethnicity: The global comparative analysis of ethnic conflict. International
Journal of Comparative Sociology 45(3–4): 179–194.
Freire, Paulo. 2000. Pedagogy of the oppressed. 30th Anniversary Edition. Intro. Donald Macedo.
London: Continuum International Publishing Ltd.
Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. The end of history and the last man. London: Penguin.
Gadamer, H.-G. 1989. Truth and method. 2nd Revised Edition. Trans. Rev. J. Weinsheimer and
D.G. Marshall. London: Sheed and Ward.
Groves, Denise. 1998. India and Pakistan: A clash of civilizations? Washington Quarterly 21(4):
17–20.