Romanticizing Community

In the USA, we have this tendency to either romanticize or demonize communal/collectivist societies.*

On one hand we have the idea that "it takes a village to raise a child" and this related image has been very popular on Facebook lately,

On the other hand, we have the idea that it's nothing short of evil to "keep up with the Joneses" and this quote, also popular on Facebook lately, speaks volumes for the way we value individuality, as well as the way we view community:

It's been my experience over the past few years of living in a "collectivist or communal" society that there is little concern for people beyond their adherence, or lack of adherence, to the norms and mores of the community, no matter what and no matter, even, if they're family.

In other words, the typical American views about communal culture are wrong. There's no "love of the people within a community" and there's certainly no value for the individual feelings or thoughts of the members. The objective is a sense of social/communal comfort based on conformity. The goals are to follow and to copy others. Members must make other people feel comfortable by changing their own own attitudes and behaviors. 

During the training that I had before coming here, we were told over and over that "doing" is not valued in communal cultures. As Americans, we often base our opinions of ourselves and others on what we "do". That can range from our jobs to our personal behavior, but the components involve action; having a lofty title is great, but what do we "do" with it? Likewise, we may be employed as a janitor, but a strong work ethic and kind heart can make all the difference in whether other people value us, or not. 

In a communal culture, it's true that more value is placed on "being" as opposed to doing. There is, however, a problem with the American interpretation of "being". We think of "being" as existing. Being ourselves. Being natural. Being honest, even. Based on my experience and what I've seen, that is decidedly NOT the way "being" actually works. The focus on "being" is based, very often, on things out of one's control (race, ethnicity, nationality, inherited social status) or on the outcomes of some kind of privilege including educational attainment, job title, or marital status. One of the biggest conundrums many Americans face here is that we're still thinking about the "do" part of "being". If you have a bachelor's degree or higher, aren't you capable of "doing" more high level thinking? Aren't you supposed to continue learning? Aren't you supposed to use the knowledge that you supposedly gained? Aren't you "doing" the responsibilities associated with that job title? Leading, managing, teaching? Staying on top of the latest trends and economic indices, if applicable? If you are a spouse, aren't you "doing" the job delegated to your position in the household? Making the money, cleaning, cooking, taking care of the yard? Reading to your children?

Being implies that you are what (not WHO) you are - nothing more is required. You don't have to "do" anything once you get the position...other than keep it - by any means necessary, I might add. Once a degree is received, you're finished. You don't have to "do" anything more. And finally, once you're married, and especially for women who have already tackled the responsibility of giving birth, your responsibility is over. From the point of gaining the education, job, or marital status, the focus is on "being" that role - not "doing" that role.

And that's really hard for a lot of us to get our arms around.

Value in the community is absolutely placed on the role one carries. No action is required other than keeping the role. 

What that may create is artful, or awful, pretending. Pretending to be productive. Pretending to be a kind spouse. Pretending to believe the word of God that is heard or even spoken. Perhaps that's why there is so much corruption, nepotism, back-alley negotiation, and even environmental destruction. Anything different involves "doing" and that's not necessary, so why bother? Follow. Conform. Do what you're told. Know your place...

I'll never forget a staff meeting many years ago (in the US) in which the staff actually attempted a form of appreciation and shared ideas for empowering the team only to be shut down with the admonition that "this isn't some kind of kum-ba-ya organization". The implication was clear - such concerns for the group, as a whole, are akin to the spiritual song in which people sit in a circle holding hands as they sway side to side and sing...mushy...kum-ba-ya. Togetherness. Feel-good. Mutual appreciation. Disdain that's not surprising from a culture that seemingly values individualism above all else, or is it?  

My point is that just because people are sitting in a circle holding hands, singing and swaying, does not mean that their needs are being honored. Many Americans see such an image through our own cultural ideas of valuing other people as individuals (of course I do the exact same thing - my lens is VERY American - Southern, to be exact). 

We are often not aware of the ones who've been sent from the circle, banished from the village, shut down and kicked out. Too often, anybody who doesn't want to sit in the circle and sing, or maybe wants to sing a different song, is banished to the netherworld. In some communal societies, that idea of kum-ba-ya couldn't be farther from the truth. The practice of some communal societies is not based on an American idea of "community" in which all members are valued, but upon the idea of conformity; ideas and actions that do not conform to the status quo cause friction - destroy the "harmony" (even though harmony requires that different notes play at the same time...) 

To maintain a semblance of "harmony" or unity, the following are much more applicable: subtle pressure, ultimatums, or bullying to force compliance, accepting and submitting to the power of peer pressure, and finally, contributing to and/or excusing the marginalization of minority opinions and/or people.

Those realities fly in the face of what many Americans assume when we think of communal societies and the idea of community...but maybe that's because even though we're thinking of a supposedly different social structure, we're still using our values to define it and give it meaning. We assume that each individual has intrinsic worth - dignity, rights, and is valuable. In some communal societies, the value of the individual only goes as far as his or her ability to conform to the expectations of the group, and maybe most of all, to "be" their role in the social structure.

Now let's talk about us - Americans. People from the United States... 

What is this individualism that we seem to value? Is it selfishness? Is it looking out for our own self-interest? Is it defined by "the wolf of Wall Street? Do we value that? Who is "our"? Our gender, race, or religion? Are we capable of going beyond our own interests and doing anything for "the common good"?

I believe that we are - I believe that our focus on the individual is something very beautiful. The flip side of egocentric individuality is the idea (nay, belief) that there is something of intrinsic value in each person that is not determined by her/his "group". That is individualism and that idea, I believe, is very beautiful. 

Appreciating an individual involves honoring their very individuality - their struggles, their ideas, their victories, their defeats, even; "who" this person is - individually. What that means is that groups can form based on ideas, principles, values - it can be cohesive and functional - kind and supportive - free of externally imposed concepts of identity (man/woman, white/non-white, this religion/that religion). We can come together - hash it out, maybe even learn something new and grow. We can become a melting pot or even a freshly tossed salad!

It is exactly through honoring the individual that true community can be built - one based on shared values and commitment to those values - rather than one based on the very things of which we have no control, such as gender, race, or ethnicity. We can also move beyond the things that can be TOO controlled; educational attainment, job titles, and marital status. Additionally, kindness matters. Anyone can be kind. Kindness is an individual attribute and it is shared, primarily, one-on-one with other individuals. 

Thank you for reading this long reflection. I just want to say and to remind us that there's nothing wrong with individualism and there's nothing wrong with the idea of community. We all just need to remember to appreciate the real goals. A community is composed of many individuals. Love one another. Be kind. Listen.

Neither individualistic culture nor communal culture provide the answer. And that's exactly why we must move into a new direction. Let's stop romanticizing, or even demonizing, what we've created in our own imaginations. Let's build a new way. Shall we?

*This definition, taken from the Geert Hofstede Centre website, explains such social dynamics as this:

...individualism, can be defined as a preference for a loosely-knit social framework in which individuals are expected to take care of only themselves and their immediate families. Its opposite, collectivism, represents a preference for a tightly-knit framework in society in which individuals can expect their relatives or members of a particular in-group to look after them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty...

(For more resources related to this theme, see this link. For the synopsis of Indonesia or the US, click here or here, respectively. To see Indonesia compared directly the the US, click here.)

Peer Pressure, Bullying and the Fight Against Conformity

I wrote this a long time ago (July or August of 2012), but couldn't bring myself to publish it - I am fully of the opinion that I need to be quiet if I don't have something nice to say - for the most part, anyway. I've edited it and tried to clarify some points, specifically to make very clear that I am NOT in any way blaming a group, but I am pointing to a specific way of thinking and acting. 

That being said, there are people who are surprised by certain acts of violence that have recently occurred in the city where I first lived in Indonesia. I'm sorry to say that I was not at all surprised, but very sad all the same. 

In the original, unedited version of this post, there were a handful of examples. I think now that such things are unnecessary and detract from the more important message:

Bullying can lead to violence. We must speak out and when we see it happen. It is not OK. When we're quiet, we contribute to a system that not only commits violence, but normalizes it.

Prejudice, stereotyping, lying, and exploiting or objectifying people in the name of culture and tradition will eventually cause problems.  Repeated, hate-filled aggression against the human dignity of another - whether secretly and discretely behind the scenes, spoken publicly with lies in practiced tones of condescension and manipulation, or the act of marginalization and shutting-out those who dare to challenge such a system - will not stay hidden forever...

The slightly updated post follows.

“In the United States, bullying is a trend. Here, it is the culture”

(an anonymous friend)

I’ve struggled with uncomfortable feelings regularly ever since my arrival, but I’ve never been able to put my finger on the reason. Is it culture shock? Do I just miss my family, friends, and community in the US?

The feelings, however, seemed to be something else entirely; reminiscent of middle school and responding to the subtle pressure of nuanced attacks from my peers to conform. I was fighting the real or perceived need to revert into a rebellious, young teenager to protect myself from the constant pressures that I originally decided were just a part of “communal culture”. Now, after a bit more time, I think I know why I felt so strangely. What seems at first as concern or common chitty-chat is actually a highly developed and very sneaky form of bullying.

Whether it's “playing mind games” or downright bullying is of no relevance. 

Both are forms of emotional abuse and in some cases, emotional abuse leads to physical abuse. When we excuse one, we unwittingly allow the other, at the very least, we create a welcoming environment for outward acts of violence.

Emotionally abusive assaults are wielded with the precision of the most technologically advanced weaponry and the most cutting remark can be delivered with a compassionate, friendly smile. Because it’s not direct, but passive, it’s harder to guard against. The light version of such a thing is sustained pressure through mocking and anonymous messaging via hand phone or various other social media outlets. The full-on version intended to punish as opposed to mere pressuring includes destruction of support networks, embarrassing or belittling statements made in front of friends or co-workers, and a constant effort to tear down or discredit with sarcasm, ridicule and taunts, until the recipient is broken and compliant. Additionally, communication (sharing or not sharing information) is also a tool used to enforce and establish the “proper” status-related positions and social behaviors. Because of the delivery methods and the commonly held definition of a friend (basically anyone who is not a stranger, i.e. you’ve met once before, you work together, etc.), it can sometimes be too late before you realize what’s happening. The idea of “everybody being a friend” was one of the things I liked most about it here when I arrived. I thought friends treated each other with care, empathy, and respect. Friend, however, is just a word.

Within such a communal culture, conformity to the norms of the group, or at least to the norms of the majority opinion, are expected. How can true dialogue ever exist in such an environment? An unfortunate fallout from this is that often the minority voice is not only ignored, but expertly suppressed. It creates conflict to have differing opinions or ideas. Only the norms specified by the majority matter...unfortunately, sometimes these norms fly in the face of what would seem to be the proper ones. Such norms include outright lying (or intentionally twisting the truth), lack of mutuality or accountability in relationships, and the absence of treating others the way you would like to be treated.  Being genuine or having integrity often takes a backseat to the will of the majority and/or the established status quo. Additionally, making assumptions, passing judgement and espousing prejudices as truth are also often acceptable and expected. Of course those things happen everywhere, but not tolerated and certainly not cultivated!

I liked a photo on Facebook once. It was of a young girl, maybe 12 or 13 years old, holding a sign beside a vehicle while her presumed father was filling up the tank. The sign said “I told a lie to my father”. A friend commented that he, too, agrees that children shouldn’t lie to their parents, but that public humiliation is a form of violence and with that he cannot abide. It was that interchange that helped me to see what I’ve come to learn. The aforementioned methods of coercion often employ such shaming tactics as public humiliation. Shaming and shame do not value human dignity, but force adherence to socially accepted norms. If those socially accepted norms excuse and justify hurt, oppression, fear, and prejudice, then that's where the trouble begins.

“Shame is a reaction to other people's criticism, 
an acute personal chagrin at our failure to live up to our obligations and
the expectations others have of us.
In true shame oriented cultures, every person has a place and a duty in the society. 
One maintains self-respect, not by choosing what is good rather than what is evil, 
but by choosing what is expected of one.”

And now I understand that it’s a form of violence, even though I’ve felt it all along.

The point of this commentary is to share that I am now aware, as never before, of a culture of violence that affects many; the voices of dissent within majority groups, students, teachers, workers, children, and spouses, among others. 

People are hurting because of systematic bullying cultivated through established social hierarchies. 

Reflecting on recent acts of violence in the United States, we must all be aware that there is no culture, religion, ethnicity, or even gender more disposed to acts of violence than any other. Human beings are violent. Violence happens everywhere. 

We all have a responsibility to stop it. We must listen to others. We must value all life - live and let live. We must not shut down different opinions and ideas, and we must not accept attempts to maintain systems that are harmful. 

We must live with love and intention, and maybe most of all, we must speak out and speak up when people are hurting, because we all are. No shame. No punishment. No prejudice. 

Let love rule. 

Yes, Actually, I DID Need Some Cheese with that Whine

It looks that this has been the longest stint in a while that I've gone without writing a post. What, pray tell, have I been doing lately?

It seems that I've been swimming around a bit in a pool of despair, tangled in the groping vines of victimhood, and flailing amidst ideas of incompetence and defeat.

That sounds fun and productive, doesn't it? (especially considering that I'm happier, in many ways, than I've ever been and have more to be grateful for than at almost any other time in my life)

So what was wrong?

In looking back, it seems that I've never had trouble relying on my faith to get me through tough times - in fact, I am so sure of my faith when times are hard that it seems to others, maybe, that I just barrel through, recklessly and determined. During those times, it's not me, it's faith that carries me.

Why then, when times are NOT tough, but in fact happy, safe, and stable, that I struggle? Is it as if I only rely on God and my faith when I should otherwise be terrified, but as soon as things are fine and straight that I think "I've got this now, thanks"... and then I don't.

This creates a vicious cycle of entitlement and responsibility that somehow manages to relegate faith to a service position, a back-up plan, of sorts, rather than constantly maintaining God's position as the driver and the One who is truly in control.

That's not how it is and grace doesn't work like that.

God isn't sitting back waiting for us to fail or to be in a position of need before He grabs us. He has us everyday, all the time, but why is it so much easier to rely on His hand when we're in trouble?

Is it pride? Is it that American work ethic that says "I'll do all I can to hold up my end, but I know you're there if I need you"?

What is it?

After a bit of reflection, I'm thinking that maybe it is that the grace of God is beyond human comprehension. Even when we KNOW we don't earn it, we still think we have to do something to honor it. (I didn't say honor God, I said honor the concept of grace)

So, while I was busy whining to myself that I'm not working (not making an income, but not even permitted to work because of the kind of governmental permission I have to even be here), living outside the bounds of "community" (for a multitude of reasons), and even worrying myself to death that I'm going to turn into a pumpkin again because there are too many good things to eat, I lost sight of the most important gifts that led to a comfortable place, albeit a place where doubt and self-pity can sneak in to wreak havoc.

So instead of focusing my energy towards the negatives I can create, I'm going to focus on my beautiful life. I'm going to be thankful and full of gratitude and compassion, but most of all, I'm going to remember that God not only has me when the going is rough and hard, but when life is, indeed, beautiful.

I will follow in happiness as strongly as I have when I should have been terrified. The love of God and His supreme grace always have me. I trust His will and will not worry in my joy anymore than I worried in my fear.

Amen and thanks be to God.