THE INTERDEPENDENT GLOBAL SOCIETY

When Euripides wrote, “All is change; all yields its place and goes” in 422 BCE, he probably did not
realize that he would be helping to introduce a book on intercultural communication. Yet, the study
of intercultural communication is about change. It is about changes in the world and how the people
in that world must adapt to them. More specifically, this book deals with the world changes that
have brought us into direct and indirect contact with people who, because of their culture, often
behave in ways that we do not understand. With or without our consent, the last three decades
[1960–1990] have thrust on us groups of people who often appear alien. These people, who appear
“different,” may live thousands of miles away or right next door. What is special about them is that,
in many ways, they are not like us.1

Written nearly thirty years ago to introduce the first edition of Communication Between Cultures,
the above paragraph is more relevant today. The world is now changing at a much faster pace,
requiring rapid adjustment to evolving technology and changing social conditions. Our interactions
with people of different cultures have become common in the classroom, the workplace, and the
healthcare setting, and with growing frequency in our neighborhood. The term “globalization”
originally implied an emerging development, a work in progress, but can now be characterized as
both an existing condition and a continuing dynamic. With rare exceptions, our lives are increasingly
dependent on people and events in other parts of the world. As Cabrera and Unruh point out, “Our
economy, environment, resources, education, and health systems all interconnect to, rely on, and
affect the economies, environments, resources, and health systems in other countries.” 2 The
reliance on food imports serves as an easily understood example of this international
interdependency. Population growth and increasing ethnic diversity in the United States have
generated a demand for more and diverse food imports.3 A 2012 government report indicated that
“an estimated 15 percent of the U.S. food supply is imported, including 50 percent of fresh fruits, 20
percent of fresh vegetables and 80 percent of seafood.” 4 But before any of those items can be
imported, international agreements must be reached on innumerable specifications relating to
quality, packaging, labels, storage, labor conditions, etc. Food products sent abroad from the United
States must also meet import requirements established by the receiving nation, all of which involve
cross-cultural negotiations, agreements, monitoring, and inspections. These procedures are carried
out and implemented for all U.S. imports and exports, and intercultural communication is the nexus
in every step. Since our first edition, we have offered numerous examples and statistics to convince
the reader of the importance of intercultural communication in contemporary society. However,
today, most readers of this text will have grown up in an era when the activities associated with
“multicultural,” “cross-cultural,” “intercultural,” “cultural diversity,” “ethnic pluralism,” and others
were common. Therefore, rather than offering a set of examples to illustrate the role of intercultural
communication in your social, professional, and even private lives, we now choose to argue that in
the globalized world, effective intercultural communication is an increasingly essential requirement
in the critical efforts to ensure world peace, improve relationships between co-cultures and the
dominant cultures within each country, assure resource sustainability, and promote ecological
viability.

THE REQUIREMENT FOR INTERCULTURAL COOPERATION

Discussions of “globalization” most frequently focus on economic benefits and the ramifications of
interdependence. However, in addition to economic considerations, globalization has raised
awareness of existing and emerging conditions that influence many aspects of our planet and
society. The global community is currently faced with a broad spectrum of circumstances that
present national governments with pronounced demands on financial and physical resources.
Moreover, there are conditions looming on the horizon that portend severe consequences for the
future unless properly anticipated and managed. Successful resolution of many of these problems
will require global governance—a transnational approach to cooperatively engage and solve
multistate problems. Table 1.1 presents a menu of particularly salient issues confronting the
globalized society, all of which have to be addressed through competent intercultural
communication. We will illustrate some of the issues confronting the global society, many of which
will likely influence your lives

SOCIAL CHALLENGES

Scientific and socioeconomic advances in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries resulted in rapid
population growth (see Table 1.2). Vastly improved healthcare, increased food production and
nutritional knowledge, and greater availability of social support systems contributed to reduced
infant mortality and increased life expectancy.5 Accompanying the many improvements and
benefits, this population explosion has exacerbated some older problems and given rise to
numerous new ones. Perhaps the most pressing is, “What changes must be made in order to ensure
the world’s environment can support these levels of human activities?” It is a question that no single
organization, government, or nation can answer. It will require shared ideas, interaction, and mutual
effort across cultural and state borders. Social and technological improvements have also facilitated
and encouraged large population movement from rural areas to urban environments. We have seen
mass migration from regions afflicted by poverty, political oppression, or conflict to areas offering
personal safety, economic opportunities, and political stability. Immigration issues are a daily topic in
the United States and regularly produce a divided electorate. Movement of people from poverty-
ridden and violence-torn African and Middle Eastern nations, along with those from Eastern Europe
seeking better employment, has altered the complexion of Western Europe. Immigrants from Latin
America and Asia have changed the traditional composition of the United States. Minorities now
represent more than 37 percent of the U.S. population, almost 13 percent were born in another
country, and more than 20 percent speak a language other than English at home. And changes
brought by immigrants are expected to continue—studies indicate that “new immigrants and their
children will make up 84%” of the 24 million net increase in the U.S. labor force by 2030.7 The
magnitude of future immigration, the accompanying challenge, and the attendant need for
intercultural skills is clearly pointed out by Professor of Evolutionary Biology Mark Pagel: the
dominant demographic trend of the next century will be the movement of people from poorer to
richer regions of the world. Diverse people will be brought together who have little common cultural
identity of the sort that historically has prompted our cultural nepotism, and this will happen at rates
that exceed those at which they can be culturally integrated.8 A majority of new immigrants, both in
the United States and in other nations, will seek work and residence in urban areas. According to the
United Nations, over half the world’s population currently lives in cities, a figure that is expected to
reach 66 percent by 2050. In the United States, 80.7 percent of the population already resides in
urban areas.9 Greater population density raises requirements for better waste management,
availability of foodstuffs, and reliable freshwater resources. It also places people of different
ethnicities, religious practices, worldviews, beliefs, values, etc. in closer proximity to each other. In
order to achieve prosperity, they will have to learn to cooperate and respect each other’s
differences

Globalization has additionally resulted in increasing intercultural relationships. Mounting

immigration, urbanization, international employment, study abroad, and ease of foreign travel are
facilitating contact between people with different racial, ethnic, religious, and cultural backgrounds.
In greater numbers, people are living and working abroad. The resultant extended intercultural
contact has led to a rise in international marriages in Asia, Europe, and the United States. According
to 2010 census data, 9.5 percent of married-couple households in the United States were interracial
or interethnic, an increase of more than 2 percent from 2000. Naturally, these cross-cultural
marriages, both internationally and domestically, have produced intercultural children, and 32
percent of U.S. citizens self-identified as multiracial in the 2010 census. This growing international
phenomenon of cultural mixing gives added emphasis to the important role of intercultural
communication and draws attention to identity issues.10 In the United States, the white non-
Hispanic population is forecast to lose majority status by 2043, after which the nation will be a
majority of minorities. By 2060, minority groups will represent an estimated 57 percent of the
population. Clearly, this will bring changes to the traditionally “dominant” U.S. culture, a product of
the beliefs and values of the historically white majority. This transition will demand greater
intercultural insight, acceptance, and communication expertise.11 Aging populations represent
another emerging problem that will require intercultural communication knowledge and skills.
Almost every nation in the world is experiencing an increase in older citizenry (i.e., over 60 years)
made more pronounced by declining birthrates. Globally, the older age-group represented 9.2
percent of the total population in 1990, had expanded to 11.7 percent by 2013, and is expected to
reach 21.1 percent by 2050. In the United States, those over 65 years of age represented 13.1
percent of the 2010 population, which was a faster rate of growth than the total population, and is
expected to increase to 21.4 percent by 2050. There are numerous social and economic
consequences arising from this trend toward expanding aging populations, not the least of which is
the ratio of working age to elderly dependency age (i.e., the number of working-age people in
relation to those in retirement). This imbalance is a concern because most social support programs
for older people are dependent on fiscal support generated by the workforce. Fortunately for the
United States, in spite of the declining birthrate, overall population growth is robust due to
immigration, which also raises the importance of intercultural understanding.12 A prescient
summation of concerns about the world’s aging population is contained in a U.S. government report
on world aging. The report calls for actions that will clearly require intercultural communication
exchanges: Despite the weight of scientific evidence, the significance of population aging and its
global implications have yet to be fully appreciated. There is a need to raise in 1990, had expanded
to 11.7 percent by 2013, and is expected to reach 21.1 percent by 2050. In the United States, those
over 65 years of age represented 13.1 percent of the 2010 population, which was a faster rate of
growth than the total population, and is expected to increase to 21.4 percent by 2050. There are
numerous social and economic consequences arising from this trend toward expanding aging
populations, not the least of which is the ratio of working age to elderly dependency age (i.e., the
number of working-age people in relation to those in retirement). This imbalance is a concern
because most social support programs for older people are dependent on fiscal support generated
by the workforce. Fortunately for the United States, in spite of the declining birthrate, overall
population growth is robust due to immigration, which also raises the importance of intercultural
understanding.12 A prescient summation of concerns about the world’s aging population is
contained in a U.S. government report on world aging. The report calls for actions that will clearly
require intercultural communication exchanges: Despite the weight of scientific evidence, the
significance of population aging and its global implications have yet to be fully appreciated. There is
a need to raise

ECOLOGICAL CONCERNS

The need and competition for natural resources among nations has a long historical record of
creating turmoil and conflict. The globalized economy continues to be characterized by nations
seeking to acquire and preserve raw materials needed to fuel their economic engines. In the 1960s
and 1970s, Japan scoured the world for needed materials. It was followed by South Korea, and now
China is acquiring resources worldwide in order to sustain its industrialization. India’s growing
economy is also adding to the demand for raw materials. As other nations’ populations grow, the
requirement for various natural resources will expand. In his 2014 report, the U.S. Director of
National Intelligence predicted that “Competition for scarce [natural] resources, such as food, water,
or energy, will likely increase tensions within and between states and could lead to more localized or
regional conflicts, or exacerbate government instability.” 14 Demands for energy resources (e.g.,
natural gas, oil, and coal), the most vital for economic growth, are expected to increase 37 percent
by 2040, and much of this demand will be from China, India, and emerging economies—a situation
ripe for political tensions. International agreements will be needed to regulate the extraction of
resources from regions of disputed sovereignty and common areas outside national boundaries,
such as seabed hydrocarbons and minerals. And cooperative policing mechanisms may be necessary
to ensure compliance with treaties and pacts. In some cases, disagreements will have to be
mediated through international governance organizations, such as occurred in the World Trade
Organization’s resolution of a trade dispute between China and the United States over rare earth
metals, essential in manufacturing high-tech products, such as smart phones and cameras.15 In
every instance, intercultural communication will be key to the success of these international
negotiations and agreements. Water represents the most indispensable resource for human, animal,
and plant life on our planet. Factors such as overconsumption, misuse, pollution, and climate change
threaten existing supplies, and serious water shortages are widely predicted for the future. Studies
indicate that by 2050, three-quarters of the world’s population could experience water scarcity.
Potable water is already an issue in parts of the United States, particularly Southern California, and
“megadroughts” lasting thirtyfive years or more are predicted for the Southwest and Midwest
during the latter part of this century. The growing population and increased urbanization are placing
enormous demands on existing water sources and creating competition between urban and
agricultural populations. In addition to more water for human consumption, increases will be
needed for agriculture to grow the necessary food sources. Lack of water has implications for health,
economic development, security, and environmental sustainability. Intercultural communication will
play a role in a number of areas related to managing water shortages. International and domestic
agreements will have to be negotiated regarding access to water, water distribution rights, and even
water trading.16 An important role for intercultural communication expertise will likely be in
developing and implementing educational programs for water management and conservation,
especially at the consumer level, where presentations will need to cross multiple cultural lines. The
threat of insufficient food resources is yet another problem arising from population growth,
urbanization, and changing dietary habits. In addition to increased numbers of people,
socioeconomic improvement has enabled millions to begin consuming more animal protein, in turn
requiring expanded land area, water usage, and crops for animal feed. Academic research has
revealed that world crop production will have to double by 2050 to meet anticipated demand for
human and animal consumption and biofuels. However, crop production is not keeping pace with
the projected requirements. A reduction in available food resources will drive prices up, place
additional burdens on people living near or below poverty levels, and increase the potential for
political instability. As insurance, some nations are already acquiring vast tracts of arable land in
Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia for agricultural development

Adding to the burden of agricultural production is the decline in pelagic resources resulting from fish
stock depletion, ocean pollution, and climate change. According to the United Nations, over 10
percent of the world’s population relies on fisheries for a living. However, the industry is facing a
number of threats, ranging from “illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing to harmful fishing
practices to wastage to poor governance.” 18 This has resulted in more than 80 percent of ocean fish
being harvested at or above their sustainability levels and the wholesale destruction of the world’s
coral reefs.19 Amelioration of this situation will require extensive international agreements covering
a broad range of topics, such as quotas, permissible practices, type and extent of punishment for
violations, and, most challenging, cooperative monitoring and policing of the ocean commons. The
extent of the problem and number of involved nations make this an extremely difficult task but a
necessary one if we are to ensure that the oceans remain a reliable source of food. According to the
President of the Earth Policy Institute, Lester Brown, “We are entering a time of chronic food
scarcity, one that is leading to intense competition for control of land and water resources— in
short, a new geopolitics of food.” 20 The implications of this evolving situation are multiple.
International cooperation will be required on a grand scale to guarantee adequate food availability,
avoid detrimental competition, and ensure continued political viability. In addition to cooperative
programs and international agreements, some solutions may have to center around changing
traditional dietary practices, a daunting cultural challenge. Evolving conditions are worsened by
environmental degradation, pollution, and climate change. The destruction of natural habitats, such
as wetlands and woodlands, for industrial and residential development (along with other factors,
such as pollution) is contributing to the extinction of plant and animal species at an accelerating
pace. Pollution is a significant and continually growing problem throughout the world, including our
oceans. A 2015 study revealed that as much as 8 million metric tons of plastic trash enters the ocean
every year. The Great Pacific Garbage Patch stretches for hundreds of miles across the Pacific Ocean
and consists primarily of nonbiodegradable plastics that only break down into smaller and smaller
particles, ultimately to be ingested by marine life. Domestic water pollution is also a growing
problem throughout the world. According to a 2014 government report, almost 60 percent of
China’s underground water was so polluted that it could not be consumed without treatment.
Surveys by the Environmental Protection Agency disclosed that pollution prevented 40 percent of
U.S. rivers, lakes, and estuaries from being used for fishing or swimming. The waters are so polluted
with runoff sewage and garbage in Rio de Janeiro’s Guanabara Bay, site of the 2016 Olympic sailing
and windsurfing events, that some officials have registered concern about the health risks to the
athletes. Air pollution continues to be an enervating health factor in many parts of the world,
especially China and India. Moreover, air pollution does not respect national borders. Recent reports
have revealed that industrial emissions produced in China are carried by wind patterns all the way to
the U.S. West Coast, making it a matter of international concern.21 The ever-increasing force of
climate change is another consideration that necessitates competent intercultural interactions.
Extreme weather conditions will bring more frequent tropical storms, droughts, wildfires, flooding,
health threats, and a host of other maladies that can be managed only by nations working together.
For instance, in low-lying areas, complete towns will have to be relocated, and some islands in the
South Pacific are likely to be inundated, requiring relocation of entire populations. Increased ocean
temperatures will exert pressure on marine habitats and fishing patterns, impacting traditional
industries and altering diets. Insect infestations and plant diseases will become more common with
warmer temperatures and result in lower agricultural yields. Adaptation to these many changes will
require that nations engage in cooperative efforts and share resources.22 We are stressing that
ecological changes, both ongoing and in the future, carry the potential to transform many of the
beliefs, practices, and habits that have become normal over the past centuries. People,
organizations, and states will have to learn new ways of managing and cooperating. Often, this will
require reaching across cultural divides

HUMANITARIAN AND LEGAL COOPERATION

Advances in communication technologies have enabled rapid notification and dissemination of
information concerning humanitarian crises, such as contagious disease outbreaks and natural
disasters. Modern transport capabilities have offered a means of expeditiously responding to those
crises, and nations and relief organizations around the world mobilize and deploy resources to
disaster sites. The 2014 outbreak of the Ebola virus in West Africa is a good example of the
complexity of responding to such an incident. The disease affected citizens of six West African
nations, and infected individuals were also treated in the United States, England, and Spain. In
attempting to contain the disease, personnel and materials from around the world were rushed to
the area, and coordination required communication across organizational, linguistic, and cultural
lines. Additionally, to be successful, the instituted treatment and containment programs had to be
culturally sensitive to local customs. For example, caring for the dead traditionally requires touching
and even kissing the body in some West African nations. To break the Ebola infection cycle,
emergency workers had to identify and implement effective methods of communicating the dangers
of this practice to the local inhabitants. Disaster response is another area of international
cooperation requiring intercultural communication competence. The worldwide response to the
2010 Haiti earthquake, the 2011 Japan earthquake and tsunami, and the 2013 Philippine super
typhoon offer examples of recent endeavors. International assistance in cases of a major accident
has also become common. For instance, the 2014 loss of a Malaysian commercial aircraft thought to
have gone down in the Indian Ocean and the AirAsia plane that crashed near Indonesia elicited
international deployment of personnel and equipment. These types of calamities increase the need
for intercultural communication skills among all parties involved. Protection of intellectual property
is another legal concern in the globalized economy. The negotiation, enactment, and enforcement of
regulations arising from international legal agreements are often confronted with issues of cultural
divergence. As an example, international copyright law is largely based on the Western concept of
creativity being primarily an individual effort, but, as Rajan points out, this conceptualization is not
consistent across all cultures: A strongly individualistic conception of creativity may not be relevant
to cultures which place a higher value on group or communal creation, or locate the work of
individual authors within a strong, community tradition of educated understanding and
appreciation. They may also be difficult to reconcile with traditions which do not accord primary
importance to the identity of the author.

More succinctly, the Euro-American cultural value is on individual ownership and creativity, but
many non-European “traditions tend toward a more communal conception.” 24 As a result, to reach
successful agreements in instances where these varied cultural perspectives collide, the involved
individuals will need a strong appreciation for the role of culture in communication

POLITICAL ISSUES

As globalization has driven the international community into greater economic interdependency, it
has presented nations with issues that on occasion conflict with domestic politics. For example,
domestic political divisions have kept the United States from becoming a participant in the
International Criminal Court, established to prosecute serious crimes against humanity, despite more
than one hundred other nations taking part. Due to its opposition to capital punishment, Mexico has
been reluctant to extradite criminals to the United States when there is a possibility of the death
penalty being imposed. It was only through international pressure that in 2013, the Japanese
government ratified an international agreement, first established in 1980, that is used to adjudicate
international child custody disputes.25 Japan’s reluctance to sign was due to the strong cultural
belief that child custody is the mother’s prerogative. Scientific advances are another area that can
become politically divisive. During a period in 2013–2014, the Chinese government halted imports of
U.S. genetically modified corn, citing health risks. The national value-related attitude toward
genetically modified food also varies between the United States and the European Union, making
imports and exports subject to international negotiations and trade agreements. Studies have shown
that opinion on research employing human embryo stem cells can also vary internationally based on
religion, ideology, and personal values. China and the United States often trade barbs about human
rights, and much of their disagreement can be traced to divergent views about human rights. For the
United States, human rights are anchored in a legal tradition of political and civil rights. China, on the
other hand, grounds its approach to the topic on a perspective that assigns the highest priority to
social and economic rights.26 These few illustrations should provide ample evidence of the many
contentious political issues dividing states in the globalized society. Dissimilar cultural values and
attitudes are at the base of many of these controversial issues, and the only prudent course of
resolution is through dialogue and agreement—in other words, through employing competent
intercultural communication.

SECURITY CONCERNS

Peace and stability in the age of globalization is under constant assault by multiple complex threats,
many of which can be countered only through international governmental and military cooperation.
To illustrate the continuing need for intercultural communication in the national security arena, we
will address a few of the ongoing challenges and operations in the following paragraphs. You should
try to keep in mind the many different languages and cultures involved among participants in the
programs and operations discussed. Weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), which include nuclear,
chemical, and biological armaments, carry the potential to inflict the greatest number of causalities
and are a concern for almost every nation. The desire to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons is
exemplified in the multinational efforts to dissuade Iran from further development and to terminate
the North Korean program. Negotiations with Iran involve representatives from China, France,
Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In addition to North Korea, the Six
Party Talks involve China, Japan, Russia, South Korea, and the United States. The removal and
destruction of Syria’s chemical arsenal in 2013–2014 involved Syria’s acquiescence, an agreement
between the United States and Russia, a UN Security Council Resolution, and supervision by the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Ships from Norway and Denmark provided
transport services. Logistic sites were used in Cyprus and Italy. The chemical weapons and associated
materials were destroyed aboard a U.S. merchant ship and at sites in Finland, Germany, the United
Kingdom, and the United States.27 The role of intercultural communication in these cases is
selfevident. We are constantly reminded of the danger of global terrorism as it spreads around the
world. With the exception of Antarctica, acts of terrorism resulting in loss of life occurred on every
continent in 2014. Nor is there any indication that the threat will diminish anytime soon. The ability
ultimately to meet the challenge of terrorism will require the cooperation of the entire international
community. The Combined Maritime Forces (CMF) offers an example of how the international
community can successfully engage and neutralize an asymmetrical threat. Composed of naval units
from 30 nations, the CMF maintains a presence in the Arabian Gulf, Northern Arabian Sea, and the
Indian Ocean, encompassing “approximately 2.5 million square miles of international waters.” 28
This all-voluntary force conducts continuous security operations and has effectively quelled Somali-
based maritime piracy. The implementation of these hugely complex operations takes an
extraordinary degree of coordination, all anchored in communication that must pass through
numerous language and cultural filters. The UN peacekeeping operations offer another example of
international cooperation that must overcome countless cultural and language obstacles. As of
January 2015, more than 120,000 uniformed and civilian personnel from 128 nations were deployed
to 16 international locations. These men and women were working to maintain peace, protect
civilian populations, sustain the environment, and promote human rights at 16 sites in Africa, the
Balkans, the Caribbean, the Middle East, and South Asia.29 Just as globalization has changed the
economic and social landscape, it has given rise to a series of emerging security threats. These
include extant and developing sectarian and ethnic tensions. Renascent nationalism has exhibited
itself as both a political instrument and an aspirational force. Old and new contested territorial
claims are coming between nations. Differences in cultural and ideological perceptions are at the
heart of many of these situations, and cooperative mutual interaction to dispel those differences is
the key to peaceful resolution. Religion remains a potent source of divisiveness around the world. A
Pew Research Center study revealed that 77 percent of the world’s population “was living in
countries with a high or very high overall level of restrictions on religion in 2013.” 30 These
restrictions include government-imposed regulations and acts of social harassment due to religious
affiliation. Of the 198 nations in the study, 30 percent had government restrictions against minority
religions, and in 61 percent of the countries, religious groups experienced some form of social
harassment.31 After two decades of conflict between Muslims in the north and Christians/Animists
in the south, Sudan was divided into two separate states in 2011, but tensions persist. Professed
Muslims belonging to the Boko Haram terrorist group seek to impose Islamic law (Sharia) throughout
Nigeria. Although it takes many forms, the Sunni–Shia divide is the underlying cause of conflict in the
Middle East, with entire nations taking different sides (e.g., Sunni Saudi Arabia vs. Shia Iran). India’s
enduring Hindu– Christian and Hindu–Muslim animosities give no indication of diminishing, and
occasional low-level violent eruptions are not uncommon. Since 2009, Hindus and Buddhist in Sir
Lanka have engaged in an uneasy peace following a debilitating civil war lasting more than twenty-
five years. The Chinese government has officially banned the Falun Gong religious group. Beginning
in 2012, Buddhist mobs have engaged in violent attacks on Muslim-minority Rohingya communities
in Myanmar. Nor is the West immune to sectarian conflict, as demonstrated by recent attacks in
Denmark, France, and the United Kingdom, part of an alarming rise in antiSemitism across Europe.32
Although not as frequently mentioned in the news as religiously based conflicts, ethnic violence is
also an expanding challenge for the international community. The following examples are but a short
list of ongoing ethnic struggles. Soon after gaining independence, peace in South Sudan was
shattered by conflict between members of the Nuer and Dinka tribes contesting control of land and
resources. Since the removal of Muammar Qaddafi as Libya’s leader, the country has devolved into a
civil war with various tribal, religious, militia, and governmental groups vying for power. Yemen has
long been riven by intertribal conflicts, the most recent occurring in early 2015, when rebels from
the Houthi tribe overthrew the sitting government. Ethnic strife continues its long history in
Myanmar, where Kachin, Shans, Chins, Karens, Mons, and numerous other minority ethnic groups
contest the central government for control of their homelands, access to resources, and
preservation of their culture. In Russia, ethnic tensions have long been a national concern, and the
northern Caucasus region is a site of continuing ethnic violence. Nationalism, another divisive
ideology, has historically been used as a populist call to rally support against such multicultural
issues as immigration, foreign products, or involvement in international organizations or pacts.
Globalization, with its focus less on individual nations and more on internationalization, has opened
the door for emerging, divisive nationalist movements in several areas of the world over the past
decade. In Europe, economic recession, unemployment, immigration issues, and sectarianism have
promoted nationalist political movements in the United Kingdom, Denmark, France, and Germany.
Since 2012, Russia has invoked emotional nationalistic appeals in its domestic political
pronouncements and used nationalism as part of the rationale for movement into the Crimea and
eastern Ukraine. In India, ardent Hindu nationalists continue to define themselves in contrast to the
nation’s Muslim population. As a justification for retaining power and to garner support for political
policies, the Chinese Communist Party instills nationalism through the educational system and
popular media. There have also been recent indicators that nationalism is growing in Japan. Nor is
the United States exempt from nationalism, as demonstrated when some politicos conflate
“American exceptionalism” with nationalism.33 When faced with any nationalistically based call, one
should always keep in mind that a fundamental function of nationalism is the creation of an “us” and
a “them.” Conflicting territorial claims have been a historical constant due to fluctuating borders
arising from wars, treaties, political intrigues, and mass migration. Many of the world’s established
borders are seen as being unilaterally imposed by former colonial powers or viewed through the
perspective of divided historical memory. Today, most historically based disagreements lie dormant,
confined to occasional rhetorical exchanges between the disputants. However, in several areas,
these ongoing territorial differences remain active and carry the potential to disrupt the greater
social order. For example, the absence of a clearly defined demarcation between Israeli and
Palestinian territory has been festering almost 100 years and remains an extremely volatile situation
today. An inability to agree on a border in the Kashmir region following the 1947 Partition has left
Indian and Pakistani armed forces aligned along the Line of Control in Kashmir. The situation is made
more dangerous due to both nations possessing nuclear weapons. Only a little farther to the north,
since their 1962 border war, Indian and Chinese forces have been separated by an imaginary line
extending over 2,500 miles through an area of disputed territory. In more recent conflicts, China has
used vague historical documents and indistinct claimed boundaries to assert sovereignty over as
much as 90 percent of the entire South China Sea, a claim that conflicts with the maritime economic
boundaries of six other littoral nations. Incidents between Chinese and Vietnamese ships in the
South China Sea in 2014 led to riots and the destruction of Chinese properties in Vietnam. Russia’s
military takeover of the Crimea, the support of rebels in eastern Ukraine, and President Putin’s
jingoistic pronouncements have unsettled the entire European continent.34 The foregoing
discussion of the numerous challenges confronting the globalized community was designed to
provide you with a broad overview of the current and evolving circumstances that carry the
potential to create friction, instability, and even conflict between nations. The purpose was to
demonstrate the requirement for international cooperation and, when needed, global governance in
managing these problems. The root cause of conflict often lies in an overemphasis on differences
between the groups involved. This book aims to develop your intercultural skills so that you may
play a role in resolving some of the conflicts in the globalized world.

TECHNOLOGY

Information technology (IT) has globalized and democratized access to information! No longer are
literary, scientific, legal, and educational materials the provenance of circumstantially advantaged
segments of society. With minimal investment in either money or time, anyone in almost any place
in the world can access the Internet for knowledge, entertainment, communication, and other
reasons. No longer does one have to travel to a library, locate an expert, purchase a book, send a
letter, or even reason out a problem for oneself. A vast body of knowledge is readily available. Even
when it is written in another language, a translation can often be obtained online. The ubiquity and
accessibility of information has made “I don’t know, but I can look it up” the mantra of the digital
generations. The ability to communicate with people around the world is a source of cohesion as
well as polarization. Technology has enabled ordinary citizens to form and organize groups quickly
around a common interest regardless of veracity or social benefit. The role of social media in the
2011 Arab Spring uprisings that occurred in part of the Middle East is well known. The Internet and
social media also played a critical role in the 2013–2014 “Euromaidan” protests, which ultimately
drove the Ukrainian president from office and set in motion the chain of events leading to armed
conflict between Ukrainian and Russian-backed separatist forces. According to one study, Internet
news sites and social media were central in the dissemination of information about the protest and
are believed to “have been highly influential—perhaps even at unprecedented levels compared to
prior protests internationally—in motivating people and framing their protest claims.” 36
Unfortunately, IT is only a medium and is unable to distinguish between use for purposes of positive
or negative gain, good or evil intent, or benign or malicious content. ISIS, for example, has employed
various modes of IT to distribute videos and messages intended to recruit converts, propagandize its
claims, and intimidate opponents. As a result, ISIS has been able to use social media, especially
Twitter, to create a virtual image that exceeds actual capabilities. In a more positive vein, while
almost 90 percent of the residents of Bell, California, speak a language other than English, the city’s
website relies on Google Translate to translate city documents into 64 different languages.37 The
Internet has also launched “international classrooms” by allowing students from different countries
to meet for online discussions as part of formal class activities. The “Global Class,” conducted by
Durham College, is a “live 90-minute class between [sic] four countries, typically three different post-
secondary classes and a guest speaker.” 38 During these classes, the role of intercultural
communication becomes especially salient. In some instances, media technology is also leading to a
more polarized society, particularly in the United States. The availability of varied information
sources on the Internet is enormous, making it quite easy to find material that confirms and
solidifies almost any conviction. One author ably described this unfortunate trend: Out in
cyberspace, facts are movable objects, pushed aside when they don’t fit beliefs, political leanings or
preconceived notions. Everybody’s an expert. The likeminded find each other and form communities
online, reinforcing their biases and their certitude.

According to Achenbach, current IT venues, which include radio and television, permit people to
inhabit a “ ‘filter bubble’ that lets in only the information with which [they] agree.” 40 Additionally,
the Internet provides a degree of anonymity that can be used to strip away social civility and allows
individuals to post shrill, demeaning, discriminatory, and even untrue information. Individuals no
longer find it necessary to seek compromises with people who hold perceptions and attitudes that
differ from their own. Although written in 2009, Nicholas Kristof’s comment remains valid today:
“Americans increasingly are segregating themselves into communities, clubs and churches where
they are surrounded by people who think the way they do…. The result is polarization and
intolerance.” 41 Evidence of this is seen on a wide range of issues, such as conservative versus
liberal, pro-life versus freedom of choice, anti-immigration versus immigration rights, reduced
government spending versus social welfare programs, and the schism surrounding gay marriage
rights. It is also evident in the vitriolic exchanges often posted on entertainment blogs, even on such
mundane issues as what is a good or bad YouTube music video. Amelioration of these divergent
perspectives will be achieved only by understanding that people have varying values and worldviews
and by acquiring the ability to communicate across those differences. The continuing growth of
digital technologies is also bringing about profound social and cultural changes. For example, users
are turning away from hard-copy publications such as newspapers and books in favor of portable
electronic devices. Universities offering online degrees are common. Even elite universities, like
Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Stanford, now offer courses online, many of
them free. Movies and television programs can be streamed to home television screens or online
devices or stored and watched on a portable device during a transatlantic crossing. The Internet also
serves as a meeting place for singles. According to a Pew report, 11 percent of U.S. Americans have
used “online dating sites or mobile dating apps to meet someone.” 42 Naturally, many more
examples could illustrate the ever-expanding role that communication technology plays in your life.
And there is little doubt that IT will bring even more change and convenience to your lives in the
future. However, we remind you again that IT is a neutral platform. The messages that pass through
the many media sources are shaped by the senders. Thus, regardless of the medium used, culture
will continue to play an influential role in shaping both the content and the form of the message.

DEVELOPING INTERCULTURAL AWARENESS

In our zeal to convince you to study intercultural communication, we do not want to overemphasize
the scale of culture’s influence on human behavior. While we strongly hold to the notion that culture
is an instrumental variable in human interaction, a number of problems may be encountered as you
make culture the centerpiece in your study of intercultural communication. Specifically, we offer five
caveats that will clarify the crucial link between culture and communication. These qualifications
deal with (1) the uniqueness of each individual, (2) the perils of generalizing, (3) the need for
objectivity, (4) the need for compromise, and (5) the myth that communication is a cure-all.

INDIVIDUAL UNIQUENESS

According to the American philosopher and psychologist William James, “In every concrete
individual, there is a uniqueness that defies formulation.” In a very real sense, that “formulation” is
another way of saying that no two people are (or ever have been) exactly alike. The reason is simple:
Our behavior is shaped by a multitude of sources, with culture being but one. Put in different terms,
we are more than our cultures. Although all cultures offer people a common frame of reference,
people are not captives of their culture, nor are they subject to all the lessons of that culture. In fact,
it is folly to think of people in terms of being blank slates. As Pinker points out, “The mind cannot be
a blank slate, because blank slates don’t do anything.” 43 Instead, people are thinking, feeling
individuals whose biology, environment, history, and personal experiences interact and play crucial
roles in their social collective behavior. Consequently, the values and behaviors of a particular
culture may not be the values and behaviors of every individual within that culture. To further clarify
the notion of individual uniqueness, reflect for a moment on all the potential responses that could
be generated by the simple phrase “I am going to a NASCAR race this Saturday.” Depending on the
listener’s background, one person might think that watching cars go around in a circle is boring,
another could consider the event to be environmentally harmful because of the exhaust gases
emitted, but another might respond by saying, “I love the sound of the engines and the smell of tires
burning rubber.” The reason, of course, is that the world does not look the same to everyone. Just
for a moment, think about how the following influences can shape your worldview, attitude,
behavior, etc.: your genetic makeup (i.e., DNA), social group experiences, language, gender, age,
individual and family history, political affiliation, educational level, perceptions of others, the existing
circumstances, the region and neighborhood where you grew up, your religious experiences,
economic resources, and many other aspects that are at play every moment of your life. All of these
factors (along with culture) coalesce to form your individual personality. Hooker does an excellent
job of drawing attention to the interplay of personality and culture and the hazards of relying solely
on culture when studying intercultural communication when he writes, Personality consists of the
traits that are unique to an individual human being. It is partly genetic and partly learned. Because
much of personality is acquired, it is strongly influenced by culture. Yet a very wide range of
personalities can develop within a given culture, whence the danger of placing too much emphasis
on “national character.” 44 We have been stressing that although all learned behavior takes place
within a cultural setting, every person has a unique personality. Therefore, you must be cautious and
prudent when making cultural generalizations. Throughout this text, you will be constantly reminded
of the following precept: Always keep in mind that culture is a powerful force in the shaping of
human behavior, but remember that people are more than their cultures.
GENERALIZING When people from other cultures declare that all Americans have tattoos, listen to
hip-hop, and eat mostly fast food, they are generalizing. When Americans conclude that Oktoberfest
shows that the Germans like beer and sausage, they are generalizing. And when people say that the
Irish are usually short tempered, Mexicans are normally late for meetings, and Asians seem to be
good at math, they are generalizing. When someone proclaims that California wine is better than
that from France or Australia, they are also generalizing. These examples are representative of an
endless number of cultural generalizations people use when talking about other groups. When we
generalize, we are allowing a few instances to represent an entire class of events, people, or
experiences. It is easy to fall into the trap of employing generalizations, as they are easy to arrive at.
For example, think how easy it is to make a decision about another culture if, after meeting several
international students from India, you concluded that everyone in India spoke English. These sorts of
cultural generalizations are popular because they are easy to create, as they rely on limited samples.
In addition, when repeated with enough regularity, they become shorthand to represent an entire
collection of people, events, or things. As you might expect, the study of intercultural
communication, which implies learning about other people and their cultures, is the perfect arena to
misuse generalizations, as it is tempting to generalize about an entire collectivity of people when
discussing their qualities and “typical” behaviors. Generalizations are based on limited data and are
then applied to a larger population. In intercultural communication, this means ascribing
characteristics to a larger group of people based on attributes displayed by a smaller group.
Stereotypes differ from generalizations in that they may not be based solely on conjecture and
usually appeal to the audience’s positive or negative emotions. For example, “All Asian students
make good grades” is a stereotype. A generalization would be, “Records indicate that Asian students
are likely to make good grades.” Although generalizing can be a problem when studying intercultural
communication, certain precautions can be taken (as we have endeavored to do in this book) to
minimize the misleading effects of generalizing. First, cultural generalizations must be viewed as
approximations, not as absolute representations. Your personal experiences have taught you that
people often do not follow the prescribed and accepted modes of cultural behavior. You may read
about social conformity as a trait of the Japanese people, but while in Tokyo, you see an elderly
woman with green hair and a group of young men wearing hip-hop clothes. In instances such as
these, remember the admonition of the English writer Robert Burton: “No rule is so general, which
admits not some exception.” Second, when you do make generalizations, they should deal with the
primary values and behaviors of a particular culture. It is these core values and learned behaviors
that occur with enough regularity and over a long enough period of time that tend to correctly
identify the members of a particular culture. If you examine the dominant culture of the United
States, you will have little trouble noticing the importance placed on individualism in everything
from dress to outward behavior. In the same manner, you could begin to get insight into the
different gender roles in Saudi Arabia by noticing how few women drive cars, hold public office, or
appear in public in Western attire. What you will notice about these two examples, although there
might be exceptions, is that the culturally instilled behaviors in both are easily recognizable. You can
see a somewhat consistent pattern in something as simple as greeting behaviors. For example, in
Mexico, friends usually embrace; in India, people bow; and in the United States, people typically
shake hands. These kinds of behaviors are recognizable because of their consistency over an
extended period, usually involving generation after generation. Third, when employing
generalizations, try to use those that can be supported by a variety of sources. Insufficient and/or
limited samples often produce unwarranted conclusions. While reading this book, you will notice
that we have used hundreds of reliable references to validate many of our conclusions. This sort of
“research” is especially useful when seeking to substantiate a generalization concerning a culture
where one’s fund of knowledge might be limited. Finally, conclusions and statements about cultures
should be qualified so that they appear not as absolutes but only as cautious generalizations. For
example, although this is only the first chapter of the book, you might have noticed how frequently
we have used words such as “often” or “usually” to avoid speaking in unconditional terms. Coles
adds to our list of qualifying terms, suggesting phrases such as “on average,” “more likely,” and
“tend to” as a way to moderate generalization.45 These qualifiers facilitate thinking and talking
about other cultures without implying that every member of the group is exactly alike. We also add
that the validity of the generalization often shifts from culture to culture. That is, if the culture is
relatively homogeneous, such as that of Japan or Korea, references to group characteristics tend to
be more accurate. However, heterogeneous cultures, such as that of the United States, are far more
difficult to generalize about because of the variety of backgrounds, religions, and ethnic groups and
the importance placed on each person’s individuality.

OBJECTIVITY

Our next consideration involves the issue of objectivity, one of those concepts that is easier to talk
about than to acquire. The very definition of objectivity—“Not influenced by personal feelings,
interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion” 46—should highlight
the difficulty of trying to communicate with other people while suspending personal judgment. The
problem, of course, is complicated when engaging in intercultural communication because you
approach and respond to other cultures from the perspective of your own culture—and often,
consciously or unconsciously, it is difficult to be objective when observing or experiencing the
actions of other cultures. The habit of overemphasizing one’s own culture as a template for
assessing other cultures is called ethnocentrism. More specifically, as Ferraro and Andreatta note,
ethnocentrism is “the belief that one’s culture is superior to all other’s.” 47 Notice in the following
brief examples how ethnocentrism and a lack of objectivity operate: An American might consider a
Chinese tour group rude and uncivilized because they spit on the sidewalk and talk loudly or believe
the Japanese strange because they do not wear shoes inside their homes.

As evidenced by the above, being objective is no simple assignment. For example, it is difficult, if not
impossible, to see and to give meaning to words and behaviors unfamiliar to you. How, for example,
do you make sense of someone’s silence if you come from a culture that does not value silence? You
might make the mistake of thinking, “How could someone be so insensitive as to be silent at a time
like this?” Someone from an indirect culture might avoid a direct refusal of your proposal by saying,
“I’d like to study that,” but never get back to you. You might deem the person inconsiderate or even
deceitful for not providing an honest answer. In both these scenarios, a lack of objectivity can
impede intercultural communication. Objectivity also requires that you approach each new situation
with an open mind and avoid being judgmental. To reject someone simply for having a different skin
color, living in a different country, espousing a dissimilar worldview, or speaking English with an
accent diminishes the person and keeps you from having new cultural experiences. Objectivity
promotes learning to interact and value distinct groups of people regardless of their culture, race,
ethnicity, religion, country, or gender.

COMPROMISE IN INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION

Intercultural knowledge and skill will not eliminate cultural conflict! If you engage in intercultural
communication for any length of time, inevitably you will encounter some type and degree of
conflict. The conflict may arise due to differences between you and the other individual(s), or it
could be an internal conflict, resulting from having to make decisions when confronted by culturally
different beliefs, values, or behavioral protocols. Encountering disagreements is a natural
characteristic of interacting with individuals who have differing perceptions of what is right or
wrong, good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, etc. The important aspect is not whether conflicts
will occur, because they will, but rather how to successfully manage the situation. Normally, the best
resolution of an external conflict is one where both parties are satisfied—mutual agreement. This is
often achieved through reciprocal compromise, as in international business and diplomatic
negotiations. In these cases, an agreement is usually reached through a compromise over interests,
such as price, time, or support, e.g., how much an item costs, when it will be delivered, and the type
of warranty. A culturally based conflict involving values can be more problematic, especially if it is an
internal conflict. For instance, imagine a scenario where you are studying in Madrid and living with a
Spanish family. One evening, your host proudly announces that despite great difficulty, she has
obtained tickets for Sunday’s bullfight featuring Spain’s top matador. If you have strong feelings
about animal rights and animal cruelty, you may experience an internal conflict. The problem then
arises as to how to handle this difficult and delicate situation. You do not want to offend your host,
but at the same time, you are rather repelled by the thought of watching a bull being killed. While
your culture has taught you that bullfighting is a blood sport, your host family has been brought up
to believe that it is an art form. What is to be done? Unfortunately, there is no standardized
procedure for handling these types of situations, and you will have to decide on the final resolution
yourself.

We do, however, feel it important that in intercultural matters you view compromise as a positive
course of action, rather than a negative choice. In the U.S. dominant culture, compromise is
frequently associated with losing or giving up. But in other cultures, compromise is a normal
approach to conflict. A good example of this was provided by a Japanese friend who told us that the
best solution to a disagreement is when “both sides have to cry a little.” We are not saying that you
always have to “cry a little,” but we do suggest that you approach intercultural conflict with an open
mind rather than a win–lose perspective. Take the time to consider the other party’s perception of
the situation, the importance of the issue, and the possible reaction to your response. In other
words, try to develop sensitivity to cultural differences and how they may affect interaction. In some
cases, finding a middle ground or even accepting the situation may be the best way. However,
situations will likely arise where personal feelings, attitudes, beliefs, and values will place you in an
uncompromising position. When those situations arise, we suggest that you make your position clear
to the other participants in a clear and sincere manner

COMMUNICATION IS NOT THE UNIVERSAL SOLUTION

Personal experience has no doubt already taught you that there are many situations in life where no
amount of talk can assuage bruised emotions, clarify mistakes, or erase hard feelings. Yet there
exists an overabundance of self-help videos, celebrity motivational experts, and books on
interpersonal relations that expound the virtues of communication as a solution to and panacea for
what plagues the individual and society. Although we readily grant that communication is a valuable
tool for resolving numerous interpersonal difficulties, we need to make it clear early in our book that
communication cannot solve all problems. In fact, there are even occasions when communication
may actually worsen the situation. Wood, in the following paragraph, joins us in warning you about
the false hope often granted to communication: Yet it would be a mistake to think communication is
a cure-all. Many problems can’t be solved by talk alone. Communication by itself won’t end hunger,
abuses of human rights around the globe, racism, intimate partner violations, or physical diseases.48
You have probably already realized that it is not unusual to encounter situations where the
participants have irreconcilable differences. And this occurs not only at the interpersonal level but
also through all strata of society, including relations between nations. These unfortunate situations
can lead to alienation and even armed conflict. Our intent in offering these five warnings about the
study of intercultural communication is not to dampen your enthusiasm for the topic. Rather, our
objective is to alert you to some of the potential problems facing anyone who takes on a topic as
large and complex as intercultural communication. However, now that we have offered these
admonitions, we are ready to begin the process of helping you improve interactions with people of
cultures different from your own.