Political and Cultural Identity in Europe
Europe is known for its shared values in various aspects because of its diverse cultural composition. With 44 countries, Europe offers diversity in not only culture but political perspective. However, such differences are nullified and unified under the common law that governs every citizen in Europe (Citrin, 2011). To achieve the objective of accommodating everyone into the cultural and political identity of Europe, governments provide five basic principles including liberty, equality, democracy, civic duty, and individual responsibility. For example, in Sweden, citizens rarely challenge the government’s decisions in court, unlike the Americans who believe that the government must involve their citizens in making critical decisions that affect the country (Citrin, 2011). As such, when all the values of people are brought into commonality, they result in shared values between cultural and political identities of the European people. Thus, the prime focus of this paper is to justify that Europe possesses shared political and cultural identity.
The political identity of a people refers to the political life that is widely shared, spans the generations, and is void of other values and customs. The principles of a political culture as identified by Jack Citrin are very influential on what the government can do and how it can be done (Citrin, 2011). The political identity of Europe presents itself as an ideological nation, defining itself not by ethnic groups, but on the grounds of democracy, individualism, liberty, equality, and property rights. However, the overriding cultural identities of people in Europe are the cause of the escalated liberal tradition. Lack of unity among the conflicting cultural values is the major cause of disparity making the political identity difficult to cope up with amongst the Europeans (Citrin, 2011). Nevertheless, taking political identity as an ideational code underscores the idea notion of collective norms as opposed to individual beliefs (Duchesne, n.d). As such, political identity of the Europeans goes beyond the individual beliefs and considers the overall value of the corporate nation at large.
The previous system of in egalitarian tradition that had taken the mantle of sustaining a racial hierarchy through Jim Crow laws and ethnocentric immigration and naturalisation policies has been overthrown by the emergence of globalisation and fragmentation of cultural and political ideas (Citrin, 2011. In the recent years, Europe has been considered as one of the leading continents in embracing national solidarity while at the same time enhancing a common culture. With globalisation, the sovereignty of America as a major superpower has been on the decline due to its integration with many nations (Citrin, 2011). Interdependence among nations and the global diffusion of ideas and communication patterns hugely erodes a nation’s distinct culture by replacing it with the universal commitment to human rights and international legal norms of culture and politics. Besides, demographic diversity as a result of immigration tends to heighten the level of cultural identity amongst the citizens in Europe that further adds to a common political identity (Skrentny, 2007). As such, due to multiculturalism, there is a measure of control of all the cultural values of different individuals. Consequently, this disregards the basic rules of cultural imperialism by establishing a common pot of political and cultural identity.
Besides, modernization of European societies also means that Europe is built on shared political and cultural values. Modernity in Europe has introduced an advanced form of ethos, self-expression, and moral relativism at the expense of bourgeois values and manners (Hillman & D’Agostino, 2011). As such, this results in one nation having two competing moral visions. There is hence, the need to find a common denominator under which to run the political and cultural values of a group. To resolve this dilemma, there must be a consensus about what must be designated to refer to culture. There must be trustworthiness of other people and assumptions about the economic activity that should compromise the political identity and goals (Hillman & D’Agostino, 2011). Indeed, modern societies do not display complete cultural identity, and as such, attempts to make settle down conflicts become very hard. Despite attempts by religion and the political authority to advocate for individual liberty and freedom, there should be limits against which the two should operate exercise power.
Europe is also believed to the home for many people who were using scholarship or other means live there. As such, they end up exchanging political and cultural experiences from their countries of origin in an attempt to come up with a common practice of politics and cultures that do not oppress anyone (Hillman & D’Agostino, 2011). Immigration laws should, therefore, be formulated to accommodate not only those who are familiar with the customs of Europe but also the newcomers. Immigrants from Africa and other parts of the world have increased cultural diversity in Europe. Nevertheless, with time, most immigrants appreciate the political and cultural patterns of Europe while also influencing these diversities.
Moreover, Europe has shared political and cultural values because it has identified audiovisual and communications industries as key instruments in establishing a sense of European cultural identity (Skrentny et al., 2007). The establishment of the pan-European market in the audiovisual sector is largely influenced by the ambitions of the European Commission to promote an audiovisual space that has the capability of accommodating every race through political and cultural identity programs. Additionally, the enlargement practices, globalisation as well as the structural position of art and entertainment has changed. As such, to strengthen European cultural production, products need to be commercially competitive and attract large audiences which have different cultural and political values.
The prime objective of this part was to justify the fact that Europe consists of shared political and cultural identities. These two aspects emanate from increased immigration rate in Europe accommodating people with diversified political and cultural ideology and who, after settling, influence the political and cultural patterns of Europe. Modernization, for instance, has shaped the political and cultural patterns of Europe. Modernization, in this case, deals with how the society adjusts its political and political systems to ensure that everyone feels comfortable. Further, economic diversification of the economy of Europe also affirms that it is characterised by shared political and cultural values
Latin America after Cold War
For over 100 years, Monroe Doctrine contained all the guiding principles that dictated the terms of the relationship between the United States and the Latin America. These principles have, however, become insignificant over the last two decades, but the basic framework in the United States has not changed sufficiently to reflect the new reality (Lähdesmäki, 2012). The United States, however, does not uphold itself as expected by the economic, political and cultural relations it shares with the Latin Americans. As such, through the symbiotic relationship between the United States and the Latin America, the latter have benefited from positive developments within its region (Lähdesmäki, 2012). The events that have unfolded after the cold war has seen Latin America growing wide and large in its political systems and democratic practices in almost every nation. In the recent past, Latin America is considered one of the most developing countries in economic terms due to its crucial provision of energy, minerals, and food to the rest of the world.
Economically, there exists strong connectedness between Latin America and the rest parts of the world. For instance, despite a few challenges that Latin America faces from the external environment that has the likelihood of affecting the economic status of the economy, it still enjoys a favorable economic relationship that boosts its economy (Rock, 1994). It is remarkable how trading activities between U.S. and Latin America has grown significantly since 1996. Latin America is identified as one of the biggest external source of oil for the U.S, which accounts for nearly 30.5% of imports from the region (Van_Grasstek, 2010). Nevertheless, Latin America is also the source of illegal narcotics for the United States.
The foreign policy priority initiated by the U.S. in Latin America has also changed the direction of development amongst Latino countries. For example, during the reign of President George W. Bush, there were a lot of foreign policy initiatives that were directed at improving the living conditions of Latino people conducive (Barshefsky, 2008). The U.S. Congress has ratified various trade agreements with Chile and Peru but attempts to create a free trade area have been at the forefront of U.S project priority. Besides, there are also attempts to kerb the trade of illegal drugs with about 4 billion dollars invested in Colombia while proposals in Mexico are being implemented to fight with drug abuse (Barshefsky, 2008). Attempts by the U.S. government to finance trading activities among the Latin Americans is because there have been increasing rates of homicides in these countries which is estimated to be double those of the rest of the world.
Further, commercial interests within the Latino countries have also expanded since the Cold War. Over the years, there has been a rise in the level of investments by the Latin American countries in conjuncture with the United States (Hakim, 2011). As such, America has expanded its economic relationships with these countries and enjoyed much from the economic relationship amongst them. However, at times, the Latin Americans would think that the commercial retrenchment in their countries was influenced by military expeditions from the United States. Nevertheless, this was not the case as much of the antagonism was provoked by the geopolitics or animosity that was taking place along the borders (Hakim, 2011). Despite these challenges, Latin American countries have enjoyed immense economic expansion within their countries.
There are also changes that have taken place in the Latin American countries after the culmination of the cold war in terms of populism views (Conniff, 1999). Populism is an elusive perspective of general understanding of what is going on around politically, socially or economically. In Latin America, populism views had a greater influence towards combating capitalism (Rock, 1994). The populist view gained roots and became an urban movement that later resulted to urbanization whereas middle and working classes were brought into the political system. It is remarkably noted that the trade connections in Latin America also got the attention of the classic populist leaders who worked effortlessly to improve the economic conditions that were devastated during the Cold War.
Besides, there has improvement in the Latin America regarding establishing a political class within these countries after the end of the cold war. As such, gaining of the political class has enabled these countries opportunity to leverage themselves against the most powerful states of the world through resource extraction from U.S. and by threatening to reunite with the USSR if specific demands were not met (Conniff, 1999). Further, major political reforms in the Latin America took place in the 1940s when the republics were transformed into a new international order after the crumbling of the Western Europe (Conniff, 1999). It is during this time that Latin American countries realized the need to strengthen the relationship with the United States. They encountered significant transformation from authoritarian regime to democratic form of leadership through which they were allowed to negotiate their welfare with their governments. During the pre cold war period, the Latin America was characterized by low trends in political participation and social reforms.
The focus of this section was to justify that there has significant developments in Latin America since the end of the Cold War. The justification that Latin America has improved since the end of the Cold War rests on the premise that, there are changes in many areas of social, economic, and political life of people in the Latin American people. For instance, trade has expanded as a result of the interrelationship between Latin American countries and the United States that serves to boost their economy. Further, the conditions of living have also improved as a result of increased interaction of Latin American countries with other nations since the end of the cold war.
References
Barshefsky, C. (2008). U.S. policy toward Latin America: A new direction for a new reality. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press.
Carothers, T. (1990). The United States and Latin America after the Cold War. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Building.
Citrin, J. (2011). Understanding America. The anatomy of an exceptional nation. New York, NY: Public affairs New York publishers.
Conniff, M.L. (1999). Populism in Latin America. London: University of Alabana Press.
Duchesne, Sophie, & Frognier, André-Paul. (n.d.). Is there a European Identity? Public Opinion and Internationalized Governance.
Hakim, P. (2011). The United States and Latin America: The Neighbourhood has Changed. The International Spectator, 46(4), 63-78.
Hillman, R. S., & D’Agostino, T. J. (2011). Understanding contemporary Latin America. Boulder, CO: Rienner.
Lähdesmäki, T. (2012). Politics of cultural marking in mini-Europe: Anchoring european cultural identity in a theme park. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 20(1), 29-40.
Rock, D. (1994). Latin America in the 1940’s: War and postwar transitions. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Skrentny, J. D., Chan, S., Fox, J., & Kim, D. (2007). Defining Nations in Asia and Europe: A Comparative Analysis of Ethnic Return Migration Policy. International Migration Review, 41(4), 793-825.
Van_Grasstek, C. (2010). Trends in United States trade with Latin America and the Caribbean and trade policy towards the region. Santiago, Chile: Naciones Unidas.
