Identity and Intercultural Communication

                Identity is the concept of who we are (Martin & Nakayama, 2013 p.170). Identity can be looked at through three different scopes to provide three different outlooks on what it is, how it is formed, and who plays a role in developing it. These three scopes are Social Scientific, Interpretive, and Critical. The Social Scientific perspective is characterized by individuals creating their own identity by relating to groups. The Interpretive perspective is defined as identity being formed through communication with others. And the Critical perspective says that identity is shaped through social, historical forces; it emphasizes contexts and resisting ascribed identity (Martin & Nakayama, 2013 p.171).

            To better understand these three perspectives we will look at them through the lens of a real-life example. The example we will look at is Syria. Currently Syria is undergoing a Civil War in which its dictator, Assad, is forcefully oppressing rebels and activists through the use of military action. However, the problem goes much deeper than that; Syria is a country whose territory lines were drawn by European powers in 20^th century; thus, it is a country of many different peoples of many different backgrounds. Assad represents the minority group the Alawites; for this reason the Alawites are given special privileges; and because of this they are despised by the majority of the country. The reason this is important though is because even though this is just one example, this is how the whole country is; it is composed of dozens of little factions that are fighting for dozens of other reasons, and if the regime were to fall and any one group was to prevail, chaos would ensue. (Fisher, M)

            Social scientifically speaking there has been an overdose in Syria, too many people from too many different groups all fighting for different causes has caused a logjam of culture. No one group is able to fully express itself and that is a big reason why there has been a quasi-civil war going on there for almost two years now. On the hand, looking at the interpretive perspective, there has been a breakdown in communication and therefore you have individuals with identities that are formed with avowal and no ascription, and vice versa. This is also a big reason why tensions have been impossible to ease in recent times; with no communication you cannot possibly see an endgame to this struggle. From the critical perspective, you will have a hard time finding any individuals involved in the struggle whose identities have not been shaped by either a social or a historical force. This is not necessarily a bad thing but because of this you now have a group of people, a nation, which is stuck in a rut that they find themselves unable to break free from. (Martin & Nakayama, 2013)

            The struggle taking place in Syria is not simply a domestic struggle, but an international struggle. Branching out from the breakdown in communication taking place there you have an international communication struggle. This breakdown could impact global relations if certain measures are taken to end the violence. However, if things are done correctly, and the situation is taken care of properly, you will see no wide-ranging effects; just a one-time isolated incident that resulted from the perfect storm of over-powered identity and low-powered communication.

References

Martin, J.N., & Nakayama, T.K. (2013). Intercultural communication in contexts (6th ed.) New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Fisher, M. (13, August 29). 9 questions about Syria you were too embarrassed to ask.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/08/29/9-questions-about-syria-you-were-too-embarrassed-to-ask/

Photos Courtesy of:

http://static.indianexpress.com/m-images/Tue%20May%2007%202013,%2009:56%20hrs/M_Id_383315_Assad.jpg

http://grahamstorrs.cantalibre.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/struggle.jpg