A New Look at Ethnocentrism
Referring back to a quote from Milton Bennett, pillar of the field of intercultural communication:
Intercultural sensitivity is not natural. It is not part of our primate past, nor has it characterized most of human history. Cross-cultural contact usually has been accompanied by bloodshed, oppression, or genocide. (Milton Bennett, “Towards Ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural sensitivity.” In M. Paige (Ed.) Education for the Intercultural Experience. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press, 1993, p. 21)
Bennett's agenda in saying this isn't to have us throw in the intercultural towel and give up on getting along. His point is to help us understand the scope and scale of the obstacles we humans confront in the task of getting along, so that we can get better at it — in much the same way as a coach, in order to be effective, has to point out a player's shortcomings.
The above quote leads off Bennett's most famous article. The "developmental model" referred to in the title has since become one of the industry standards in intercultural communication. Here we'll take look at the ethnocentric side of the model.
Bennett argues that, as human beings spend more time in intercultural environments, they trace out a roughly predictable developmental path. He divides the path into six stages, the first three of which are "ethnocentric" and the latter three of which are "ethnorelative." Here is how the stages are represented:
The ethnocentric side of the diagram is defined as "assuming that the worldview of one's own culture is central to all reality." (30) Stage 1, Denial, is the most basic form of ethnocentrism: no other groups even exist that are worthy of attention. In a world as interconnected as ours is in the 21st century, it's hard to maintain this illusion. One example is the ways in which expatriate communities isolate themselves from their surroundings, trying to create, for example, a "little America" on the outskirts of Beijing. Denial can also take another, less deliberate form: ignorance of difference as cultural. It’s not so much that all difference is invisible; it’s more that culturally patterned difference is invisible.
Defense/Reversal is stage 2. In pure Denial, the non-existence of the "other" means there is no threat. In Defense, there is open acknowledgment of difference, and along with it a sense of threat. We defend ourselves against the threat by insisting that "our way" is better. Disparagement is the hallmark of the Defense stage.
Reversal, the mirror image of Defense, occurs when we disparage our own culture, having become immersed in another culture which we have decided is superior. This happens frequently with Peace Corps volunteers, according to Bennett. It’s also a common stage of the study abroad experience.
Minimization, stage 3, is further along the developmental path, because not only is cultural difference recognized, but it is no longer disparaged. What unites all humanity is put at the forefront: cultural differences are presumed to be less important than what we all share.
You may ask: Why is this still considered ethnocentric? We might think we’re all one big, shiny, happy human family. Beneath the surface, though, what we’re really saying is, “You’re like me,” which is importantly different from, “I’m like you,” because my own set of experiences is still being used as the main reference point. “I” am still at the center.
When using Bennett's ideas in my consulting work, I usually focus on Defense, because I see it as the default state of humanity. Most of us spend enough time exposed to groups with obviously different beliefs from us that we can't be in Denial, and Minimization won't hold up to scrutiny on most days. So, on bad days, or in bad weeks or months, we end up in Defense…a lot.
Have you spent much time around Western expatriates living in developing countries? I've been one for a good part of my life, and I can tell you firsthand that I've spent a lot of energy complaining about how "they" do things here, and that I've heard plenty of the same from other Westerners around me, most of whom I like and respect a lot as human beings. We're not bad people for wishing "they" were more like "us"; we're just standard-issue human beings stuck, for however long — hours, days, weeks — in a specific stage of intercultural development.
Bennett is clear that he doesn't intend his model to describe the static state of any single human being. What we want, and what we work for, is a steady, stubborn push toward the right side of the diagram.
I'll take up ethnorelativism next time.