Cultural Differences Can but Need Not Block Dialogue
One American playwright said that one can take a person “out of the country but not take the country out” of the person. This simply means that we always carry with us wherever we go tendencies born of our cultural background and these can be markedly present or simply vestiges.
When people of different cultural backgrounds share a common space, even with the best of intentions to share such space harmoniously, there still exists the potential for misunderstanding because of the tendency to interpret ordinary incidents in the light of one’s cultural background or in the light of past experiences which are part of our “personal” history. This reality needs to be underscored because our world has become a world of migration and emigration/immigration and communities of people coming from different cultural backgrounds continue to be formed. This is not to say that ipso facto these communities will experience hostilities among the culturally-mixed residents. Not necessarily, no, but the potential is there for the breakdown of relations which can lead to mistrust and misunderstanding and in some cases, to violence.
What is happening now in two barangays in Zamboanga City, Arena Blanco and Mampang, is a case in point. A violent incident between two individuals belonging to two families of different cultural backgrounds resulted in the death of one of the protagonists. It is easy to empathize with the grief and anger of the family of the victim. But what is crucial here is how the grief and anger will be expressed. And what the culture of the victim’s family will dictate as to the usual way to redress such a wrong.
In a cultural milieu which is strongly influenced by western concepts of justice and punishment for breaking the law, the expected response is to report the crime to the police authorities and consequently a case will be filed in court against the wrongdoer/s. But in a culturally-mixed community not everyone, or not every family, will draw from this value orientation. And thus the complication that can arise.
In some cultural communities it is contingent on the family to redress the wrong that has been experienced in a culturally acceptable way; not to do so would bring shame upon the family. On the other hand, the law operating in the community is to have the proper authorities handle the matter. Right away there will be a conflict of interest. The acceptable cultural way may be at odds with what the law would implement.
A situation may further be complicated if there are parties which will foment the unhappy situation to advance their own agenda, whatever that agenda is. And regretfully, we realize that many of these agendas are not for the greater good of the greater number. Perhaps friends of either party in the hostility sincerely wish to have the problem resolved. They are to be encouraged to be dialogical in their involvement.
The Silsilah Dialogue Movement has consistently pursued its vision of the culture of dialogue, path to peace. It sees dialogue as an orientation to a style of life which recognizes respect and solidarity among people in spite of cultural differences; it sees that dialogue is the orientation which helps us to go on in spite of the snags in relationships within a community. Dialogue is what makes us seek a common ground to overcome difficulties and build stronger communities. This is our prayer and our hope for the communities of Arena Blanco and Mampang. (Silsilah)
