NameInstitution
There is a wide variety of ways one can view towards differences across cultures. On a micro level, one could look at how families interact in distinct ways across cultures. On a macro level, one would look to how governmental action is reflective of cultural differences. One lens to view differences in cultures is to analyze how they resolves conflicts. The environment within which a culture is created affects how conflicts are resolved. This essay analyzes the differences in conflict resolution between Icelandic and Kenyan culture. This provides an interesting case study since many of the fundamental tenets of have emerged from vastly different geography, ethnic and cultural backgrounds.
For being a small country, Iceland is widely studied by a variety of disciplines. Geologists find it a unique case study for the extreme temperatures and prevalent volcanic activity (Benediktsson, 2011). It is also of an interest to sociologist and anthropologists because of the unique cultural conditions that the geography has caused. In her book, Iceland Imagined, Karen Oslund cites something said by one of the early Icelandic scholars who cautioned future anthroplogists and sociologists from considering Iceland without understanding its unique sociological position: “Iceland can not be entirely separated from the Scandinavian countries. From the point of view of the historian or linguist, it is the place of origins of the Scandinavian people, their traditions, language, and poetry” (Oslund, 2011).
In the late ninth century a sailor from Scandinavia named Ingólfur Arnason discovered Iceland. Soon after, Scandinavia sent settlers to the land, and later Irish slaves. Genetically Icelandic people share a common heritage which is a mix of Nordic and Irish genes. Oslund sees the underlying tendencies past down from these two cultures as key to understand why Icelandic people and government operate as they do. (Oslund, 2011).
During the vast majority of its history, Iceland was ruled by either Norway or Denmark. Not until 1904 did it gain a partial independence, and not until 1944 did was if fully an independent nation with the Icelandic people deciding their desinty under a form of social democracy. Iceland has little more than 300,000 citizens according to its most recent census taken in 2010. The entire country is little more than a mid-size city.
This minuscule population, bolstered by a harsh geography lies at the heart of how Iceland resolves conflicts. The example that will be employed as a comparison to conflict resolution in Kenya is the recent crisis that Iceland underwent when its economy crashed in 2008. The entire financial sector was brought to an even worse set of circumstances than those affecting the rest of the world during the global recession of 2008 (Varick, 2008).
While the world was grappling for solutions and partial fixes, Iceland resolved their conflict in a way that captured the attention of the world. They had multiple problems on their hands, since the economic crisis led to a political crisis which led to all three of the country’s major banks being unable to resolve their balances sheets and were then forced to declare bankruptcy (Varick, 2008). These issues spread across their borders and the UK and the Netherlands had runs on their deposits due to their association with Icelandic banking. This is why Economist called it “biggest crisis of an economy that any country has ever suffered.”
But though it was a crisis of massive proportions, the solution seemed to come seamlessly from the ashes. Any fix was going to need swift legislation and careful politically maneuvering, which was something that happened. Keeping in mind the population size during the crisis is important for understanding how both of these elements came together to fix the problem. Iceland, unlike the US when it underwent a similar crisis, kicked out all of those responsible from banking, since their unadapt maniuplations of the financial system for short term gains was seen as the root of the problem (Varick, 2008).
Another issue that was at the problem was a constitution that had allowed politicians and bankers to act reckless in the first place. That, the people of Iceland united to voice an opinion, was something that needed to be fixed. The constitution had been drafted when Iceland became a country in 1944. The writers of the constitution had always planned on it being temporary, and wrote it with the intention of it being replaced within two years of its implementation. However, because of those very deficiencies which led the writers to want it’s replacement, the constitution remained the governing document. The constitution was so deficient that the UN in considered its existence a human right’s violation. (Wade and Sigurgeirsdottir, 2012).
The dominant cultural influence in Iceland, Nordic cultures, is marked by close family ties which unite people for the good of the whole. In order for the constitution to be rewritten quickly and was if the majority of people not only united to support it, but united to force their politicians to take immediate action on the issue. Nordic culture tends to be left leaning, and they consider their government an extiontion of those values. Wade and Sigurdottir, in their report “Iceland’s Rise, Fall, Stabilization and Beyond” attribute these culture tenets as essential to the way in which Iceland resolved its conflict. People of the country began a revolution of protest by banging pots and pans in the streets. City councils invited people to participate in government proceedings on the Internet, giving everyone in the country a voice (Sigurgeirsdottir & Wade, 2012). 95% of people of Iceland have the Internet, and council leaders created a system where even the 5% that did not could join in them via the mail system.
The new constitution and political action, which resolved the conflict, is reflected by the preamble of the new constitution: “We, the people of Iceland, wish to create a just society where every one of us has a seat at the same table” (Icelandic Constitution, 2008).
While different in nature, Kenya, the year before Iceland’s 2008 Financial Crisis, had a political crisis that also affected everyone within the country.
Unlike Iceland, where politics comes from a shared culture, Kenya has a much denser web of independent people composing its much larger population. Kenya’s 2007 presidential election led to a yearlong crisis that came to be known as the “Post Election Violence.” In addition to involving everyone in its roughly forty million population, it involved the forty-two tribes that make up the people of Kenya (Okia, 2011).
The problem came through a conflict in who was the legitimate winner of the election. Mwai Kibaki, the man who would eventually claim the seat, claimed that he won the election while rival, Raila Odinga, also claimed that he was the victor of the election.
The country needed the congress and courts to step in with the support of the people to resolve this crisis. But unlike the Icelandic crisis, the people of Kenya were not united in how to resolve the crisis. To the contrary, clandestine group’s armed villages and stirred up tribal rivalries with the intention of creating political chaos in order to force their political will within the government (Okia, 2011).
Kenya as a country is an artifact from the British Empire. It’s lines are not drawn by shores edge like Iceland. Instead, leaders in the British government drew them a century ago. After the British left/were ousted from power, a country of 42 traditional separate groups emerged. Just as important as understanding the role that geography plays in Icelandic culture, it is important to understand how important tribal mentalities are in understanding Kenya’s culture.
Thousands of people were killed in tribal clashes. The eventually deal that was reached was one that was only accepted by the losing party, Odinga, because he saw his country “going up in flames” and relented his claim to power in order to preserve order in the country (Okia, 2011).
Understanding this, one understands why similar models of conflict resolution for Kenyan and Iceland would likely be doomed to fail. Some countries exist as a cohesion between cultures, and to other countries citizenship and race and culture one in the same. Though it is difficult to call one right or wrong, it is clear from this example the much greater challenge of resolving conflict within cultures that are composed of a variety of sub-cultures, each with their own identity.
References:
Crapo, R. H. (2012). Cultural anthropology: understanding ourselves & others (5th ed.). Guilford, Conn.: Dushkin Pub. Group.
"Cracks in the crust." The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 13 Dec. 2008. Web. 30 June 2014. <http://www.economist.com/node/12762027
Okia, Opolot. Journal of Third World Studies. Fall. The Role of The Police in The Post Election Violence in Kenya 2007/2008. 17. Vol. 28 Issue 2, p259-275. 2011,
Varick, Sher. The great recession of 2008-2009: Causes, consequences and politicle responses EconStar 134-145 Print. 2010
Wade, Robert H.; Sigurgeirsdottir, Sillla, Cambridge Journal of Economics 36:1: 127- 144. Print. 2012.
