There must be something I don’t understand. The prime authors of Gross National Happiness speak as follows about culture: “The key importance of culture includes: to instill values for the full development of human beings, to meet spiritual and emotional needs, to temper the pace of modernisation and the negative impacts of globalisation, to safeguard and strengthen the country’s sovereignty and security, to develop resilience, and to promote diversity for meaningful contribution”.
Cultural resilience I understand. For instance, in China it has always been the expectation that children will look after their parents in old age. Now, it seems, millions have abandoned the family home for the city, leaving their old folk alone, struggling and ailing. This is a massive cultural change for which the social and political system is unprepared. The system turns out to be un-resilient.
But then they include the word “diversity”, which has acquired a politically correct overtone, meaning migrants who bring with them diverse and sometimes disruptive cultures. The advent of energetic, bright and ambitious immigrants can obviously be a good thing for an economy. But when they change the way people live and have lived all their lives, what does this do to social cohesion and age-old culture? I don’t think the authors of GNP have thought this through.
The brilliant crime writer, Henning Mankell, documents how Sweden, which once had a strong social culture, is now wracked with crime and disillusionment. Homogeneity has disappeared and with it a certain way to doing things and interacting with others. And this leaves a large section of the population deflated and disillusioned, for they are unable to do a single thing about it. They have no say. Have the designers of GNP simply thrown in “diversity” to be politically correct? They certainly don’t appear either to define it or explain why diversity assists cultural resilience.
Silly little thing: I grew up queueing at bus stops in a fair and orderly manner. Everybody did it. Now, in London where I currently am, it’s one mad rush onto the bus, regardless of age or frailty. In some parts of Britain English has become a second language, and the rise of the dire UKIP illustrates the alienation of large numbers of people with immigration. It has always been a class-ridden country, but at least everyone used to understand the system. Now there is no system, except everyone for himself.
Half of the GNH committee definition of culture isn’t true. “Culture” is a universal concept of historical analysis; it is a powerful intellectual tool for understanding human groups over hundreds of thousands of years.
Yes, it is true that culture always must socialize its members to meet needs from security, order, and material necessities to social, emotional, and intellectual developments.
Unfortunately, the authors grafted undefined terms into the concept of culture–“impact of globalization,” “resilience” and “diversity”–which are too time-specific and muddle understanding.