Sociology of Ethnic Relations

Aisuluu Alymbekova, CSSE-124

Almaty 2014
Why is the study of race and ethnic relations important in multi-cultural societies?
Many people use the terms race and ethnicity interchangeably, however the
distinction must be made. Wilkinson (1993) defines the term, race as a category of
persons who are related by a common heredity or ancestry and who are perceived and
responded to in terms of external features or traits, whereas ethnicity often refers to a
shared culture and lifestyle.
Race is described as the differences based on skin color or biological
characteristics. Besides there has not been any believable realistic evidence that indicates
that common psychological, moral or academic features are described to people on the
basis of their skin color or looks of face (Donald and Rattans, 1993). Race" identity took
significance over religion, ethnic origin, education and training, socioeconomic class,
career, verbal statement, principles, beliefs, morals, lifestyles, geographical location, and
all other human attribute that up to this time provided all groups and individuals with a
sense of who they were (Conrad 1969).
A number of theories have been used for studying race/ethnicity as a central
changeable of attention. Most of these theories come from a micro-theoretical view and
attempt to explain conduct from an individual, or within work group insight (Tajfel,
1981). Most of these theories come from the fields of social psychology or cognitive
psychology and stem from our cognitive and social need to classify ourselves and others
based on surface-level or readily perceivable personality such as race (Phinney,1992).
These theories often have been used to establish or defend hypotheses that have focused
on pessimistic outcomes or guesses as a consequence of race/ethnicity differences. Some
of the basic assumptions made about community and individual nature contained in many
of these theories are that:
Humans critic each other on surface-level individuality, such as race or gender, in the
absence of further information (Davis & Watson, 1982; Schein, 1973).
It must be noted that race is social construct rather than biological concept. The
fact remains that different societies construct different systems of race classifications and
these systems change over time. Ethnic group maybe distinguished on the basis of
language, form of family, structure and role of the family members, religious beliefs and
customs, forms of artistic expression such as music and dance and national origin. Two
individuals with the same racial identity may have different ethnicity for example a black
American and a black Jamaican have different culture or ethnic backgrounds. Equally,
two individuals with the same ethnic background may identify with different race example
Hispanic maybe black or white.
In a multicultural society, when society is studied it may be discovered how races
and ethnic groups are treated or how they should be treated. The disparity between the
ideal and the normal occurrence will allow us to see how the society functions. It would
then be impossible to study the society without emphasizing on the relations between the
various groups. Observing these groups will highlight key information. All these race and
ethnic groups in the multicultural societies help us to see the importance of studying all
the different groups and, their interaction with each other. Race and Ethnic Relations can
influence or cause actions in the wider society. If Race and Ethnic relations are bad or
terrible, it may lead to violence, discrimination and bad treatment of others. Thus, for the
communication in the society or peace or stability in the wider society race and ethnic
relations must be studied. Understanding Race and Ethnic relations would assist in
understanding society as a whole. Multicultural society is understood and defined as a
combination of different cultures, races and ethnic groups in a society. According to Misir
good governance in multicultural societies generally ensures the confluence of each ethnic
groups culture to create national unity. National unity must not mean a dilution of the
ethnics cultures. National unity must not mean giving a higher status to some cultures to
the exclusion of other cultures. Ethnics should be given space to unite and interact within
a mosaic of all cultures. National unity must mean pluralist unity where there is a dynamic
coexistence of each groups culture. National unity must create space and promote an
appreciation of all cultures. Further, all cultures must be on a level playing field to
contribute to societal development. This approach to national unity indeed will reflect all
cultural patterns in the societys major institutions.
Studying and understanding the culture and practice of each group, allows for
better cooperation, functioning and allegiance to ones county. This however does by no
means indicate that the various groups are to abandon their own tradition. According to
(Zastrow 2010) the nations in the United States have adopted the practice of what is called
Cultural pluralism. Cultural pluralism is a concept that implies a series of coexisting
groups, each preserving its own tradition and culture but each loyal to an overarching
nation. Hence, studying race and ethnicity relations in a multi-cultural society is important
because it is said that when two or more racial or ethnic groups come into contact, one of
several interactions may occur, including genocide, expulsion or population transfer,
slavery, colonialism, segregation, acculturation,, assimilation, pluralism, and
amalgamation. This may occur when two or more groups that are different exist in the
same society, or when different groups from different societies come into contact. Not all
patterns of interaction between ethnic and racial groups are destructive but one should be
aware of the issues that may arise in such multi-cultural society so measures can be taken
initially to prevent the abovementioned from occurring.
In so doing, we will be able to incorporate pluralism as a society whereby we
will maintain our distinctiveness as a people, yet have respect for one another and be able
to equally access to social resources. In addition, we will be able to work peaceably with
one another, contributing to the efficiency and productiveness of our society, while
enhancing the economy. Furthermore, in order for there to be stability and progression of
a society there must be some form of assimilation. Assimilation is the process by which a
minority becomes socially, economically and culturally absorbed within the dominant
society (Anderson et al 2011). According to assimilationist, society cannot be cohesive
and stable unless its members share a common national culture, including a common
system of meaning and significance, a shared conception of the good life at personal and
collective levels, and a shared body of customs, practices, habits, attitudes and collective
memories (Parekh 2005). In the absence of such a shared culture, they would disagree
deeply about the meanings of different human activities and relations and the values to be
assigned to them, and would simply not be able to cooperate and sustain a shared life.
With the merging of race and ethnic relations individuals in the society share basic
common values, beliefs and customs which is also an indication of togetherness which
allows for individuals to feel belonged to a wider group or society other than that of their
racial or ethnic group.
All of this demonstrates to the fact that inter-ethnic inter face has a long history.
We humans are not new to the dispute of trying to get along with "unfamiliar" others.
What strategies were used in early times to accommodate or transcend differences? How
did inherited societies recognize and deal with humans who differed from themselves,
both culturally and physically? In existing times, many areas of the world are supporting a
way with "ethnic" conflicts, and "ethnicity" seems to be a new notion about human
identities stopped with elements of exclusivity, opposition, competition, and antagonism.
Some groups define themselves in conditions that appear rigid and unyielding and in
disagreement always to "the others." In many belongings, we have seen populations state
an almost lasting addition an ethnic or religious identity, as if such features of our social
selves are determined by our DNA and cannot be transformed or diminished by any social
mechanisms. In some cases, populations that were once deemed generally ethnically
homogeneous are now unambiguously and irrevocably multination.
The media represents a popular idea of these phenomena as if they were something
new in the human practice, and many scholars in the social sciences care for multi
ethnicity as not only a modern phenomenon or a novel condition, but one that inevitably
creates problems and potential, if not real, conflicts. Two broad categories of problems
can be accepted:
The first having to do with how people of diverse teams get along with one
another;
The second is the problem of how individuals and groups perceive who they are
the problem of identity."
The sets of troubles are clearly interrelated but not the same. In the first class, there
seems to be a fundamental principle or guess that people of diverse ethnic groups are in
opposition with one another so that difference and opposition are inevitable. Another
related and often unstated statement is that different ethnic groups can have no common
benefit that makes any form of unity or even good relations not possible.
It is the second difficulties that this paper addresses, the one concerning
individuality, an arena of troubles that may be more strange to Americans, in terms of
their individual conceptions of who they are, than to peoples of other nations. There seems
to be a psychologically based theory in our society that people must know who they are,
that a concrete and positive sense of one's individual selfness (or "identity")i n a wider
world of other" selves" is a necessary condition for good psychological health. We
humans are actually the only animal that sufferings over the question, "Who am I?"
Perhaps the question get up because in manufacturing societies we lack a sense of bonding
to a relationship group, a village, or other more limited territorial entity and because our
heavy focus on eccentricity disconnects us from others and fosters an abiding sense of
separation and in safety. Whatever the reason, some lessons from history might provide a
broader context in which to understand the dilemmas of human identity that we
experience in the modern world.
Human beings understand the world and their place in it in vastly different ways.
Individuals bring with them their culture as part of their identity, it has profoundly shaped
them and means much to them, and their self-respect is tied up with respect not only for
them as individuals but also for their culture. Respecting them therefore involves
respecting their culture. When a groups cultures is treated with insensitivity and
contempt, and when they are required to abandon them as a condition of their acceptance,
they feel besieged and threatened, turn inward, close ranks, stifle internal dissent and
diversity, and become defensive and defiant. This is hardly the way to create a cohesive
society. In addition, respecting another groups cultures has to do with the value of
cultural diversity. No culture is perfect or represents the last word in human wisdom. Each
articulates a particular vision of the good life, develops some human capacities and
virtues, and marginalizes or ignores others. They can therefore benefit from a sympathetic
dialogue. The dialogue makes them aware of their commonalities and differences as well
as their strengths and imitations, and encourages critical self-consciousness and legitimate
pride and humility
There are perspectives that highlight the impact of the structure and culture of
society on race and ethnic relations. The Functionalist emphasize that each component of
society contributes to the stability of the whole. In the past, inequality between majority
and minority groups was functional for some groups in society. For example, the belief in
the superiority of one group over another provided moral justification for slavery,
supplying the south with the means to develop an agricultural economy based on cotton.
Functionalist recognized, however, that racial and ethnic inequality is also dysfunctional
for society (Schaefer 1998; William& Morris 1993). A society that practices
discrimination fails to develop and utilize resources of minority members. Prejudice and
discrimination aggravate social problems such as crime and violence, war, poverty, health
problems, urban decay, and drug use problems that cause human suffering as well as
financial burdens on individuals and society.
Conflict theorists emphasize the role of competition over wealth, power, and
prestige in creating and maintaining racial and ethnic group tensions. Majority group
subordination of racial and ethnic minorities reflects perceived or actual economic threats
by the minority. Conflict theorists also argue that the wealthy and powerful elite foster
negative attitudes toward minorities in order to maintain racial and ethnic tensions among
workers. As long as workers are divided along racial and ethnic lines, they are less likely
to join forces to advance their own interests at the expense of the capitalists.
Finally, the symbolic perspective focuses on how meanings, labels, and definitions
affect racial and within groups. The different connotations of the color a white and black,
for example, may contribute to negative attitudes toward people with color. The labelling
perspective directs us to consider the role that negative stereotypes play in race and
ethnicity. This negativity may lead to self-fulfilling prophecy.
These perspectives will help us to understand the relations of the racial and ethnic
groups in the society, thus, allowing us to counteract the problems before they arise.
Studying race and ethnic relations in multicultural societies assist in bring individuals
together for the benefit of society as a whole. It would also assist authorities in
formulating social policies to deal with the inequalities, misunderstandings and negative
stereotyping that may arise. Discrimination against racial and ethnic groups in all areas of
life, especially in areas such as employment, education, health and housing that affect
their life chances, should be declared unlawful and subjected to appropriate sanctions.
Discrimination implies unequal treatment, and conveys to its victims that they are not
accepted by the rest of society as its equal members (Parekh 2005).

References
Andersen, M.L., Taylor H.F. (2011) Sociology The Essentials 6th Edition. Wadworth
Belmont, CA. USA
Misir Prem Toward National Unity in Multicultural Societies retrieved on 15th March,
2012 from
http://www.uog.edu.gy/files/documents/prochancellor/Toward_National_Unity_in_Multic
ultural_Societies.pdf
Parekh, B. (2005) Unity and diversity in Multicultural Societies:
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/inst/download/1parekh.pdf (accessed online
March 13 2012)
Zastrow, C. (2010). Introduction to Social Work and Social Welfare 10th Edition:
Brooks/Cole, Belmont CA. USA