The riots: The Psychology and its management

Much of the discussion focuses on the legitimacy of the riots. But the situation is more complex than that. Why assume that if there is discontent among a community, a lash out will be ‘intelligently’ executed?
Yes, looting and mugging and burning is awful (support brave clean up) but it is so easy for me as a 38 year-old to sit here in my house on a 30K+ salary condemning it. As a lecturer of final year, mainly minority and foreign, students at a London University, I see their frustration and concern for the future with only few of them having a job lined up. And these are the educated youth!

We see people run into shops, grabbing televisions and setting cars on fire. It has become apparent that this is not a conventional protest. So is it a matter of judging all of them as thugs, call in the army and punish the thieves?

To mobilse such large groups of people means that a) they lack role models (where are the parents?) B) they lost hope (do not fear the consequence) and youth centres risk shut down due to cuts c) their social identity is defined by materialistic status symbols, which is a learned measure of self esteem (ie, they get ‘respec’ through bling not a good degree, a good job, a good skill, being an engaged citizen).

For sure, looters and aggressors need to be held responsible, but there are more questions to ask. It is very difficult because my initial reaction to the images too is that they deserve punishment (and we have created a society where police stands by for fear of ending up in court on a human rights charge), yet I know that it is more complex and I can’t ignore the difficult analysis of this societal crisis.

Much research on riots and collective action has taken place. Any social psychologist will tell you that racism is very much alive (Social dominance theory) and that collective action can spiral out of control through social identification, which becomes more prominent than the other identities (so people will think as themselves a protester, protect their ‘own’ and not self-criticise). Group polaristion radicalises this. They can tell you that people become depressed because they need a sense of belonging and not feel ostracised from society but that anger is fuelled by threat (one of us got shot while the rest of you were on your holiday).
Research also shows that riot-type behaviour globally peaks in summer – we need to look at past riots to understand the shaping of the rioters’ social identity while mobilised. Thugs can only get away with their theft if protected by their community, who give them a place to hide and who don’t tell. If this support is removed the thugs become vulnerable and the violence can be managed. But management doesn’t mean rubber bullets. The challenge of  good leadership is the ability to manage a conflict, not avoid it or dominate and suppress it.    Instead of tough talk, in the long-term our communities benefit from evidence based management.
Where are the social and political psychologists (Reicher, Drury, Klandermans, Huddy, Feldman, Kinnval and Sidanius)? – their 3rd voices of reason-behind-human-behaviour need to be heard. Where are management and leadership scholars (Brett, Herman, Van Dick, Euwema)? – non-partisan sources of guidance for policy makers and government are much needed now.  

Continue Reading

How to create an identity for something new?

Have you ever needed something but there wasn’t a name for it yet? You wonder what terms to use when searching for it online and ask friends/family if such a thing exists at all. Or, you’re an entrepreneur and you created a thing or a service and it needs a brand, an identity and it needs a benchmark so people can interpret its ‘kind’.

For example, working with MOT2U, confirms my thinking that a company’s identity is as much dependent on others’ interpretation of it as it depends on how the MOT2U people themselves define it. So, the idea started with me needing to get my car checked (compulsory by law in the UK). A friend then offered to come and pick it up, get it ‘MOT-ed’ and bring it back. Not only did this allow me to just get on with my day but it also felt that my car was in good hands as he’d be better at negotiating what needed to be fixed for what price than me. Brilliant! 

So the concept was born but what is it called? Car broker? Car consultant? Car guru?

Since its launch in 2008, MOT2U has developed and grown. It has asked experts but also the average person how they perceive the company. Many loved the idea. Some thought it’s a ‘posh garage’. Others were not sure of the colours (black and red). At the moment the company hovers on its own cloud, without a clear benchmark: Is it more Ocado than Tesco (therefore actually level with Sainsbury’s – Try something new today…)?

Although people from individualistic countries argue that they’re independent thinkers, with a strong sense of agency, savvy marketeers know that humans like to belong. So, a company creates an identity but it needs an anchor because people like to categorise themselves and others to make sense of the world. Some brands transcend these categories (Colegate toothpaste? Fairy washing-up liquid?), some brands are confused or in denial (British Airways, Burberry, BP) and others hover on their label-less cloud, yet to be identified.

Just as a leader is a leader when she/he is perceived as such by followers, we live in a time where tweeting followers create a culture via social media and decide whether a brand is hot or not. But not all things commercial are about short-term trends.

MOT2U is a useful service that gives peace of mind. It functions a bit like your dentist, who texts you that you’re due for a check up. Or like your mortgage broker, who is in the know of all the different products on the market and doesn’t represent one specific lender. You may not follow your dentist or broker on Twitter or Facebook for gimmicky updates but see it as a reliable relation and you’re in it for the long haul – from your first Fiat to your fancy (recycled) Ferrari. As their next TV ad, I’m thinking Colin Firth throwing keys to an MOT2U chauffeur wearing the company’s logo in green…

Continue Reading

Failed Multiculturalism

David Cameron argued that “under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream.  We’ve failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong.  We’ve even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values” (Cameron, 2011, www.number10, Although the majority of his speech focuses on the responsibilities of immigrants when they come to Britain, he points that the responsibility of the government is that “we must build stronger societies and stronger identities at home. … It’s that identity, that feeling of belonging in our countries, that I believe is the key to achieving true cohesion.” 

However, his words have been interpreted as a change from multiculturalism to singularism: “Cameron was showing his support for Angela Merkel and her German Christian Democrat party’s idea that security and cohesion are brought about not through integration and pluralism, but through monoculturalism and assimilation into the dominant Leitkultur (lead culture)” (Fekete, 2011, Although it has been argued that Cameron’s views were more subtle than Merkel’s and Sarkozy’s (Bagehot, 2011). He distinguished between piety and extremism and notes that the government has a responsibility and needs to manage the situation. Nonetheless, Cameron’s speech was welcomed by nationalist party members (Le Pen in France, Batty, 2011). In fact, Sarkozy argued that too much attention was paid to the individual immigrant and not enough to the identity of the nation who hosts them.

A rejection of multiculturalism requires an assessment of what it is that’s being rejected. In 2004, Trevor Phillips (2004), the chairman of the then Commission for Racial Equality (CRE), said that multiculturalism was out of date and no longer useful, not least because it encouraged “separateness” between communities. In a criticism of the CRE (now Equality and Human Rights Commission), Lerman (2010) stated that it cannot be said that fully formed multicultural policies were ever followed by government: “Indeed much of what government has tried to do in this area has been contradictory and counterproductive. It failed to assert common values based on the primacy of human rights. It never effectively tackled racial inequality and its failures have been amplified by the disastrous performance of the EHRC. … And despite occasional cack-handed stabs at defining Britishness, it failed to provide any thoughtful leadership in developing a national narrative that would reflect the reality of multicultural Britain” ( Such media discussions highlight the challenges that government leadership face and whether the discussion needs to move on from a conceptual to a more pragmatic, evidence based management analysis.

In the UK, the Commission on Integration and Cohesion published the ‘Our Shared Future’ report, which indicated that there was a sense of shared values across the individuals and communities consulted.  In an independent report advising the commission, Buofino and Thompson (2007: 15) argued that ‘good mental health, satisfying and secure work, a secure and loving private life, freedom, moral values and a secure community were found to be the main factors affecting happiness’. The Commission concluded that their expectation that communities clash in terms of values was not found to be true but warned that ‘if the discrimination experienced by some groups within our society continues, we will not be able to achieve the goals we set out in this report for building integration and cohesion’ (Commission on Integration and Cohesion, 2007: 27). 

My thoughts are that multiculturalism has failed but that this isn’t a bad thing because multiculturalism isn’t necessarily the celebration of diversity some think it is. A very interesting study by Johnston Conover, Searing and Crewe (2004) found that British and American respondents’ views do not “monochromatically reflect either liberal, cultural pluralist, or communitarian models, but, instead leave cultural pluralism in the back cupboard and put forward complex mixtures of liberalism and communitarianism” (p. 1061). Moreover, they found that communitarian thinking is likely to impede liberal and cultural pluralist pathways to citizenship. This highlights the importance of value congruence in people’s mindset, even if they believe strongly in liberalism, cultural pluralism and equal citizenship. If this is the case, then government leaders need to take heed and manage such a potential cognitive dissonance. Thus, multiculturalism shies away from taking responsibility and engaging into a dialogue and potentially a conflict that needs to be managed, not avoided. That takes guts. From all involved.


Continue Reading

Something for grey matter

Recently, via FB and over dinner, we’ve been discussing perception of the other. It’s one specific subject I like because it’s loaded with psychological pitfalls. Plus, I like talking about the experiments such as the prisoners/guards, Summercamp, etc. I think (Social) Psychologists should contribute more to today’s debates on race, multiculturalism and politics, as they are a 3rd voice between the political correct brigade and bigots.

Black doll white doll   A friend posted the video of Clark & Clark’s Black/White doll experiment. The experiment involves little black children (about 6 years old I suspect) who are asked to pick the nice/like best/like to play with and the children pick the white doll. When asked to point out the bad doll, they pick the black one. Then, when asked which doll resembles them most, 66% pick the black doll and 44% the white doll. It is heartbreaking to see. The experiment was replicated in 2005 with the same result. In 2009, after Obama’s election, the same experiment obtained different results: 88% of kids happily identified with the black doll. The majority of the kids chose black or both and 32 percent chose the white doll when asked which one was the nicest but 47 percent of the girls said the white doll was prettier. The article from ABC news ends on a hopeful note about Obama’s influence. However, it isn’t that straightforward (good role model availability).

An experiment on judgement of Obama’s skin colour showed that those who support him see him as lighter coloured than those who dont even when controlled for racist views. Of course, Obama is a prominent figure, so the researchers decided to use a neutral picture of a sports person of mixed race that was presented as a new politician with a pro-student or anti-student policies. The same applied – the students in the pro-student condition picked the light skinned picture as representative of the person, the students in the anti-student condition picked the dark skinned picture. So we need to realise how persistent negative stereotypes (black = bad) are (and how damaging, by the looks of the video) but additionally we need to be aware of a skewed positive culture (White = good).

And it’ll take some work. As a non-race related example, Catherine Lido did an experiment with positive and negative primes on people who then went trough asylum seekers’ applications. Negative primes affected judgement, positive didnt. I hope I am recalling her work correctly when I say that the conclusion was that the positive prime was not matching any stereotyping beliefs already in our minds so they didn’t stick. If we see our minds like a big chest of drawers, some drawers contain information readily available. The positive stereotype drawer of asylum seekers = good doesn’t exist yet. It seems the same may apply for the black = good drawer, although, based on the ABC experiment, it’s heading in the right direction.

I’m trying to capture ‘cultural intelligence’ though a measure that is self report based but taps into beliefs about the world (perception) additionally to opinions about one’s own level of cultural intelligence (which is what the concept has been criticised for so far). Point is, awareness of our biases is an important point for further study,

The clip of the video

The link to the ABC news article

The link of an article on the Obama experiment

Continue Reading

Chinese whispers in Cross Cultural Perspectives

It’s January 2011. a good time for some reflection and action-taking. I certainly have resolutions and know, from the research that is done on the subject, that keeping a diary or at least plan my behaviour may help.


Since last year, I have been keen to evaluate if the materials that I teach actually affect the students’ thinking.  One of the challenges for this year is to convey the message I have intended for my students.  In order to evaluate this, I included a review exercise as part of the MBA assessment – students were required to evaluate the impact (or not) of the course ‘Cross Cultural Perspectives’ on their thinking and (potentially) practice. The course is part of ‘Management Perspectives’, which includes ethics, diversity, consultancy & entrepreneurship. It aims to add a philosophical perspective to the MBA experience.  The MBA is a great opportunity to take some time to reflect. MBA students often come in with an air of ‘you cannot tell me anything new’ (which makes me wonder why they’re there in the first place). But the whole point is to share experiences, reflect and discuss. This is their time to learn, reject/accept and evolve.

Unfortunately for me, the reviews mainly focused on a) the need to be aware that there are other nationalities and b) we all need to be politically correct/nice to one another. This wasn’t the lesson I intended. The five sessions focused on different aspects of management (economic crisis, marketing, negotiations, leadership) and the main topic throughout all of them was to encourage a) awareness of the subjectivity of best practice, b) critical thinking in terms of cognitive biases (mental short cuts like stereotyping) and c) the importance of cultural intelligence. As is evident, this doesn’t quite match the main themes from students’ reviews (despite that they were encouraged to think critically, feel comfortable to be critical and were given a template with an example). So, back to the drawing board.

Perhaps I am dealing with a cultural difference; the students (none were British/Western European/American) may not be familiar with the pedagogic practice of  criticising the facilitator. I’ll try again at the end of the year, when they almost finished their entire MBA to see if a) cross cultural perspectives made an impact (self reflection) and b) they retained the core 3 messages (do they incorporate the knowledge into the presentation on their project?). A bit like the Theory of Planned Behaviour with an intervention…

Continue Reading

Softly softly

While prowling the internet for great videos to show MBA and UG students, I come across many that talk about globalisation and the need for effective management.

All of these discuss the merits of good communication, a motivation to learn about the other and the willingness to question one’s own beliefs. I suppose what can be called cultural intelligence.

It is then to my amusement that, after a video or two on this subject (linked to, hardly a soft, touchy-feely source) and some examples of evidence based management, my MBA students proceed to bargain hard during a negotiation exercise. Some stand up and shout, some point fingers. I hear ‘you must see that our need for (resource X) is greater than yours!’. Yeah, that will do it. Aim of the game is to communicate so that the teams find out that they need different parts of resource X. Not many were willing to share that information. If asked why not they cannot answer.

Is it an innate distrust we have as humans? Or are we taught to be competitive, even if it is detrimental to our success. Why, even if the evidence is provided, do we not practice what is taught? Communicate, communicate, communicate.

Continue Reading

A German, Lebanese and Nederlandse walk into a bar…

Nathalie (Dutch, PhD Cross Cultural Psychology in the UK) sends an email to Ronald (German, PhD Cross Cultural Psychology in New Zealand) and Charles (Lebanese, PhD Cross Cultural Psychology in Beirut) about a cross cultural issue. All three are academics at local universities.

Nathalie, London 09/10/2010

A cross cultural issue:

We teach our classes in London, Hong Kong and Dubai. These are partner campuses, in the sense that when students obtain their degree it says ‘British University’ without an indication at what location. We have always been instructed that English standards apply. In practice this means that content and assignments need to be of equivalent level (although do not necessarily need to be the same).

Today we were told that Dubai students complained that they had to do an assignment that involved the analysis of the performance of companies that produce alcohol. They felt that this was insensitive to their cultural norm.

It was suggested that we adjust the content to local needs.

I have huge reservations. First, it’s analysis of a company, I am not making them drink the stuff. Secondly, the university’s aim is to expand world-wide. We now have campuses in Mauritius, China, India, Dubai, Sri Lanka etc etc. Adjusting content and assignments to each culture is just not feasible.

Some people have argued that we teach from a Western-centric perspective. We expect students to be independent learners, who are critical thinkers, which for some other cultures may be challenging. As a UK university, are we selling a UK product or is the university a multinational that should adjust it’s product to local needs?

What do you think?

Ronald, New Zealand 09/10/2010

hahaha this is too funny. sorry, but those complaints i can’t quite take seriously.

if people are too ideologically narrow to care about stuff like that, just change the name of the product. maybe make it landmines or deep sea oil drilling machinery or male underwear something like that :p is this a serious complaint or just somebody trying to act important?

Nathalie, London 10/09/2010

A serious complaint, presented today by the Dubai representative (English national), who urged all module leaders to change the content to Dubai norms.

Ronald, New Zealand 09/10/2010

i leave it to charles to reply to that.

what happened to good old educational standards, first practiced and perfected in those areas that seem to have some problems with content these days (according to this complaint).

i guess the university needs money, so you should change all your course content now. immediately.

Charles, Beirut 10/09/2010


Well, I’d probably side with the Dubai request on this one. The issue is not really about alcohol for me, but about teaching effectiveness…

The inclusion of Alcohol in the example becomes a distraction from the actual exercise as students are focusing on this “forbidden” or “unfamilar”

object rather than on the point of the exercise. This is not about critical thinking. What if the exercise was turned to “the company that publishes Mein Kempf wants to increase its sales, blab la” sent to UK or German students. it will irk some people and distract from the main purpose of the exercise. In my personal opinion, exercises need to use examples that are meaningful and recognisable by students for them to be most effective. No point giving camel trading examples to British students, or referring to superior Japanese efficiency to Chinese participants. 

However, we would have a problem if Dubai authorities request removing “sexism” or homophobic discrimination from the curriculum, or decides that some psychological concepts are inappropriate. Then we are dealing with actual content.

That’s my two cent worth of thoughts.

Ronald, New Zealand 10/09/2010

i still believe that the alc example is hypocritical though. i have not been to dubai, but i have been told that you can buy alc and many men appear to drink. so it is a superficial political reaction rather than a sacred value type kind of problem. i am sceptical about religiously motivated requests, but i understand that it might deeply offend and motivate certain groups of people. but at the end of the day, deeply religious people are often quite tolerant and these issues are used for political purposes.

my one cent.

Nathalie, London 10/09/2010

I thought about this some more and sent email last night via iPhone: On 2nd thoughts, if even working on a case on alcohol represents an acknowledgement of something abominable hence it is a problem (like a case on pedophilia discussed as a norm) then this may make sense.

I do not agree, however, with Charles’ comment that we cannot agree with homophobic issues. If by law homosexuality is not allowed, I don’t see the difference between that and alcohol, which is also forbidden by law. Thus, if it concerned a legal case of Smith vs Kramer, where Kramer was the defendant and it was related to dismissal of work due to sexuality and Dubai would complain about that… then isn’t that the same argument?

What this highlights is that our Western minds are rarely exposed to situations where we have to write about something we find disgusting (e.g., a case study of the success of a company that makes utensils for female clitoral removal). Hence, we jump through the political correctness hoop and LEARNED that issues related to alcohol are problematic, however, we do not truly understand the sentiment, we cannot empathise. I certainly didn’t, and felt that Dubai should get over it.

I understand now. It conjures up all sorts of questions. It makes me realise that the gap between cultures is magnificently huge and that debates about land, etc may be more rational but debates about these norms and values are emotional and difficult to comprehend. If people are not willing to explore, research to try to understand (and instead do the PC thing or the f*** off thing) then we’re not getting anywhere really.

My two pennies.

Charles, Beirut 13/09/2010

Feels like a conversation … : )

The example of alcohol is not similar to homosexuality, even if they seem to have a  common denominator in “laws and regulations”.

Consuming alcohol or not has no implication towards discrimination, and is a matter of choice (to drink or not to drink). This is not the case in homosexuality or gender or race. These you are born into, and all humans are equal in the eyes of Allah 🙂 (ergo the theological argument).

So, if the retrograde government of one country or the other would like to enforce homophobic legislation, it doesn’t mean we have to bend to it. I live in a country that supposedly considers homosexuality illegal, yet I talk about it openly in class even if some ears do not like to hear what I say. This is not the same as preferences and choices (e.g. to ban CFC aerosol or not :)).

Nathalie, London 13/09/2010:

I see your point. But then this too is up for debate because you say one is born into homosexuality, whereas others may argue it isn’t. It then comes back to opinion and my opinion is that, I am not asking the student to drink the stuff, I am asking him/her to evaluate a Cross Cultural Case study on a beer company. If anything, the international MBA student should’ve highlighted the cultural issues related to this product (and get an ‘A’!).

After note: The case study was changed to a different kind of assignment before this discussion happened. This particular case study on teaching a controversial product will now be used in the introductory lecture at Under Graduate and Post Graduate level as it can be apply to the context of marketing (a controversial product), advertising, shipping, producing etc. To me, this example has highlighted the complexity of cross cultural management. When a conflict occurs, the challenge is to empathise truly, i.e., understand the beliefs and emotions. This then doesn’t mean that something has to change perse. That depends on ultimately what is deemed to be in the benefit of the organisation/individuals involved.

Continue Reading

“I tolerate you”

Tolerance is a much used, socially desirable value across the Western world. It sounds attractive because it reflects values such as the ability to live side-by-side those who are different and to restrain oneself. Yet, tolerance as a value can be interpreted in different ways, and possibly therefore it is so attractive for a political usage.

For example, unlike with the American melting pot, the Dutch did not require immigrants to integrate or assimilate. They were merely tolerated as a different community. Yet, tolerance indicates a power relationship, with those who tolerate as the more powerful. For example, to say that ‘I will tolerate you’ at a personal level reflects this power difference clearly. Yet, it seems acceptable rhetoric at the national level, even if the meaning is the same and is not, as also commonly thought, a concept of inclusivity.

In fact, Wemyss (2006: 215) argues that tolerance is not a positive national aspiration as it is in fact ‘the conditional withholding of force by those at the top of a ‘hierarchy of belonging’. Secondly, tolerance indicates acceptance and benevolence for the greater good, which, over the years, has become synonymized with a social and liberal political view. Therefore, using the word ‘tolerance’ is indicative of an implied power relation as much as it supports the idea of a multicultural society.

Proponents of pluralism, like the enlightened Gentili, assume that the nature of human beings is as such that they can (be taught to) live side by side without caring what the other thinks, or who they worship. Pluralism, then, is a possibility provided that people acknowledge and suppress their urge to invade, segregate, and dominate. It requires a shift from an individualistic approach to politics to come towards an ethical, inclusive form of governing, as argued by Amin (2010):


One reason for a turn to a politics of ethics – the desire to link moral and political

philosophy – is the belief that rationalism, utilitarianism, consumerism and individualism have diminished the role of ethics in social organization and human interaction, and that credos such as liberalism, socialism, religious society and nationalism have legitimated harm, including ethical harm, towards those believed to be on the outside (Appiah, 2006; Parekh, 2000).


In the UK, the Commission on Integration and Cohesion published the ‘Our Shared Future’ report, which indicated that there was a sense of shared values across the individuals and communities consulted.  In an independent report advising the commission, Buofino and Thompson (2007: 15) argued that ‘good mental health, satisfying and secure work, a secure and loving private life, freedom, moral values and a secure community were found to be the main factors affecting happiness’. The Commission concluded that their expectation that communities clash in terms of values was not found to be true but warned that ‘if the discrimination experienced by some groups within our society continues, we will not be able to achieve the goals we set out in this report for building integration and cohesion’ (Commission on Integration and Cohesion, 2007: 27).

In the Netherlands, the report called ‘The Drama of Multiculturalism’ (Scheffer, 2000) shook the establishment on its foundations. The author argued that multiculturalism had failed and that, due to the pillarization ethos and because Dutch society is void of strong nationalism, immigrants were not required to integrate. This left them confused in terms of their identity as SIT and SCT would have predicted. Furthermore, Scheffer (2000) argues that for multiculturalism to work, the Dutch should not eschew conflict in order to come to a resolution. He concludes[i] (translated from Dutch):


We have had an exceptional time, when a relaxed and wealthy society let go of the reigns. The illusion of invulnerability was strong and it seemed as if freedom and forbearance stabilised autonomously. Those years are over. At the moment, citizens obtain less justice security, social protection and cultural acknowledgement from the State. Now that the cornerstones of our contented nation are moving, many turn against the government that constantly relativises itself. The political upper-layer, who used to possess a clear civilization mission, now doubts itself and loses more and more grip on the societal reality.


Then one can understand the refusal by the cabinet and parliament to face the, for everybody visible and often high-lighted, problems surrounding ethnic minorities in the Netherlands. A parliamentary study in to the immigration and integration policies is necessary, because now whole generations are signed off under the veil of tolerance. The current policy of generous admission and limited integration enlarges the inequality en contributes to a sense of estrangement in society. Tolerance moans under the weight of outstanding maintenance. The multicultural drama that unfolds then is the largest threat to societal peace.


 Instead of taking heed of Scheffer’s words, by voting for the PVV, the Dutch elected for a full immigration ban on people from Moslim countries, a tax on Moslim women wearing a veil and for The Netherlands to leave the EU if Turkey joins. Wilders’ PVV party and other similar parties in Europe reject multiculturalism because they are unwilling to be tolerant even. Statistics generated by so called voting indicator software that advises the public on a representative party of their viewpoints based on questions show that PVV’s program is popular; It is argued that they represent what people think but feel they cannot say (Kanne & de Beer, 2009).

It is the management of the complexity of the modern person’s sense of belonging and security within conflict situations that requires further study. Identity negotiation between layers of identity by definition leads to conflict. The current negotiation between the higher order national identity (American, Dutch, European), and smaller subcultures (e.g. Muslim, gender, or gay subcultures) is a case in point. Additionally to negotiating one’s own identity, people are required to interact with others with often very different values. This diversity in experience and background can be a platform for success (van Ameijde, Nelson, Billsberry & van Meurs, 2008) but it may also cause misunderstandings (van Meurs, 2003; van Meurs & Spencer-Oatey, 2007). We have to acknowledge this challenge: the human fear of uncertainty vs. the human capacity for compassion.

[i] We hebben een uitzonderlijke tijd achter ons, waarin een zeer ontspannen en welvarende samenleving de teugels heeft laten vieren. De illusie van onkwetsbaarheid was sterk en het leek alsof de vrijheid en verdraagzaamheid zich als vanzelf bestendigden. Die jaren zijn voorbij. Burgers ontlenen momenteel minder rechtszekerheid, sociale bescherming en culturele bevestiging aan de staat. Nu deze hoekstenen van onze tevreden natie zijn gaan schuiven, keren velen zich af van een overheid die zichzelf voortdurend relativeert. De politieke bovenlaag die vroeger over een duidelijke beschavingsmissie beschikte, twijfelt aan zichzelf en verliest meer en meer zijn greep op de maatschappelijke werkelijkheid.

Zo kan men de weigering begrijpen van kabinet en parlement voor iedereen zichtbare en vaak gesignaleerde problemen rondom etnische minderheden in Nederland onder ogen te zien. Een parlementair onderzoek naar het immigratie- en integratiebeleid is nodig, want nu worden hele generaties onder het mom van tolerantie afgeschreven. Het huidige beleid van ruime toelating en beperkte integratie vergroot de ongelijkheid en draagt bij tot een gevoel van vervreemding in de samenleving. De tolerantie kreunt onder de last van achterstallig onderhoud. Het multiculturele drama dat zich voltrekt is dan ook de grootste bedreiging voor de maatschappelijke vrede (Scheffer, 2000)


Continue Reading

Hup Holland Hup!

It’s the World Cup final and I am very excited because Holland (or Netherlands as they’re now referred to in this tournament) are playing!

From my living room in London, I followed all the games and when they won from Brazil the buzz really started. I wasn’t the only one – the media, the players, the people of the Netherlands had overcome a threshold that Friday – Holland won from Brazil. The Dutch are not known for their national pride (which in fact has been mentioned as a problem for integration – why join the majority if they don’t care themselves?). Anyway, after the game, Holland suddenly felt a million miles away. Although I am usually not that bothered about being an immigrant in the UK (noticed that for the Middle Classes this is called ‘being an expat’), that evening I needed to drink a biertje and sing in my native language. So my boyfriend and I took the tube to the Dutch bar De Hems. There, very tall people clad in orange were dancing ‘De Polonaise’ and I stood on the periphery.

I am unsure why this surprised me – it is not necessary to feel of mixed identity through socialisation (as opposed to being biologically of mixed heritage). Yet, if you’d ask me on any day, I am full Dutch but integrated into English society. To the point that when I travel back to The Netherlands, I experience a little culture shock each time.I feel 60% Dutch, 40%English.

But when Holland won from Uruguay and Germany lost against Spain, I found myself trailing the internet for flights to the Netherlands. Suddenly, my identity became 100% Dutch again. I could read via the internet that the Dutch media was all about orange and the Dutch boys in South Africa and I heard from my family that the streets were being painted orange back home. Was this a once in a lifetime opportunity? Should I be standing there among1000s of fellow Dutch on a square in Amsterdam and watch the game on a big screen? I checked the usual expat sites and saw that I wasn’t alone – posts on Facebook and forums indicated that other Dutch people in the UK (with British partners) had found themselves sitting on the couch alone and wanted to know where they could watch the next game. A certain fever got hold of me. Donning an orange t-shirt I went to work and phoned my father – what’s the plan?

What I didn’t know was that my brilliant friends here in the UK had planned to come over on Sunday to watch the game with me, after my boyfriend sent them a text saying I had felt very homesick. So, from Oxford, Buckinghamshire, Slough and London they will come, including one Colombian friend, who will be supporting Spain. This morning, as I was putting up the orange garlands, I realised that I am home away from home and that I’d rather sit in my living room with 10 good friends from all over the world watching what will be a very exciting game than standing among 1000s strangers who happen to be Dutch too. Our sense of identity and belonging is a complex thing – now where’s my orange vuvuzela?

World Cup 2010

Continue Reading

Why do sheep swing?

The results are out – the Dutch elections took place last week and the VVD (right wing, liberal) won by a small margin. Second is PvdA (socialists), third… PVV (nationalistic, anti Islam). I voted none of the above and am now wondering how the parties are going to put their coalition together. According to the votes, the Dutch want a right wing government: VVD, PVV and ? (CDA – Christian Democrats – declined).

As a Cross Cultural Psychologist, I am interested in several questions. First, according to the polls, PVV would not win seats with such a margin. So why did the Dutch defy the predictors and vote for Geert Wilders’ party?

Secondly, in Belgium for the first time in 180 years a party (N-VA) that wants to split Belgium into two (Flanders en Wallonia) has become the most popular. Although this party is not like PVV in terms of the anti-Islam policies,  one Dutch broadsheet is now wondering if it’s intellectually acceptable to vote nationalistic (NRC

Some may argue that the smaller countries are fed up with people coming in, unsettling an established culture in a country that has been occupied by foreign entities in the past and thus likely to be allergic to those who impose their views that deviate from the ‘tolerant’ norm. Hence, is there a need for the basics as per Maslow’s pyramid, to be satisfied? Lock the doors,  send a strong message to the established parties that Joe and Jane Bloggs want to be heard and sort out nationalistic interests? Interesting, but the Dutch are not known for their nationalism. At the most the Dutch would don their orange and support ‘Holland’ during the football (2-0 against Denmark, since you asked).

However, while I was in the Netherlands in April, I was intrigued to view a tv documentary on the BNP that exaggerated the support for this party among Britons. The media in the Netherlands was telling the Dutch that the British would vote BNP. They didn’t, but was this media hype enough for the Dutch to think, I’ll vote PVV since everybody else is too and I am fed up with the current politically correct climate? Certainly, things aren’t so simplistic, but my point is… why this swing? Why did the Dutch and now the Belgians vote nationalistic? Why follow each other like sheep but why did the British abstain from voting for the BNP?

I’m digging around the World Value Survey data to find out. Me thinks its something to do with pragmatic pluralism…

Continue Reading