Cultural Approach In Political Analysis

Culture is important to the world’s order. It helps to locate oneself, to give actions and motives an explanation, to link up collective identities to political action and to motivate people and groups to act in a certain way. However, there are two rules need to be followed. First, culture cannot be used or defined broadly, it cannot included all human actions, institutions and beliefs and second, the relationship between the effects of culture on collective action and political life are oblique and it is crucial to examine the interaction of culture impact between interests and institutions in order to fully appreciate the role of culture in political life. Unlike other theories used in comparative politics, for instance the rational choice theory, cultural approaches take many forms.

By using culture as a centre of political analysis, it is different from using rational self-interest in political making because using cultural analysis can create different explanation for the same question. There are different advantages by using cultural analysis. First, cultural analysis can provide an account of political behaviour and a connection to individuals and groups. Individuals and collective actions are linked based on the common belief in a culture share and it involves two specific elements, the strong reinforcement between individuals and collective identity and the sense that outsiders will treat oneself and other group members mostly the same ways. For those who form and join the group most likely have common or similar experiences that helps to consolidate every members of the group. Since group members have similar experiences, it gives them emotional comfort and they believe their goal is the same and they would understand each other, but they are just fascinated by their idealism. However, Anderson (1991) thinks that the within-group identity formation are overemphasized and it overvalued the uniformity within groups because there is a different between what group members think they can share and what they can actually share.

Second, cultural analysis provides resources for political organization and mobilization. Cultural organizations are used to achieve goals directly. Religion, one of the elements of cultural can be used to explain the reason why cultural analysis can bring out resources and mobility for political organizations. Religion refer to a person’s belief. People believe what the “God” or the “Buddha” said and would do what they told them to. It is easy for religions to boost up emotions and it is possible to arouse people’s attention and to “control” or talk through them to do a certain kind of action. For example, donate money as a kind of worship, hence to address with social issue in various aspects, like welfare (donate money to hospital in order to upgrade medical equipment)and education (provide different workshop or study tour for student to see more of the world). As there are regular meeting for believer, like going to church every Sunday, it creates a platform for people who share the same or similar values to communicate regularly and interact with others which can bond the relationship between members. With the power to persuade and create a “family” atmosphere, religion (culture) provides a fundamental base for organization. According to Spiro’s view, it emphasizes culture as a public shared meanings, behaviours, institutions and social structure but not only a culturally constituted phenomena. It explains the reason that individual and groups will do what they believe.

Third, cultural analysis acts as boundaries and helps to organize actions. As mentioned, by using cultural analysis, there will be different explanation for the same question. Because of difference in culture, there will be different explanation for the same question and that is where the boundaries drawn, because culture belongs to the value and belief that an individual have. By using the example of priority seats in Hong Kong. The originally purpose of it is to encourage people to give out their seats when there is someone needed. It is not forcible, but only if you are willing to give the seat to someone who needed it. However, people will not take the priority seats even if there’s no one needed it because of the “new” culture in Hong Kong, where people who do not give the seats to children, people with disability nor elderly will be taken photos and video and uploaded to social platform in order to let other citizens to know the one who is not willing to share his/her seats to others is a “bad” guy and this even happen to non-priority seats. Under the pressure and culture of “public trial”, people nowadays are less likely to take the seats, especially the priority seats even there is no on needed. Such new-in cultural have shape people’s behaviours and explain why the image of priority seat has turned from positive to negative.