CULTURE RELATIVISM,

RACISM, ETHNICITY
AND ETHNOCENTRICISM
 RELATIVISM
 Relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right
and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of
justification are products of differing conventions and
frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to
the context giving rise to them. More precisely, “relativism”
covers views which maintain that—at a high level of
abstraction—at least some class of things have the properties
they have (e.g., beautiful, morally good, epistemically justified)
not simpliciter(simply) , but only relative to a given framework
of assessment (e.g., local cultural norms, individual standards),
and correspondingly, that the truth of claims attributing these
properties holds only once the relevant framework of assessment
is specified or supplied. Relativists characteristically insist,
furthermore, that if something is only relatively so, then there
can be no framework-independent vantage point from which the
matter of whether the thing in question is so can be established.
 Relativism has been, in its various guises, both one of the
most popular and most reviled philosophical doctrines of
our time. Defenders see it as a harbinger of tolerance and
the only ethical and epistemic stance worthy of the open-
minded and tolerant. Detractors dismiss it for its alleged
incoherence and uncritical intellectual permissiveness.
Debates about relativism permeate the whole spectrum of
philosophical sub-disciplines. From ethics to epistemology,
science to religion, political theory to ontology, theories of
meaning and even logic, philosophy has felt the need to
respond to this heady and seemingly subversive idea.
Discussions of relativism often also invoke considerations
relevant to the very nature and methodology of philosophy
and to the division between the so-called “analytic and
continental” camps in philosophy.
 CULTURAL RELATIVISM
 Public debates about relativism often revolve around the
frequently cited but unclear notion of cultural relativism.
The idea that norms and values are born out of
conventions can be traced back to the Greek historian
Herodotus (c. 484–425 BC), but it is only in the 20th
century, and particularly with the advent of social
anthropology, that cultural relativism has gained wide
currency. Franz Boas, responsible for the founding of
social anthropology in the U.S., claimed that-
 “The data of ethnology prove that not only our
knowledge but also our emotions are the result of the
form of our social life and of the history of the people to
whom we belong”. (Boas 1940: 636)
 Boas’s views became the orthodoxy of anthropology
through M. J. Herskovits’ “principle of cultural
relativism” stating: “Judgments are based on
experience, and experience is interpreted by each
individual in terms of his own enculturation”
(Herskovits 1955:15).

 Since those early days, social anthropologists have

come to develop more nuanced approaches to
cultural relativism (see for instance Geertz 1993);
however, its core tenet, a claim to the equal standing
of all cultural perspectives and values which co-vary
with their cultural and social background, has
remained constant.
 Cultural relativists justify their position by recourse to a combination of
empirical, conceptual and normative considerations:

 (a) The empirical observation that there is a significant degree of

diversity in norms, values and beliefs across cultures and historic
periods, known as descriptive relativism .
 (b) An inductive argument to the effect that failures in previous attempts
to resolve disagreements arising from (a) show that there are no universal
criteria for adjudicating between differing world-views.
 (c) The methodological assumption that human behavior and thought
carry the imprint of their cultural and social context such that biology by
itself is not sufficient for explaining many of their most important
features, especially those with respect to which cultures differ.
 (d) The normative principle of a need for tolerance and acceptance
towards other points of view, which leads to so-called “normative or
prescriptive cultural relativism”, or the positions that cultural relativism
is a moral requirement.
 Claims (a)–(d) are open to a variety of objections. Some
anthropologists and biologists have argued against the empirical
assumption of the variability of cultures and have disputed its extent.
Kinship, death and its attendant rituals of mourning, birth, the
experience of empathy, expressions of sympathy and fear, and the
biological needs that give rise to these, are some of the constant
elements of human experience that belie the seeming diversity
reported by ethnographers (Brown 2004).
 (c) has also been challenged by naturalistically inclined social
scientists who believe that an evolutionary or a biologically
informed approach can provide a context-independent, universally
applicable theoretical framework for explaining what is common to
all cultures, despite their superficial differences.
 Moreover, Moody-Adams (1997), among others, has argued that
cultures are not integrated wholes that could determine uni-
directionally the beliefs and experiences of their members; they are
porous, riddled with inconsistencies and amenable to change.
 Finally, (d) is under pressure from the very relativism it advocates.
Other critics, Pope Benedict XVI for instance, in his very first
homily delivered upon election (18 April 2005), reject and condemn
prescriptive cultural relativism as a harbinger of nihilism and an
“anything goes” extreme permissiveness.
 An influential form of descriptive cultural relativism
owes its genesis to linguistics. Benjamin Whorf, inspired
by his teacher Edward Sapir, who in turn was supervised
by the social anthropologist Franz Boas, used
ethnographic evidence from American Indian languages,
such as Hopi, to argue that languages mold our views of
the world and different languages do so differently,
because “we dissect nature along lines laid down by our
native languages” (Whorf 1956: 213)
 RACISM
 Racism is the belief that groups of humans possess different
behavioral traits corresponding to physical appearance and can be
divided based on the superiority of one race over another. It may also
mean prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against other
people because they are of a different race or ethnicity. Modern
variants of racism are often based in social perceptions of biological
differences between peoples. These views can take the form of social
actions, practices or beliefs, or political systems in which different
races are ranked as inherently superior or inferior to each other, based
on presumed shared inheritable traits, abilities, or qualities.
 In terms of political systems (e.g., apartheid) that support the
expression of prejudice or aversion in discriminatory practices or
laws, racist ideology may include associated social aspects such
as nativism, xenophobia, otherness, segregation, hierarchical ranking,
and supremacism.
 Racism, also called racialism, the belief that humans may be
divided into separate and exclusive biological entities called
“races”; that there is a causal link between inherited physical
traits and traits of personality, intellect, morality, and other
cultural and behavioral features; and that some races are
innately superior to others.
 The term is also applied to political, economic, or legal
institutions and systems that engage in or
perpetuate discrimination on the basis of race or otherwise
reinforce racial inequalities in wealth and income, education,
health care, civil rights, and other areas.
 Such institutional, structural, or systemic racism became a
particular focus of scholarly investigation in the 1980s with the
emergence of critical race theory, an offshoot of the critical
legal studies movement.
 Since the late 20th century the notion of biological race has
been recognized as a cultural invention, entirely without
scientific basis.
 Sociologists, in general, recognize "race" as a social construct. This means that,
although the concepts of race and racism are based on observable biological
characteristics, any conclusions drawn about race on the basis of those observations are
heavily influenced by cultural ideologies. Racism, as an ideology, exists in a society at
both the individual and institutional level.
 While much of the research and work on racism during the last half-century or so has
concentrated on "white racism" in the Western world, historical accounts of race-based
social practices can be found across the globe. Thus, racism can be broadly defined to
encompass individual and group prejudices and acts of discrimination that result in
material and cultural advantages conferred on a majority or a dominant social
group. So-called "white racism" focuses on societies in which white populations are the
majority or the dominant social group. In studies of these majority white societies, the
aggregate of material and cultural advantages is usually termed "white privilege".
 Race and race relations are prominent areas of study in sociology and economics. Much
of the sociological literature focuses on white racism. Some of the earliest sociological
works on racism were penned by sociologist W. E. B. Du Bois, the first African
American to earn a doctoral degree from Harvard University. Du Bois wrote, "the
problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color line.” Wellman (1993)
defines racism as "culturally sanctioned beliefs, which, regardless of intentions
involved, defend the advantages whites have because of the subordinated position of
racial minorities". In both sociology and economics, the outcomes of racist actions are
often measured by the inequality in income, wealth, net worth, and access to other
cultural resources (such as education), between racial groups.
 In sociology and social psychology, racial identity and the acquisition of
that identity, is often used as a variable in racism studies. Racial
ideologies and racial identity affect individuals' perception of race and
discrimination.
 Cazenave and Maddern (1999) define racism as "a highly organized
system of 'race'-based group privilege that operates at every level of
society and is held together by a sophisticated ideology of color/'race'
supremacy. Racial centrality (the extent to which a culture recognizes
individuals' racial identity) appears to affect the degree of
discrimination African American young adults perceive whereas racial
ideology may buffer the detrimental emotional effects of that
discrimination." Sellers and Shelton (2003) found that a relationship
between racial discrimination and emotional distress was moderated by
racial ideology and social beliefs.
 Some sociologists also argue that, particularly in the West, where racism
is often negatively sanctioned in society, racism has changed from being
a blatant to a more covert expression of racial prejudice. The "newer"
(more hidden and less easily detectable) forms of racism – which can be
considered embedded in social processes and structures – are more
difficult to explore as well as challenge. It has been suggested that,
while in many countries overt or explicit racism has become
increasingly taboo, even among those who display egalitarian explicit
attitudes, an implicit or aversive racism is still maintained
subconsciously.
 This process has been studied extensively in social psychology as implicit
associations and implicit attitudes, a component of implicit cognition. Implicit
attitudes are evaluations that occur without conscious awareness towards an
attitude object or the self. These evaluations are generally either favorable or
unfavorable. They come about from various influences in the individual
experience. Implicit attitudes are not consciously identified (or they are
inaccurately identified) traces of past experience that mediate favorable or
unfavorable feelings, thoughts, or actions towards social objects. These
feelings, thoughts, or actions have an influence on behavior of which the
individual may not be aware.
 Therefore, subconscious racism can influence our visual processing and how
our minds work when we are subliminally exposed to faces of different colors.
In thinking about crime, for example, social psychologist Jennifer L. Eberhardt
(2004) of Stanford University holds that, "blackness is so associated with crime
you're ready to pick out these crime objects.” Such exposures influence our
minds and they can cause subconscious racism in our behavior towards other
people or even towards objects. Thus, racist thoughts and actions can arise
from stereotypes and fears of which we are not aware. For example, scientists
and activists have warned that the use of the stereotype "Nigerian Prince" for
referring to advance-fee scammers is racist, i.e. "reducing Nigeria to a nation
of scammers and fraudulent princes, as some people still do online, is
a stereotype that needs to be called out".
 ASPECTS/ TYPES
 The ideology underlying racism can manifest in many aspects of social life.
 Aversive racism
 Aversive racism is a form of implicit racism, in which a person's unconscious
negative evaluations of racial or ethnic minorities are realized by a persistent
avoidance of interaction with other racial and ethnic groups. As opposed to
traditional, overt racism, which is characterized by overt hatred for and explicit
discrimination against racial/ethnic minorities, aversive racism is characterized by
more complex, ambivalent expressions and attitudes. Aversive racism is similar in
implications to the concept of symbolic or modern racism (described below),
which is also a form of implicit, unconscious, or covert attitude which results in
unconscious forms of discrimination.
 The term was coined by Joel Kovel to describe the subtle racial behaviors of any
ethnic or racial group who rationalize their aversion to a particular group by
appeal to rules or stereotypes. People who behave in an aversively racial way may
profess egalitarian beliefs, and will often deny their racially motivated behavior;
nevertheless they change their behavior when dealing with a member of another
race or ethnic group than the one they belong to. The motivation for the change is
thought to be implicit or subconscious. Experiments have provided empirical
support for the existence of aversive racism. Aversive racism has been shown to
have potentially serious implications for decision making in employment, in legal
decisions and in helping behavior.
 Color blindness
 In relation to racism, color blindness is the disregard of racial characteristics in social
interaction, for example in the rejection of affirmative action, as a way to address the
results of past patterns of discrimination. Critics of this attitude argue that by refusing
to attend to racial disparities, racial color blindness in fact unconsciously perpetuates
the patterns that produce racial inequality.
 Eduardo Bonilla-Silva argues that color blind racism arises from an
"abstract liberalism, biologization of culture, naturalization of racial matters, and
minimization of racism". Color blind practices are "subtle, institutional, and apparently
nonracial" because race is explicitly ignored in decision-making. If race is disregarded
in predominantly white populations, for example, whiteness becomes
the normative standard, whereas people of color are othered, and the racism these
individuals experience may be minimized or erased. At an individual level, people with
"color blind prejudice" reject racist ideology, but also reject systemic policies intended
to fix institutional racism.
 Cultural
 Cultural racism manifests as societal beliefs and customs that promote the assumption
that the products of a given culture, including the language and traditions of that
culture, are superior to those of other cultures. It shares a great deal with xenophobia,
which is often characterized by fear of, or aggression toward, members of an out-
group by members of an in-group. In that sense it is also similar to communalism as
used in South Asia.
 Cultural racism exists when there is a widespread acceptance of stereotypes concerning
different ethnic or population groups. Whereas racism can be characterized by the
belief that one race is inherently superior to another, cultural racism can be
characterized by the belief that one culture is inherently superior to another
 Economic
 Historical economic or social disparity is alleged to be a form
of discrimination caused by past racism and historical reasons, affecting the present
generation through deficits in the formal education and kinds of preparation in
previous generations, and through primarily unconscious racist attitudes and actions
on members of the general population. Economic discrimination may lead to choices
that perpetuate racism. For example, color photographic film was tuned for white
skin as are automatic soap dispensers and facial recognition systems.
 In 2011, Bank of America agreed to pay $335 million to settle a federal government
claim that its mortgage division- Countrywide Financial discriminated against black
and Hispanic homebuyers.
 Institutional
 Institutional racism (also known as structural racism, state racism or systemic racism)
is racial discrimination by governments, corporations, religions, or educational
institutions or other large organizations with the power to influence the lives of many
individuals. Stokely Carmichael is credited for coining the phrase institutional
racism in the late 1960s. He defined the term as "the collective failure of an
organization to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of
their colour, culture or ethnic origin".
 Maulana Karenga argued that racism constituted the destruction of culture, language,
religion, and human possibility and that the effects of racism were "the morally
monstrous destruction of human possibility involved redefining African humanity to
the world, poisoning past, present and future relations with others who only know us
through this stereotyping and thus damaging the truly human relations among peoples.
 Othering
 Othering is the term used by some to describe a system of discrimination whereby
the characteristics of a group are used to distinguish them as separate from the
norm.
 Othering plays a fundamental role in the history and continuation of racism. To
objectify a culture as something different, exotic or underdeveloped is to
generalize that it is not like 'normal' society. Europe's colonial attitude towards the
Orientals exemplifies this as it was thought that the East was the opposite of the
West; feminine where the West was masculine, weak where the West was strong
and traditional where the West was progressive. By making these generalizations
and othering the East, Europe was simultaneously defining herself as the norm,
further entrenching the gap.
 Much of the process of othering relies on imagined difference, or the expectation
of difference. Spatial difference can be enough to conclude that "we" are "here"
and the "others" are over "there". Imagined differences serve to categorize people
into groups and assign them characteristics that suit the imaginer's expectations.
 Racial segregation
 Racial segregation is the separation of humans into socially-constructed racial
groups in daily life. It may apply to activities such as eating in a restaurant,
drinking from a water fountain, using a bathroom, attending school, going to the
movies, or in the rental or purchase of a home. Segregation is generally outlawed,
but may exist through social norms, even when there is no strong individual
preference for it, as suggested by Thomas Schelling's models of segregation and
subsequent work.
 Supremacism
 Centuries of European colonialism in the Americas, Africa and Asia were
often justified by white supremacist attitudes. During the early 20th
century, the phrase "The White Man's Burden" was widely used to justify
an imperialist policy as a noble enterprise. A justification for the policy of
conquest and subjugation of Native Americans emanated from the
stereotyped perceptions of the indigenous people as "merciless Indian
savages", as they are described in the United States Declaration of
Independence. Sam Wolfson of The Guardian writes that "the
declaration's passage has often been cited as an encapsulation of
the dehumanizing attitude toward indigenous Americans that the US was
founded on." In an 1890 article about colonial expansion onto Native
American land, author L. Frank Baum wrote: "The Whites, by law of
conquest, by justice of civilization, are masters of the American
continent, and the best safety of the frontier settlements will be secured
by the total annihilation of the few remaining Indians." Attitudes of black
supremacy, Arab supremacy and East Asian supremacy also exist.
 Subconscious biases
 Recent research has shown that individuals who consciously claim to
reject racism may still exhibit race-based subconscious biases in their
decision-making processes. While such "subconscious racial biases" do
not fully fit the definition of racism, their impact can be similar, though
typically less pronounced, not being explicit, conscious or deliberate.
 Symbolic/modern
 Some scholars argue that in the US, earlier violent and aggressive forms of
racism have evolved into a more subtle form of prejudice in the late 20th
century. This new form of racism is sometimes referred to as "modern racism"
and it is characterized by outwardly acting unprejudiced while inwardly
maintaining prejudiced attitudes, displaying subtle prejudiced behaviors such as
actions informed by attributing qualities to others based on racial stereotypes,
and evaluating the same behavior differently based on the race of the person
being evaluated.
 This view is based on studies of prejudice and discriminatory behavior, where
some people will act ambivalently towards black people, with positive reactions
in certain, more public contexts, but more negative views and expressions in
more private contexts.
 This ambivalence may also be visible for example in hiring decisions where job
candidates that are otherwise positively evaluated may be unconsciously
disfavored by employers in the final decision because of their race.
 Some scholars consider modern racism to be characterized by an explicit
rejection of stereotypes, combined with resistance to changing structures of
discrimination for reasons that are ostensibly non-racial, an ideology that
considers opportunity at a purely individual basis denying the relevance of race
in determining individual opportunities and the exhibition of indirect forms of
micro-aggression toward and/or avoidance of people of other races.
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
 In 1919, a proposal to include a racial equality provision in the Covenant
of the League of Nations was supported by a majority, but not adopted in
the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. In 1943, Japan and its allies declared
work for the abolition of racial discrimination to be their aim at the Greater
East Asia Conference. Article 1 of the 1945 UN Charter includes
"promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental
freedoms for all without distinction as to race" as UN purpose.
 In 1950, UNESCO suggested in The Race Question – a statement signed
by 21 scholars such as Ashley Montagu, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Gunnar
Myrdal, Julian Huxley, etc. – to "drop the term race altogether and instead
speak of ethnic groups". The statement condemned scientific
racism theories that had played a role in the Holocaust. It aimed both at
debunking scientific racist theories, by popularizing modern knowledge
concerning "the race question", and morally condemned racism as contrary
to the philosophy of the Enlightenment and its assumption of equal
rights for all. Along with Myrdal's An American Dilemma: The Negro
Problem and Modern Democracy(1944), The Race Question influenced the
1954 U.S. Supreme Court desegregation decision in Brown v. Board of
Education. Also, in 1950, the European Convention on Human Rights was
adopted, which was widely used on racial discrimination issues.
 The United Nations use the definition of racial discrimination laid out
in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination, adopted in 1966:
 ... any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race,
color, descent, or national or ethnic origin that has the purpose or
effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or
exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental
freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field
of public life. (Part 1 of Article 1 of the U.N. International Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination)
 In 2001, the European Union explicitly banned racism, along with
many other forms of social discrimination, in the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the legal effect of which,
if any, would necessarily be limited to Institutions of the European
Union: "Article 21 of the charter prohibits discrimination on any
ground such as race, color, ethnic or social origin, genetic features,
language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion,
membership of a national minority, property, disability, age or sexual
orientation and also discrimination on the grounds of nationality."
 ETHNICITY
 An ethnic group or ethnicity is a grouping of people who identify with each other on
the basis of shared attributes that distinguish them from other groups such as a common
set of traditions, ancestry, language, history, society, culture, nation, religion, or social
treatment within their residing area. Ethnicity is sometimes used interchangeably with
the term nation, particularly in cases of ethnic nationalism, and is separate from, but
related to the concept of races.
 Ethnicity can be an inherited status or based on the society within which one lives.
Membership of an ethnic group tends to be defined by a shared cultural
heritage, ancestry, origin myth, history, homeland, language or dialect, symbolic
systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, art or physical
appearance. Ethnic groups often continue to speak related languages and share a
similar gene pool.
 By way of language shift, acculturation, adoption and religious conversion, individuals
or groups may over time shift from one ethnic group to another. Ethnic groups may be
subdivided into subgroups or tribes, which over time may become separate ethnic
groups themselves due to endogamy or physical isolation from the parent group.
Conversely, formerly separate ethnicities can merge to form a pan-ethnicity and may
eventually merge into one single ethnicity. Whether through division or amalgamation,
the formation of a separate ethnic identity is referred to as ethnogenesis.
 The nature of ethnicity is still debated by scholars. 'Primordialists' view ethnic groups
as real phenomena whose distinct characteristics have endured since the distant past.
Others view ethnic groups as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on
rules made by society.
 DEFINITIONS AND CONCEPTUAL HISTORY
 Ethnography begins in classical antiquity; after early authors
like Anaximander and Hecataeus of Miletus, Herodotus in c. 480
BC laid the foundation of
both historiography and ethnography of the ancient world. The
Greeks at this time did not only describe foreign nations but had
also developed a concept of their own "ethnicity", which they
grouped under the name of Hellenes. Herodotus gave a famous
account of what defined Greek (Hellenic) ethnic identity in his
day, enumerating
 shared descent

 shared language

 shared sanctuaries and sacrifices

 shared customs
 Max Weber maintained that ethnic groups were künstlich (artificial,
i.e. a social construct) because they were based on a subjective belief
in shared Gemeinschaft (community). Secondly, this belief in shared
Gemeinschaft did not create the group; the group created the belief.
Third, group formation resulted from the drive to monopolize power
and status. This was contrary to the prevailing naturalist belief of the
time, which held that socio-cultural and behavioral differences
between peoples stemmed from inherited traits and tendencies derived
from common descent, then called "race".
 Another influential theoretician of ethnicity was Fredrik Barth, whose
"Ethnic Groups and Boundaries" from 1969 has been described as
instrumental in spreading the usage of the term in social studies in the
1980s and 1990s. Barth went further than Weber in stressing the
constructed nature of ethnicity. To Barth, ethnicity was perpetually
negotiated and renegotiated by both external ascription and internal
self-identification. Barth's view is that ethnic groups are not
discontinuous cultural isolates or logical a priority to which people
naturally belong. He wanted to part with anthropological notions of
cultures as bounded entities, and ethnicity as primordialist bonds,
replacing it with a focus on the interface between groups.
 In 1978, anthropologist Ronald Cohen claimed that the identification
of "ethnic groups" in the usage of social scientists often reflected
inaccurate labels more than indigenous realities: the name ethnic
identities we accept, often unthinkingly, as basic givens in the literature
are often arbitrarily, or even worse inaccurately, imposed.
 In this way, he pointed to the fact that identification of an ethnic group
by outsiders, e.g. anthropologists, may not coincide with the self-
identification of the members of that group. He also described that in
the first decades of usage, the term ethnicity had often been used in
lieu of older terms such as "cultural" or "tribal" when referring to
smaller groups with shared cultural systems and shared heritage, but
that "ethnicity" had the added value of being able to describe the
commonalities between systems of group identity in both tribal and
modern societies. Cohen also suggested that claims concerning
"ethnic" identity (like earlier claims concerning "tribal" identity) are
often colonialist practices and effects of the relations between
colonized peoples and nation-states
 Kanchan Chandra rejects the expansive definitions of ethnic identity
(such as those that include common culture, common language,
common history and common territory), choosing instead to define
ethnic identity narrowly as a subset of identity categories determined
by the belief of common descent.
APPROACHES TO UNDERSTANDING ETHNICITY
 Different approaches to understanding ethnicity have been used by different
social scientists when trying to understand the nature of ethnicity as a factor in
human life and society. As Jonathan M. Hall observes, World War II was a
turning point in ethnic studies. The consequences of Nazi racism discouraged
essentialist interpretations of ethnic groups and race. Ethnic groups came to be
defined as social rather than biological entities. Their coherence was attributed
to shared myths, descent, kinship, a commonplace of origin, language, religion,
customs, and national character. So, ethnic groups are conceived as mutable
rather than stable, constructed in discursive practices rather than written in the
genes.
 Examples of various approaches are primordialism, essentialism, perennialism,
constructivism, modernism, and instrumentalism.
 "Primordialism", holds that ethnicity has existed at all times of human history
and that modern ethnic groups have historical continuity into the far past. For
them, the idea of ethnicity is closely linked to the idea of nations and is rooted
in the pre-Weber understanding of humanity as being divided into primordially
existing groups rooted by kinship and biological heritage.
 "Essentialist primordialism" further holds that ethnicity is an a priori fact
of human existence, that ethnicity precedes any human social interaction
and that it is unchanged by it. This theory sees ethnic groups as natural, not
just as historical. It also has problems dealing with the consequences of
intermarriage, migration and colonization for the composition of modern-
day multi-ethnic societies.
  "Kinship primordialism" holds that ethnic communities are extensions of
kinship units, basically being derived by kinship or clan ties where the choices
of cultural signs (language, religion, traditions) are made exactly to show this
biological affinity. In this way, the myths of common biological ancestry that are
a defining feature of ethnic communities are to be understood as representing
actual biological history. A problem with this view on ethnicity is that it is more
often than not the case that mythic origins of specific ethnic groups directly
contradict the known biological history of an ethnic community.
 "Geertz's primordialism", notably espoused by anthropologist Clifford Geertz,
argues that humans in general attribute an overwhelming power to primordial
human "givens" such as blood ties, language, territory, and cultural differences.
In Geertz' opinion, ethnicity is not in itself primordial but humans perceive it as
such because it is embedded in their experience of the world.
 In Geertz' opinion, ethnicity is not in itself primordial but humans perceive it as
such because it is embedded in their experience of the world.
 "Perennialism", an approach that is primarily concerned with nationhood but tends
to see nations and ethnic communities as basically the same phenomenon holds that
the nation, as a type of social and political organization, is of an immemorial or
"perennial" character. Smith (1999) distinguishes two variants: "continuous
perennialism", which claims that particular nations have existed for very long
periods, and "recurrent perennialism", which focuses on the emergence, dissolution
and reappearance of nations as a recurring aspect of human history.
 "Perpetual perennialism" holds that specific ethnic groups have existed
continuously throughout history.
 "Situational perennialism" holds that nations and ethnic groups emerge, change
and vanish through the course of history. This view holds that the concept of
ethnicity is a tool used by political groups to manipulate resources such as
wealth, power, territory or status in their particular groups' interests.
Accordingly, ethnicity emerges when it is relevant as a means of furthering
emergent collective interests and changes according to political changes in
society. Examples of a perennialist interpretation of ethnicity are also found in
Barth and Seidner who see ethnicity as ever-changing boundaries between
groups of people established through ongoing social negotiation and
interaction.
 "Instrumentalist perennialism", while seeing ethnicity primarily as a versatile
tool that identified different ethnics groups and limits through time, explains
ethnicity as a mechanism of social stratification, meaning that ethnicity is the
basis for a hierarchical arrangement of individuals. According to Donald Noel,
a sociologist who developed a theory on the origin of ethnic stratification,
ethnic stratification is a "system of stratification wherein some relatively fixed
group membership (e.g., race, religion, or nationality) is utilized as a major
criterion for assigning social positions". Ethnic stratification is one of many
different types of social stratification, including stratification based on socio-
economic status, race, or gender. According to Donald Noel, ethnic
stratification will emerge only when specific ethnic groups are brought into
contact with one another, and only when those groups are characterized by a
high degree of ethnocentrism, competition, and differential power.
 Ethnocentrism is the tendency to look at the world primarily
from the perspective of one's own culture, and to downgrade
all other groups outside one's own culture. Some sociologists,
such as Lawrence Bobo and Vincent Hutchings, say the origin
of ethnic stratification lies in individual dispositions of ethnic
prejudice, which relates to the theory of ethnocentrism.
Continuing with Noel's theory, some degree of differential
power must be present for the emergence of ethnic
stratification. In other words, an inequality of power among
ethnic groups means "they are of such unequal power that one
is able to impose its will upon another". In addition to
differential power, a degree of competition structured along
ethnic lines is a prerequisite to ethnic stratification as well. The
different ethnic groups must be competing for some common
goal, such as power or influence, or a material interest, such as
wealth or territory. Lawrence Bobo and Vincent Hutchings
propose that competition is driven by self-interest and
hostility, and results in inevitable stratification and conflict.
 "Constructivism" sees both primordialist and perennialist views as
basically flawed, and rejects the notion of ethnicity as a basic human
condition. It holds that ethnic groups are only products of human
social interaction, maintained only in so far as they are maintained
as valid social constructs in societies.
 "Modernist constructivism" correlates the emergence of ethnicity with
the movement towards nation states beginning in the early modern
period. Proponents of this theory, such as Eric Hobsbawm, argue that
ethnicity and notions of ethnic pride, such as nationalism, are purely
modern inventions, appearing only in the modern period of world
history. They hold that prior to this, ethnic homogeneity was not
considered an ideal or necessary factor in the forging of large-scale
societies.
 Ethnicity is an important means by which people may identify with
a larger group. Many social scientists, such
as anthropologists Fredrik Barth and Eric Wolf, do not consider
ethnic identity to be universal. They regard ethnicity as a product of
specific kinds of inter-group interactions, rather than an essential
quality inherent to human groups. Processes that result in the
emergence of such identification are called ethno genesis. Members
of an ethnic group, on the whole, claim cultural continuities over
time, although historians and cultural anthropologists have
documented that many of the values, practices, and norms that
imply continuity with the past are of relatively recent invention. [41]
 Ethnic groups can form a cultural mosaic in a society.
That could be in a city like New York City or Trieste,
but also the fallen monarchy of the Austro-Hungarian
Empire or the USA. Current topics are in particular
social and cultural differentiation, multilingualism,
competing identity offers, multiple cultural identities
and the formation of Salad bowl and melting
pot. Ethnic groups differ from other social groups, such
as subcultures, interest groups or social classes,
because they emerge and change over historical periods
(centuries) in a process known as ethno genesis, a
period of several generations of endogamy resulting in
common ancestry (which is then sometimes cast in
terms of a mythological narrative of a founding figure);
ethnic identity is reinforced by reference to "boundary
markers" – characteristics said to be unique to the
group which set it apart from other groups.
ETHNOCENTRICISM
 Ethnocentrism in social science and anthropology—as well as in
colloquial English discourse—means to apply one's own culture
or ethnicity as a frame of reference to judge other cultures,
practices, behaviors, beliefs, and people, instead of using the
standards of the particular culture involved. Since this judgment
is often negative, some people also use the term to refer to the
belief that one's culture is superior to, or more correct or normal
than, all others—especially regarding the distinctions that define
each ethnicity's cultural identity, such
as language, behavior, customs, and religion. In common usage, it
can also simply mean any culturally biased judgment. For
example, ethnocentrism can be seen in the common portrayals of
the Global South and the Global North.
 Ethnocentrism is sometimes related to racism, stereotyping,
discrimination, or xenophobia. However, the term "ethnocentrism"
does not necessarily involve a negative view of the others' race or
indicate a negative connotation. The opposite of ethnocentrism
is cultural relativism, which means to understand a different
culture in its own terms without subjective judgments.
 The term "ethnocentrism" was first applied in the social
sciences by American sociologist William G. Sumner. In his
1906 book, Folkways, Sumner describes ethnocentrism as
"the technical name for the view of things in which one's
own group is the center of everything, and all others are
scaled and rated with reference to it." He further
characterized ethnocentrism as often leading
to pride, vanity, the belief in one's own group's superiority,
and contempt for outsiders
 Over time, ethnocentrism developed alongside the
progression of social understandings by people such as social
theorist, Theodore W. Adorno. In Adorno's The
Authoritarian Personality, he and his colleagues of
the Frankfurt School established a broader definition of the
term as a result of "in group-out group differentiation,"
stating that ethnocentrism "combines a positive attitude
toward one's own ethnic/cultural group (the in-group) with a
negative attitude toward the other ethnic/cultural group
(the out-group)." Both of these juxtaposing attitudes are also
a result of a process known as social
identification and social counter-identification.
 ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT
 The term ethnocentrism derives from two Greek words: "ethnos," meaning nation, and
"kentron," meaning center. Scholars believe this term was coined by Polish
sociologist Ludwig Gumplowicz in the 19th century, although alternate theories suggest
that he only popularized the concept as opposed to inventing it. He saw ethnocentrism as
a phenomenon similar to the delusions of geocentrism and anthropocentrism, defining
Ethnocentrism as "the reasons by virtue of which each group of people believed it had
always occupied the highest point, not only among contemporaneous peoples and nations,
but also in relation to all peoples of the historical past."
 Subsequently, in the 20th century, American social scientist William G. Sumner proposed
two different definitions in his 1906 book Folkways. Sumner stated that "Ethnocentrism
is the technical name for this view of things in which one's own group is the center of
everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it." In the War and Other
Essays (1911), he wrote that "the sentiment of cohesion, internal comradeship, and
devotion to the in-group, which carries with it a sense of superiority to any out-group and
readiness to defend the interests of the in-group against the out-group, is technically
known as ethnocentrism.”
 According to Boris Bizumic it is a popular misunderstanding that Sumner originated the
term ethnocentrism, stating that in actuality he brought ethnocentrism into the
mainstreams of anthropology, social science, and psychology through his English
publications.
 Several theories have been reinforced through the social and psychological
understandings of ethnocentrism including T.W Adorno's Authoritarian Personality
Theory (1950), Donald T. Campbell's Realistic Group Conflict Theory (1972), and Henri
Tajfel's Social identity theory (1986). These theories have helped to distinguish
ethnocentrism as a means to better understand the behaviors caused by in-group and out-
group differentiation throughout history and society
ETHNOCENTRISM IN SOCIAL SCIENCES

 In social sciences, ethnocentrism means to judge another culture based on

the standard of one's own culture instead of the standard of the other
particular culture. When people use their own culture as a parameter to
measure other cultures, they often tend to think that their culture is superior
and see other cultures as inferior and bizarre. Ethnocentrism can be
explained at different levels of analysis. For example, at an intergroup level,
this term is seen as a consequence of a conflict between groups; while at the
individual level, in-group cohesion and out-group hostility can explain
personality traits. Also, ethnocentrism can helps us to explain the
construction of identity. Ethnocentrism can explain the basis of one's
identity by excluding the out group that is the target of ethnocentric
sentiments and used as a way of distinguishing oneself from other groups
that can be more or less tolerant. This practice in social interactions creates
social boundaries, such boundaries define and draw symbolic boundaries of
the group that one wants to be associated with or belong to. In this way,
ethnocentrism is a term not only limited to anthropology but also can be
applied to other fields of social sciences like sociology or psychology.
 CAUSES

 Ethnocentrism is believed to be a learned behavior embedded into a variety of

beliefs and values of an individual or group.
 Due to enculturation, individuals in in-groups have a deeper sense of loyalty and are
more likely to following the norms and develop relationships with associated
members. Within relation to enculturation, ethnocentrism is said to be a trans
generational problem since stereotypes and similar perspectives can be enforced and
encouraged as time progresses. Although loyalty can increase better in-grouper
approval, limited interactions with other cultures can prevent individuals to have an
understanding and appreciation towards cultural differences resulting in greater
ethnocentrism.
 The social identity approach suggests that ethnocentric beliefs are caused by a
strong identification with one's own culture that directly creates a positive view of
that culture. It is theorized by Henri Tajfel and John C. Turner that to maintain that
positive view, people make social comparisons that cast competing cultural groups
in an unfavorable light.
 Alternative or opposite perspectives could cause individuals to develop naïve
realism and be subject to limitations in understandings. These characteristics can
also lead to individuals to become subject to ethnocentrism, when referencing out-
groups, and black sheep effect, where personal perspectives contradict those from
fellow in-groupers
 Realistic conflict theory assumes that ethnocentrism happens due to "real or
perceived conflict" between groups. This also happens when a dominant
group may perceive the new members as a threat. Scholars have recently
demonstrated that individuals are more likely to develop in-group
identification and out-group negatively in response to intergroup competition,
conflict, or threat.
 Although the causes of ethnocentric beliefs and actions can have varying
roots of context and reason, the effects of ethnocentrism has had both
negative and positive effects throughout history. The most detrimental effects
of ethnocentrism resulting into genocide, apartheid, slavery, and many violent
conflicts. Historical examples of these negative effects of ethnocentrism
are The Holocaust, the Crusades, the Trail of Tears, and the internment of
Japanese Americans. These events were a result of cultural differences
reinforced inhumanely by a superior, majority group. In his 1976 book on
evolution, The Selfish Gene, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins writes
that "blood-feuds and inter-clan warfare are easily interpretative in terms
of Hamilton's genetic theory."Simulation-based experiments in evolutionary
game theory have attempted to provide an explanation for the selection of
ethnocentric-strategy phenotypes.
 The positive examples of ethnocentrism throughout history have aimed to
prohibit the callousness of ethnocentrism and reverse the perspectives of
living in a single culture. These organizations can include the formation of
the United Nations; aimed to maintain international relations, and
the Olympic Games; a celebration of sports and friendly competition between
cultures
 EFFECTS
 A study in New Zealand was used to compare how individuals
associate with in-groups and out-groupers and has a
connotation to discrimination. Strong in-group favoritism
benefits the dominant groups and is different from out-group
hostility and/or punishment. A suggested solution is to limit the
perceived threat from the out-group that also decreases the
likeliness for those supporting the in-groups to negatively
react.
 Ethnocentrism also influences consumer preference over
which goods they purchase. A study that used several in-group
and out-group orientations have shown a correlation
between national identity, consumer
cosmopolitanism, consumer ethnocentrism, and the methods
consumer choose their products, whether imported or domestic
ETHNOCENTRISM AND RACISM

 Ethnocentrism is usually associated with racism.

However, as mentioned before, ethnocentrism does not
necessarily implicate a negative connotation. In
European research the term racism is not linked to
ethnocentrism because Europeans avoid applying the
concept of race to humans; meanwhile, using this term is
not a problem for American researchers. Since
ethnocentrism implicated a strong identification with
one's in-group, it mostly automatically leads to negative
feelings and stereotyping to the members of the out
group, which can be confused with racism. Finally,
scholars agree that avoiding stereotypes is an
indispensable prerequisite to overcome ethnocentrism;
and mass media play a key role regarding this issue.
EFFECTS OF ETHNOCENTRISM IN THE MEDIA

 Mass media plays an important role in our current society. We are

constantly exposed to media content every day. Researchers had
found that ethnocentrism is dysfunctional in communication and
similar fields because the lack of acceptance of other cultures
leads to the creation of barriers for people of different
backgrounds to interact with each other. The presence of
ethnocentrism in media content creates an issue in the exchange
of messages in the communication process. The media industry is
dominated by the Global North, so Western ethnocentrism tends
to be exposed in the media. This can be seen in the predominance
of Westerner content in TV shows, film, and other forms of mass
media. Some Western shows tend to depict foreign cultures as
inferior or strange in contrast to their own culture.