Man is perhaps the most intelligent being in existence. This high intelligence is not always a good thing. For one, it brings about the conflict which comes in forms as simple as arguments and devastating as war itself. So what causes conflict after all? The answer is differences; scientifically it has been proven that people are psychologically afraid of what they can not perceive. Among these differences that cause conflict is variations in culture. The human being continually divides himself through various aspects of culture whether its religious or ideological differences that culture formulates between different individuals. Thus, the basis of any cultural conflict is how members of opposing cultures view the ideas, beliefs and practices of their respective counterparts. This paper presents an analysis of the Israel-Palestine conflict, a dispute that has ensued for over 60 years.
The clash between Israel and Palestine has led to serious bloodshed, destruction of property and at times even bringing the two countries to the brink of war. Many view it as the fight between Christians and Muslims (Ben-Meir, 2013). These are two ancient religions with different historical backgrounds which have similar yet contrasting beliefs. On most occasions large groups of Muslims do not live nearby Christians, however, the proximity between the two countries has further aggravated the quarrel. Why then would such enmity exist between people whom only religion differentiates and nothing else? And if so can there a future solution to solve this issue that has endured time. This paper will intend to tackle such questions concerning psychological concepts.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
To understand the cause of the dispute between these two states, one needs to be coherent with the historical occurrences and keep a psychological perspective in mind. For the Jews (Israelis) their epidemic comes in the form of the Holocaust; a period in which Germany and her allies brutally murdered, shunned and chased away millions of Jews from Europe. (Ben-Meir, 2013). For almost every Jew well knowledgeable about his/her history, this is a dark period of which scars remain up to date. So what has this to do with the Palestinians? During the mass Jew escape, many found themselves in Palestine as refugees. For most Palestinians they never seem to comprehend the psychological torture that the Jews had endured during the Holocaust. Thus, when Israel was formed; a nation to cater for the Jewish refugees from the 2 nd World War, the Jews were chased rather than allowed time to leave. As a consequence, a psychological grudge and revulsions have been passed down to Jewish generations against Palestinians.
On the other hand, Palestinians too had problems of their own. Ben-Meir describes the Palestinians experienced when they faced the Nakba; a catastrophe that was brought about by the 1948 war. Left in despair, hunger and misery; no one seemed to care really about them especially not the newly formed Israel state. Thus, Palestinian refugees were victimized while attempting to cross the Israeli border. Consequent bloody encounters between the two warring communities did not help the situation any less. Thus, the Palestinians too feel hurt and tormented by their disasters and thus feel they do not feel the need to be remorseful for the Jews. Also, it should be noted that after formation of Israel; a country specifically to cater for Jewish refugees, Jews felt rather protective of their promised land a “prophesy” their God had promised thus there was the need to protect the land through all means possible.
Therefore, this victim mentality that is in both the two groups has been the cause of a divergence that has lasted over seven decades. In most instances, leaders or radicals mobilize people using victimization as an excuse to gain their personal interests. As well, the religion drift and cultural differences have provoked the radicalization of the two communities further. Various theories and teachings of cultural psychology can be used to analyze the situation in question. To begin with, the 4 I’s culture or the culture cycle describes the situation if looked at differently. The culture cycle consist of four major components: individual, interactions, ideas and institutions.
For that reason, from the Israel-Palestine conflict the individual should be any of the initial Jews facing the Holocaust and the Palestinians facing the Nakba. It can be deduced that the two different individuals have similar sufferings that psychologically affect their thinking and view of the world regarding who is responsible for their state. In terms of interaction we can look at it in two different aspects; these are adhesive and cohesive interactions. In adhesive, interactions are between individuals from the same group as they interact they find a way to share their experiences and problems, this ends up creating a bond in which they care for each other and protect both their interests. Cohesive interaction is the other way round this involves the interface between the two sides; everyone has his/her troubles thus petite sympathy for the other this ends up breeding hatred.
Furthermore, ideas come into play which is directly related to interaction. Whether they are ideas of victimization or radicalization, they are bred through the constant interaction between the members. But ideas take a lot of time to develop into beliefs among members of the same cultural grouping. Although, the more time is taken, the stronger the beliefs that are created (Ben-Meir, 2013). Finally, institutions which here are the governments and the two religions involved which promote the ideas generated and the same time is increasing interactions. At the end of the day, a culture of hatred and enmity is created between the two parties that are passed down from generation to generation.
Moreover, culture is something subtle that when one attempts to change it, he/she most likely gets ostracized. Hence to come up with a solution to a cultural conflict involves delicate processes to come up with an agreement between the two. It seems very natural that the Jews feel a need to protect their God-given land and heritage they worked so hard to achieve. Conversely, Palestinians feel obliged to avenge their antecedents whereby they view themselves as victims of unending injustices. This is where cultural empathy comes into play.
Cultural empathy is simply the understanding and appreciation of a culture different from one’s own. There exist two types of cultural empathy: intercultural and ethnocultural empathy. Cultural empathy constantly faces the challenge of ethnocentric views and a power dynamic that exist between people with different cultural backgrounds. Customarily people tend to judge other’s culture in relation to their own. The case is similar to the Jew-Muslim conflict; everyone thinks the other is wrong. Another challenge is the power struggle that exists in the society. For every conflict, there is an oppressor and an oppressed. The oppressor seldom lets go of the control of privileges they possess while the oppressed may use all means to gain advantages themselves.
To conclude, the case of the Palestinians and Israelis reflects much on cultural psychology and its teachings. According to Ben-Meir (2013), it may seem that while attempting to protect their interests Jews have become oppressors or rather aggravators. While the primary contributing factor that incites this dispute is the grudge and victim mentality that exist in both camps remains. For this reason, to resolve this issue, both members should aim to empathize with the other not just socially but also culturally. However, this is not a mere children dispute that can be solved by apologizing. The process may involve a lot of time, understanding and convincing. As such should be aimed at forgetting the past, in contrast, to unite through intermingling.
Reference
Ben-Meir, A. (2013). Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Historical Experiences and Perception . Retrieved from http://www.jewishjournal.com/opinion/article/israeli_palestinian_conflict_historical_experiences_and_perception.
