Cultural change is about influencing the mutually accepted behaviours of human beings, in terms of individual focus of intention and expressed opinion. It is also about how the doctrines of human societies influence one another, in terms of the habitual norms of groups or cohorts of cultural capital.
Cultural capital represents the sub-cultural values, attitudes and social norms, underlying the cultural behavioural intentions of groups, of people, living in local, regional and national communities. Cultural capital naturally rests its foundations in attitudinal conflict, when the behavioural intentions of a societal group represent differing sub-cultural norms, or differing attitudinal cognitions about change. This is because cultural change is all about shifting the commonly accepted practices of behaviour of groups, of people, be they local, regional, national or global. The larger the group, the more challenging the shifting process will be because of applied sub-cultural influences of acceptable behavioural norms.
human cultural change
Sub-culture is represented by the conducts of, for example: families, organisations, mind, body and/or spirit doctrines, social disciplines and economic professions. The sub-cultures contained within human societies are generally framed by the behavioural norms promoted and enforced by the legal culture of the society in question. Should sub-culture norms be greater than cultural norms, then the cultural norm of the legal environment, within which the sub-cultures live and work, will take president over the community. When a democratic government considers cultural development, they may consider the valued behaviour of sub-cultural norms, in their determination of cultural capital within a locality or region. This is what is generally called community consultation, public opinion polling, socio-economic research and marketing. The social norms of cultural capital are important, when considering cultural development initiatives, because social norms represent the consumer choice of the desired change, for example: improved education in domestic farming in schools vs improved education in technology. The choices made reflect the cultural priorities of the cultured community. When a totalitarian government considers cultural development, it tends to consider it as belonging to the culture of the government. In a similar way, cultural decisions about future worker education tend to arise from the economic priorities of a nation. Non-compliance to cultural change, as prescribed by the leading sub-culture, tends to be supported with punishment and reward systems, political or military oppression, rebellion or revolt. In contrast cultural development can also reinforce human culture through arts activities designed to facilitate a sense of belonging. This kind of government development may not be about cultural change, in so much as it may be about the celebration of local cultures in the unifying of community pride, cultural tradition or cultural tourism.
In order for a governance to shift public perception, from accepted cultural norms into a new way of thinking, a huge tactical foreplay of democratic strategies is required, and generally over a long period of time, if sub-cultural resistance is to be successfully replaced with the desired cultural norm. Education plays a key role in all large-scale cultural development activities and children are the greatest beneficiaries leading cultural change, for example: “digital natives” or victims of the change, for example: " adult role behavioural stereotyping”.
earth culture support
Culture essentially is a reflection of what is and what is not acceptable within a community, whether that community be a family unit or a nation. In this way cultural development is layered with accepted behaviours that may conflict, within the individual as well as, with others. Acceptable behaviour within a democratic community is not able to be changed unless the leaders of that community are prepared to process political narratives that are in support of the desired change. In this way, human communication is the beginning, the middle and the normalising of all cultural development activities in any democratic situation. In any community, where freedom of speech is an accepted norm, communication is the power tool of change. Should the cultural norm of “ knowledge is power” be accepted, the more strategically powerful the communication, cultural change, tool will be. In a community that values communication, cultural change will also reflect the quality of that communication. Where there is an umbrella culture of open communication, cultural diversity flourishes. The more communicative a culture is, the more media is needed to shift this already accepted behavioural norm into cultural change. In a community where expressing sub-cultural norms is common place, the introduction of a new cultural norm generally causes a fervor of sub-cultural expressions about the introduction. Behavioural norms favouring open communication depend on acceptable language mediums, to not only introduce the idea, but to sustain it, review it or reform it: For example, to promote a healthy cultural change, like non smoking, a strategist might recommend building non-smoking preference habits into a community through working in partnership with the communication, social marketing and promotional structures of public and private organisations including schools, employers and volunteer agencies. The strategist might also recommend building cultural obligation into a community with democratic political action designed to encourage judicial non-smoking compliance through regulation and legislation.
Your personal view about the above example will reflect your own cultural norms. Cultural change challenges familiar patterns through political and traditional means. All cultures are weighted with behavioural norms that are passed down from generation to generation. Therefore a cultural change proposition must reflect the established behavioural values of the targeted cultural group/s, if an habitual shift is to be volunteered by the leaders then followers of the group. Enforcement of a shift that goes against the behavioural grain of a culture can result in resistance. This is despite individual values because culture is all about agreed intention and behaviour; For example, most fair judicial systems rely on the intention of the accused to commit the alleged crime as well as the on facts of the criminal act itself. In this way, human conflict is always a key feature of any cultural change strategy when considering how the proposed change may, or may not, meet the values of the impacted sub-culture. Should multiple sub-cultures of a nation attempt to enact cultural change upon each other, the perceived quality of the enacted change, under the perceived morality of the nation, may cause perceptual confusions and conflict could be the result. This is because too many cultural change impacts can lead to cultural change chaos, where many sides of a multi-cultural equation find themselves experiencing a lack of common ground. This is why it is extremely important, when considering cultural change, to define exactly what is meant by the term “change” within the context of the targeted culture/s. There is a world of difference between introducing a healthy strategy into a culture that values the health of its citizens than into a culture that doesn't. This is because cultural change has a tendency to impact on the morals and ethics contained within all sub-cultures. Sub-cultures can also be contiguously political in nature when breached by an outside influence. In a society that embraces freedom of speech, this political nature may be able to flourish, with greater resilience, than in a society where freedom of speech is not embraced. Yet in both domains, communication is the key when considering cultural change and should the communication be in accord with the values of the dominant forces within a targeted culture, a proposed change may be welcomed and even embraced. Communication of this nature can be called propaganda or tailoring the message to meet the needs of the target audience. Whatever you may call your communication strategy, what happens when one sub-culture considers that a different sub-culture should change in accordance to its values? Is there a moral law applicable for all cultures irrespective of nationally agreed codes of behaviour? Conflict happens when the cultural change being proposed isn't a change for one of the parties, but a re-enforcement of the behavioural norms of the culture proposing the change. A cultural change proposal from one party over another, generally reflects an act of cultural righteousness. In democracies cultural righteousness can be supported by ballad and in non-democracies by military force. In the non-smoking example, given earlier, the healthy change proposal reflects the righteousness of the, ballad supported, leading culture to care for the welfare of its constituent communities. The difference between the two proposals of righteousness is that one is an unsupported constituent act of change and the other is a supported constituent act of change. The other difference is one is an op positional act of change. Both examples are positional acts of change, the difference being the strength of honest community support at the ballad box.
earth culture change
There are many potentials of conflict in all cultural change activities. If the majority of people in a democratic sub culture agree with the “power in numbers” approach to righteous change, irrespective of what you might secretly think, the changing process will proceed. In situations where change is opposed by a sub-cultural group that does not agree, with the ‘power in numbers’ approach to righteous change, change refute tends to happen. This is why hierarchy is extremely important when considering cultural change. Who has the power to lead the change is a good question to ask and the power may not always rest with the people in leadership positions. Power is the cultural norm and the more people there are upholding the cultural norm, the more energy there will be directed to the furtherance of the cultural norm. In this way, anyone preaching the cultural norm will gain the power of the group and anyone rejecting the cultural norm with lose the power of the group. In a democratic society, where freedom of speech is encouraged, the power of the cultural norm includes multi-cultural diversity. Should a minority group want to assert their power over the cultural norm, they either have to tap into the beliefs of the group or build up a force of their own to dominate it. For example, Military leaders favour dominion over consultation as opposed to as spiritual leaders who favour consultation over domination. However, history has shown that despite the short come benefits of dominion cultural change, spiritual change always wins in the long-term. The defense is that you will live long enough to see it.
Cultural change ambitions will always depend on whether or not the goal is for short or long-term benefits. Cultural change that is purely focused on the here and now will also not be able to vision potential outcomes.
20th Century cultures experienced many human discoveries and inventions that are reforming the 21st Century with multi-cultural expressions of righteous change in accordance to the established norms of the past. Who has the right and what has the power to culturally change humanity in the 21st Century? Your answer to this question will reflect your cultural norms, despite earth being the right answer. The way to lead planet earth is to uphold her cultural norms and they are? Your answer to this question will reflect your cultural norms as well as understanding of environmental practices. Despite human ingenuity, the earth has always been the power behind the cultural change provisions of the modern age. This power is demonstrated in the most common of all change expressions, money. The attributes of the Earth tend to be managed in accounting terms by cultural change leaders despite any lack of accounting terms in promotional efforts. Earthly assets have always provided the materials and resources of all human cultural endeavours. Today, the complexity for us, is not only our cultural norms, but accepting that change will be in accordance to Earth behaviours instead of our own, no matter what political regime we live in or what cultural wars we may contribute to and/ or be subjected to. Power over the Earth’s cultural assets is the reason why humans go to trade war, despite its various disguises. When considering cultural change, the earth has already introduced righteousness with the melting of polar ice-caps, earthquakes and tsunami’s. Is earth’s ‘strategy’ to change human culture a short-term or a long-term one? Your answer to this question will reflect your cultural norms. Is earth working in accordance to your cultural norms or against it? Your answer to this question will be in accordance to your capacity to think differently.
earthly cultural change
The righteous force of life itself, is fast becoming one of the most challenging cultural changes of the 21st Century. It is a challenge that can be met, should the ballad be in favour of the culture of the Earth, as she is presently expressing it. Hanging onto the inventiveness of the 20th Century in the 21st Century means letting go of the past, listening to what truly has the power and inventing ways that agree with the emerging cultural change force that is the Earth. Earth is not a human leader, a mindful politician or a military dictator. The Earth is the bed we eat from, sleep on, reproduce in and defecate on. It is the life force that also has universal forces, greater than itself, challenging it to change its culture. Earth is a force whose day of reckoning is the end of all who depend on her for life. So far, despite space exploration efforts, Earth remains the ultimate cultural leader. Agreeing with earthly cultural life means behaving in accordance with the multi-cultural nature of Earth, whether we understand them or not. Earth sustains all life which means Earth is more than about human beings cultural norms. Earth is the giver of life and without life there is no human culture. Cultural change is as simple and as complex as the size of the righteous force introducing the change. Earth has introduced the cultural change, your response to the introduction is a reflection of your cultural norms, but it doesn't have to be. As cultural norms are founded in behaviour, there is scientific evidence to suggest that individuals have the power to think differently from their behaviour. Thinking and learning about the implications of habitual behaviours, in terms of cultural change forced upon us by Earth, can lead to empowered life-giving practices that equate with Earth culture in a more agreeable way, for example the Earth is only culturally livable for us because of its biological diversity. The food we eat is a result of that diversity and extinction of life in any area of the food chain, impacts on us in terms of cultural change through extinction. I guess you could say extinction is a cultural change by force, that could be halted should the change decision be in favour of the biologically diverse cultural norms of the Earth.
Earth is not only resourcing the culturally driven technological economies of the 21st Century, but sending messages of biological extinction. Despite any science fiction to the contrary, there is no doubt that cultural change in the 21st Century will boil down to what Earth will become through extinctions. On a grand scale, cultural change is the righteous power of one culture to influence the habitual norms of another culture. At micro level this means how one individual influences the cultural intentions and behaviour of another individual. The micro level is the friendliest place to begin and while living in accordance to cultural norms, also represents the power that you have to think, if not behave, differently.
Chan6es HOME exists to help raise awareness that the Earth is the ultimate authority on how to culturally change human life through evolutionary means. To survive Earth's threat of “a sixth” evolutionary extinction, human cultures must gain insight into how to evolve their behavioural habits and cultural norms into more adequately reflecting the inter-relationship of biological life not on Earth but of Earth. Of Earth because the biology of Earth, of which humans are a part, belongs to Earth and not to us despite our ability to take and trade what we want and need. Humans are highly dependent on the ecological and biologically diverse nature of Earth, not the other way around. It may come as a surprise to learn that the Earth does not need us, no matter how important we may consider ourselves to be, but humans certainly do need the Earth if it wants to survive. There is no other planet to run away to when Earth resources run out. This means cultural change has to be in accordance to the part of the Earth’s environment we reside in, whether we want to change our behavioural norms or not. The better that we treat the environment, and the life of it, the more the Earth will reward us with improved life. Cultural change, whether for the Earth or some other human cause, doesn't happen overnight, and the behavioural habits of cultural norms will always decree a group’s ability to see life in a different way. Cultural change outside of moral code re-enforcement, as in the non-smoking health example above, is generational. Educating young people into how to respect the life of Earth, while practicing culturally positioned behavioural habits is reasonable, because of the behavioural intention in supporting a cultural shift. While the conflict, in practicing the intention to facilitate cultural change in the next generation, might be that it is not in line with your cultural practices, you still might be in a position to support a future generational changes in thinking through a sharing of information that reflects the importance of supporting Earthly life. Whether or not you agree, of course, depends on your culture and the freedoms within that allow individuals to think differently. © Chris Tyne, 2013.