Running head: America and Germany: Institution

America and Germany: Institution

America and Germany: Military Institutions War and Culture are intertwined with Politics as well as Religion. The reasons are because the Human Psyche governs these four things and such it is within the whims of those who have the powers or are have the power within the society or community to control it. It can be said that culture is equivalent of “any group of humans living or working together over time develops “habitual practices, default programs, hidden assumptions and unreflected cognitive frames” that inform their choices, or indeed they will have created “a repertoire or ‘tool kit’ of habits, skills, and styles from which people construct ‘strategies of action’.” (Lee 2011, pp.3) As such, war can result in a cultures ideology, socioeconomic background and religious beliefs. Most Wars have a main/central or focal point or theme as to why they are being fought, and it is the underlying cultures belief that governs the reason for said wars. (The Holy Wars due to Religion, the Civil War due to political beliefs of freedom and liberty, World War II due to religious and political propaganda). Americas Perception in regards to “Death’s Significance for the Civil war generation arose as well from its violation of prevailing assumptions about life’s proper end-about who should die, when and where, and under what circumstances.” (Faust 2008, pp. xxii) Before the war, dying was due to natural and normal circumstances. Rules of conduct for the dying was practiced (the Good Death), and focused around dying within the comfort of one’s home (a tradition centered on the Good Death), with family and kin assembled around the deceased to hear his/her last words. The deceased was buried deep enough so no animal can unearth, in a coffin so to shield him from direct contact with the dirt, and putting a marker/tombstone equaling a decent burial. “One of the striking indications of civilization and refinement among a people is the tenderness and care manifested by them towards their dead.”(Faust 2008, pp. 61) However, Civil War changed the views of Americans about rituals of death. Civilians and soldiers had practicality dictated over needs or wants. The war bringing brought about a change in the rituals of death. “Burying the dead after a Civil War battle seemed always to be an act of improvisation, one that called upon the particular resources of the moment and circumstances: available troops to be detailed, prisoners of war to be deployed, civilians enlisted.” (Faust 2008, pp.65) Mass graves created, dead soldiers piled up in trenches, ditches, and any available outlet. Proper burial rituals where not given since “the needs of the living increasingly trumped the dignity of the departed.” (Faust 2008, pp.70) However, from these atrocities also came hope in the keeping of the Good Death. Soldiers, chaplains, military nurses, and doctors conspired to provide the dying man and his family with as many elements of the conventional good death as possible, struggling even in the chaos of war to make possible for men-and their loved ones- to believe they had died well.” (Faust 2008, pp.11) These people eased and comforted the sick, invalid and dying. The dying held pictures and tokens from loved ones connecting them to one another. Letters, wills where made, and requests were asked by the dying to comrades, or hospital personnel to ensure that their families would receive said items. “Some soldiers enacted other rituals of respect for the dead: brief prayers either with or without the participation of a chaplain.” (Faust 2008, pp. 77) When possible, comrades at arms would bury their dead or even send the bodies back to their loved ones. Others wrote condolence letters depicting how the person died, what their good deeds where during the war and an affirmation that they died in a manner befitting the Good Death. Presently, these ideologies have dramatically changed. The war in Iraq has provided numerous examples of the power of the social situation in explaining the actions of our own military personnel. One of the most highly publicized incidents was the prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. Using your knowledge of social psychology, explain how this incident could have occurred. In addition, provide your own perspective (based on social psychological principles) on whether or not the soldiers involved in the prisoner abuse cases should be held legally responsible for their actions. Be sure to support completely using theories from social psychology. In times of war, people are told what to do, when to do and how to do it. We are given a set of rules by which we follow in order to live day to day. These are the Law of Armed Conflict constituting the Geneva and Hague Conventions, The Uniform Code of Military Justice, and The Rules of Engagement. I believe that the perpetrators (the military and the civilian contractors) where all aware of their actions. They acted out of pure aggression and hatred. The government made excuses such as “a few bad apples”, or that the military member where just he MP defendants claim that they were following orders to soften up the prisoners as a prelude to interrogation. Acts of aggression and a sense of honor society is mainly pervasion during times of war. The Frustration-Aggression Theory is at play. These soldiers become frustrated with the war, and the country and the people that “elicit the motive to aggress and all the aggression is caused by frustration.”(Kassin, Fein, Markus 2011, pp. 454) The “inclination to aggress is deflected from the real target to a substitute.” (Kassin, Fein, Markus 2011, pp. 455) The aspect of war is its overwhelmingly masculine quality; war is an assertion of dominance over the other, perceived as weak, as cowardly, as a wimps. This can be attributed to a culture of honor, “which emphasizes honor and social status, particularly for males, and the role of aggression in protecting that honor. The term honor here can be used by in conjunction with the service for country- these people believed that what they were doing was servicing their country, where in fact they were being monsters and enjoying it. The excuses they used such as: they did not receive and instruction as to how to go about interrogation is complete and total bullshit. From the start of our military training regardless of what job we hold in the service, and before we reach our AOR (area of responsibility), we are given trainings, and rules of conduct governed by the Law of Armed Conflict , The UCMJ as guidance. These people committed monstrous acts and abuse of authority just because they could. These soldiers should have had more severe punishment/sentences that would have locked them up in jail for the rest of their natural live. Just because the people being tortured are not from the same culture, nation or religion should not mean that their lives and the tortures they experienced should be deemed less worthy. Chapter 7 in Lee’s Book talks about the atrocities done by the German Military, the culture and the political views that supported the near genocide of the Herrero and Namma Tribes of Colonial Southwest Germany. Ms. Isabel V. Hull does a stupendous description of Germany’s military culture that was also applied to it government regime. She notes some psychological and social aspects like colonial mentally, racism, socioeconomic inequality, aggression, and obedience. Colonial mentality springs from the “implicit personality theory- a network of assumptions that we hold about relationships among various types of people, traits, and behavior.” (Kassin, Fein, Markus 2011, pp. 129) This is evident in Germany’s treatment of its colonized citizens. In every war, nations/cultures that are conquered or lost are at the mercy of the victor. Hence when Germany colonized Southwest Africa, the mentality that was pervasive was the “superiority of Europeans over inferior Africans (a type of generalized race-thinking ubiquitous in the imperial situation and common to all colonial armies).” (Lee 2011, pp. 146) Racism is also part of this colonial mentality since the idea of Western superiority or superiority of the conquering nation is always present because it creates control over the conquered culture. Class, race, sex and gender play a role in our society. This creates certain images and ideas of how and what roles we play in a given culture and our society. Class is the hierarchal position that includes occupational position that creates a value that gains privilege and power. Race another type of class system based on skin color, nationality and religion creates a ranking system. “Frustration-aggression hypothesis-(1) Frustration-which is produced by interrupting a person’s progress towards an expected goal-will always elicit the motive to aggress; (2)All aggression is caused by frustration”(Kassin, Fein, Markus 2011, pp.455) with a displacement form. “Some of the reasons that Germany’s troops in SWA suffered and became frustrated were circumstantial, but there also were structural-institutional reasons that made unnecessary likely. One of the main reasons was inadequate provision….and medical treatment.” (Lee 2011, pp. 151) thus displacing their frustration on to their enemies, the prisoners of war, and the non-combatants by committing heinous acts against them. The “inclination to aggress is deflected from the real target to a substitute.” (Kassin, Fein, Markus 2011, pp. 455) Aggression is also apparent in “Vernichtung which had developed into a specific dogma that called for swift, offensive movement, if possible culminating in single concentric battle of Annihilation.” (Lee 2011, pp. 147) The aspect of war is its overwhelmingly masculine quality; war is an assertion of dominance over the other, perceived as weak, as cowardly, as a wimps. A “culture of honor, which emphasizes honor and social status, particularly for males, and the role of aggression in protecting that honor” (Kassin, Fein, Markus 2011, pp. 452) is also evident in regards to the military structure. Anything less of a total victory by which it was not won by total military force and considered weak. After the fall of Germany during the Great War and World War II, the German people as a whole started a new way of thinking deviating from the militaristic ways. Due to its losses and the atrocities that happened during the war per Hitler’s regime, Germany started to be more-open-minded and accepting, all the way learning from their Past. Hofstede created the a way to summarize the cultural dimension of current Germany.
Evaluation
In terms of Geert-Hofstede Cultural 5-Dimension Model, Germany in regards to Power Distance ranks at a score of 35 meaning that inequalities among people is minimized and that unorthodox ways in regards to decision making is accepted. “Germany tends to cluster with those countries that are less accepting of an unequal distribution of power, status, and material rewards in society.” (Gannon, 1994) Modern, advanced and very open minded concerning its society, shaped by high levels of gender equality, regional identity, plurality of lifestyle, tolerance and acceptance of Homosexuality. Rating at 67 in the Individualism, German society is individualistic in nature. They have a nuclear family since it can be “isolated geographically and psychologically from its kin.” (Georgas 2003). “Loyalty is based on personal preferences for people as well as a sense of duty and responsibility.” (Hofstede: What about Germany) Like America, Germany tends to focus on the “I” instead of the “We”, on the “I take care of myself and you take care of you notion.” .Even though Germany is individualistic, it also has some collectivist elements within the society. “Like musicians in the symphony, each must subordinate some individuality so that all of society may benefit.” (Gannon, 1994) Germans uphold and respect the rules and take responsibility in fulfilling their part in society.
Evaluations on the Masculinity/Femininity dimension tends to focus more on the Masculine side. Germans associate power with masculinity, strength, confidence and trust. Success oriented in regards to education and profession with the motto of winner takes all or may the best man win. Sense of pride comes from ones profession or from certain skillset. Competitiveness with a sprinkle of cooperation is highly supported in the German Culture. It is expected that one is able to contribute to the best of ones abilities while also contributing the the greater good of the community. “Assertiveness in business is permitted, but aggressiveness is considered bad form.” (Gannon, 1994) Germany is one of the countries that rank high in Uncertainty Avoidance. They rely on reason and logic that is infallible in creating standards and procedures implemented in case of circumstances. Since Germany has a decentralized Power Distance, the need to clearly establish and distribute responsibilities is essential. Uncertainty is reduced when the roles/ responsibilities is defined thru standardization and certificate measures. The Long Term-Orientation dimension, Germany ranks in 31, which is the equivalent of a Short-Term Oriented Society. This means that Germans have a deep respect and adherence to tradition and history. One has to keep up a certain appearance as not to become a social pariah. With this in mind, certain aspects like socio economic status and class is a basis for worth or value within the community.

Synthesis Overall Germany and the United States in regards the 5 cultural dimensions have almost the same results except for the Uncertainty Avoidance wherein the United States are more relaxed and people tend to see the future as something that is uncertain and should not be over-planned too much. The “live everyday like it is your last” motto is very pervasive within the country. The summary of Hofstedes’ Cultural dimension can be seen on the chart for Germany and the United States. ASPECT | GERMANY | UNITED STATES | POWER DISTANCE | INEQUALITIES AMONG PEOPLE SHOULD BE MINIMIZED. UNIQUENESS IS ACCEPTED | LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL | INDIVIDUALISM | INDIVIDUALISTIC-BEING SELF RELIANT | INDIVIDUALISTIC SOCIETY-SELF RELIANT AND TO LOOK AFTER ONESELF AND IMMEDIATE FAMILY. | MASCULINITY/FEMININITY | MASCULINE- SUCCESS ORIENTED AND DRIVEN.”WINNER TAKES ALL ATTITUDE” | MASCULINE-”LIVE IN ORDER TO WORK”.MAY THE BEST MAN WIN | UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE | HIGH UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE. USE OF REASON AND LOGIC IS INFALIABLE | UNCERTAINTY ACCEPTANCE-COME WHAT MAY. | LONG TERM ORIENTATION | SHORT TERM ORIENTATION- RESPECT FOR TRADITION AND HISTORY | SHORT TERM ORIENTATION-RESPECT AND UPHOLD TRADITIONAL VALUES |

Reference: Faust, D.G., (2008). This Republic of Suffering, Death and the American Civil War. (pp.xxii-77) New York, NY: Vintage Civil War Library Kassin, S., Fein, S. & Markus, H. R. (2011). Social Psychology, (8th Ed, pp. 129-455). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Lee, W. E. (2011). Warfare and Culture in World History (Pages 3-151). New York: New York University Press. Gannon M. J., Understanding Global Cultures: Metaphorical Journeys Through 17 Countries, 1994 Hofstede: What about Germany- http://geert-hofstede.com/germany.html