It's the Culture, Stupid

In which the pundits ponder the powerful influence of an ill-defined concept.

Responding to a much-hyped book on the “Chinese” method of strict parenting by Amy Chua, the Ottawa Citizen’s editorial board argues that cultural relativism should not be used to excuse child abuse. Chua, a law professor at Yale, writes proudly that she used to call her seven-year-old daughter “garbage” and forbid her use the washroom or get a drink until she played the piano properly. Yikes, says the Citizen. “To shrug at a mother who belittles her children because she says that's how they do it in China is no more valid than shrugging at a father who locks his teenage daughter in her room and says that is how they do it in Afghanistan.”

The National Post’s Barbara Kay condemns Chua’s parenting style, but defends the idea that “culture is the single greatest predictor for academic success.” What Kay calls the “‘Chinese mother’ school of oppression” may have produced academically successful children, but she fears for the wellbeing of the kids. Kay much prefers her own “Jewish experience” of childhood, with its “high expectations [and] high sensitivity to children’s psychic needs.” Of course she prefers her own upbringing! That’s what happens when we use someone’s cultural background to explain their negative behaviour: we make our own culture look superior by comparison.

In an article that is sure to spark some controversy, the Post’s Dan Gardner declares that cultural differences are what explains the disproportionate success of Asian students, and why Haiti is perpetually mired in poverty. This idea, Gardner assures us, is “increasingly accepted by people who think seriously about these things” but is verboten to talk about because of political correctness. At the risk of not sounding like “serious thinkers,” we in The Mark Newsroom find Gardner’s argument unconvincing, not because it’s not PC, but because it doesn't really explain anything. Isn’t “culture” just a term to gloss over a group of perceptions that are the sum of factors like history, economics, and even government policy? Can anyone define “Chinese culture” in a way that increases, rather than obscures, our understanding of how those factors have influenced society?