2010 and 2025 the conditions for a big
cultural change will be met. This will
happen as a result of the current communication
revolution. The magnitude of cultural change
is proportional to the amount of communication
increase (se the quantum
leap communication hypothesis) . So, a big increment in
communication flows will produce big
cultural changes .
as far as the communication revolution is
unfolding very quickly, cultural impacts
will happen very quickly too. In
consequence, after 2010 we may expect that humankind
will need to absorb a huge amount of novelty
in a very short period of time. Meanwhile, the vast
majority of people may not be able to
ability to cope with a very large novelty intake
depends on some individual characteristics,
but mainly i) on the culture people use and
ii) the social framework where people live
and economic environment may facilitate
changes or, conversely, may hamper them. So
we may distinguish cultures depending on
their ability to facilitate change and
novelty intake. On the basis of cultural changes occurred
during the last 25 years, let's consider four
different types of culture.
is important to underlay that different
speed in the novelty intake produces growing
distances between cultural regions. And
distances generate tensions. From now on, those
tensions are going to grow.
FOR CULTURAL CHANGE
from more dynamic societies (type 4) will
substantially increase their ability to
handle novelty even if novelty will raise
quicker than the capacity to cope
with. This may produce i) a digital divide and
ii) several forms of congestion
among their populations.
belonging to regions in development (type
3), will also evolve but at a lower rate.
Some privileged individuals will cope with the novelty
overload, but the whole social system will
not. As a consequence, the gap between
the rise of novelty and the ability of their
populations to cope with it, will grow.
the case of less dynamic cultures (type 2
and type 1) the prospect is worse. Here
again, some individuals could face the rise
of novelty but social systems will remain
very far away from what it would be required.
for facilitating change are related to the relationship
that everyone maintains with its own culture
(see ' The
unbending process ').
first conclusion lies on the danger of
very serious tensions between different
cultural areas. Until now, we have managed
intercultural tensions with more or less success.
Nevertheless, current tensions could only be
a small scale prelude of what we are going
to face in the near future.
years to come, the
magnitude of intercultural clash may result from: i) unsustainable
migratory pressures upon the more advanced
regions, ii) quick proliferation of bitter forms
of international activism and terrorism and perhaps iii)
some forms of civilization confrontations.
second conclusion is related to the tensions within
every cultural region.
the most advanced regions it will appear what we could
call ' the different speed citizens
phenomena '. This will be enhanced by:
forms of digital divide, ( see The
digital fracture )
fast increase of recent arrived immigrants,
quick growth of several forms of
past-oriented social segments, which
will be virulent and might result from novelty
overload, particularly among certain types of
the case of domestic tensions in the other
cultural regions (type 1, 2 and 3) they will
be of the same kind of those occurred in the more advanced
regions, except those linked to immigration. The
cultural shock in the fastest type 3 developing regions will be
the more slow ones, the gap with the more
advanced cultures will be extremely harmful.
combined effect of international and
domestic tensions and their astonishing magnitude draws a
nightmare scenario, specially by the end of
the current decade and afterwards.
those problems appear to be related to the
inability of current cultures in order to
manage i) the rise of novelty and ii) the
coming intercultural struggles. Populations
need more effective patterns of behavior,
renewed cognitive structures and better
motivations in order to increase their
ability to face the years to come.
main conclusion is that we
need to make our cultures to
evolve. It must be done quickly, towards any direction
able enough to enhance our ability
to stimulate change and, at the same
time, to assimilate it.
this scenario, between 2002 and 2004 a
debate on cultural change starts all over
the World. Many persons and organizations
2005 and 2010, the failure of current
cultures to manage the new emergent problems
becomes obvious and the time for action will
the 2010 perspective it will become evident
that the pacific cohabitation of different
World populations will not be reached by the
means of candid pacifistic attitudes,
dualistic explanations (the good and the
evil) or mere altruistic initiatives. All
these may help to deal with some superficial
problems but has no helpful effect on
the deepest culture layers, from where the
precursors of the conflicts come. On the
other hand, violence will not be considered
as the indefinite solution aiming at solving
problems, satisfying needs, controlling
conflicts and facilitating cohabitation.
a result, a kind of general emergency state
takes place and several large projects of
culture transformation start