Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

20.

Report of the Subcommittee on International Organizations and Movements, Committee on Foreign Affairs, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. (1974).

21.

For a discussion, see "Symposium on Human Rights, The National Interest, and U.S. Foreign Policy: Some Preliminary Observations" in the Virginia Journal of International Law, vol. 14, No. 4 (1974), which contains articles by Lillich, Bilder, Buergenthal, Farer, Henkin, Shestack and R. Cohen.

22. Statement by U.S. Representative Philip E. Hoffman before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in General Debate on Procedures for Dealing with Gross Violations of Human Rights, U.S. Mission (Geneva), Press Release, pp. 1-2, Feb. 14, 1975.

23. Statement of Assistant Secretary William D. Rogers, reproduced in Congressional Record, vol. 121, pp. S9399-9400.

24.

OAS General Assembly, Resolution of May 19, 1975, reproduced supra at p. S9400. 24a. In his speech on "The Moral Foundations of Foreign Policy," delivered on July 15, 1975 in Minneapolis, Minnesota, to the Upper Midwest Council on Foreign Affairs, Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger declared that one of the principles guiding U.S. foreign policy is that “human rights are a legitimate international concern and have been so defined in international agreements for more than a generation." U.S. Department of State, Press Release 372, p. 6 (1975). 25. 88 Stat. 1815-1816, Sec. 46, 22 U.S. Code 2304 (1974).

26. 89 Stat. 860, Sec 310, 22 U.S. Code 2151n (1975), adding a new Sec. 116 (“Human Rights') to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

27.

28.

See Chapter IV, supra, pp. 79-80.

Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 as amended by Sec. 26, 88 Stat. 1802 (1974). 28a. The chances for U.S. ratification of the Genocide Convention have improved immensely with the February 1976 decision of the American Bar Association to support U.S. ratification of the Genocide Convention. The A.B.A. had since 1949 opposed such ratification. This change in A.B.A. policy is extremely important because, as a New York Times editorial recently pointed out, "while conjuring up bogus spectacles of Americans being summoned before alien courts on charges of racial discrimination at home, Senate opposition invariably fell back on the A.B.A. attitude as the clincher for their arguments." New York Times, February 26, 1976, p. 32, col. 2. 29. See F. Newman, "The New International Tribunal," California Law Review, vol. 56, p. 1559, at pp. 1567-68 (1968).

30. It must be remembered, in this connection, that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is the touchstone of modern international human rights law, proclaims only general principles. Later human rights instruments, among them the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, are designed to implement these principles and to give them juridical precision. Thus the contents, interpretation, and application of these treaties ultimately determine the meaning and scope of the principles that the Universal Declaration proclaims. The states which ratify these human rights conventions consequently acquire the power to affect the meaning of the Universal Declaration and to shape the future of international human rights law. The non-participation of the U.S. in the process is not only politically indefensible; it also deprives the international community of the valuable experience that this country has acquired in dealing with highly complex human rights problems.

CHAPTER SIX

Major Research Findings
Concerning Students'
International Knowledge
and Attitudes

I. INTRODUCTION

Meaningful education for international understanding that will incorporate the necessary concern for human rights requires knowledge of the processes of international relations and international human rights institutions. If programs in international education are to be effectively designed, we need to be able to draw on a synthesis of research concerning the basic knowledge and attitudes of students which pinpoints their common misunderstandings regarding other nations and peoples. It is not enough to devise appealing lists of educational objectives.

One source of information for this synthesis is political socialization research which in the past fifteen years has documented variations in the political information and attitudes of different groups of pre-adults; however, this research has in large measure emphasized domestic political orientations. A summary of available research in the international socialization of children as it pertains to the development of a sense of national identity, orientations toward other nations and peoples, toward the United Nations, toward the United States as an important participant in international affairs, toward the more abstract concepts of war and peace and, finally, toward the future of international society, is included in Remy, Nathan, Becker and Torney. They drew the following conclusions:

1

1. International learning begins early in life.

2. International learning is cumulative . . . what children learn at one age builds upon and is influenced by what they have previously learned. 3. The time of middle childhood (grades three through eight) is an important period in international learning.

4. The beliefs, attitudes, values, and knowledge individuals develop about the world differ- each individual student brings his or her own particular configuration of orientations toward the world.

5. The mass media, especially television and newspapers, play an important role in children's international learning.

A thorough knowledge and understanding of the specific factors which operate to mold the perspectives, attitudes, and knowledge of students are essential to the development of sound educational programs and procedures. Accordingly, our purpose in this chapter is to provide an overview of the available research findings on these topics.

II. RESEARCH ON STUDENT ATTITUDES AND KNOWLEDGE A. Sense of National Identity

The sense of national identity appears early, is subject to little change, and is therefore one of the most important of the child's perspectives. The most informative studies of the emergence of this sense of identity have been conducted with young children. Connell, reporting on his interview study with Australian children, points out that ideas which young children hold about potential external enemies which pose a threat to their country (and these often include all foreign countries) are related to primitive and diffuse fears that the safe places of their own lives will be disturbed. 2 This causes an intensification of support for their own national system and the status quo. Connell concluded that as a result of these basic fears and feelings of threat, during early childhood nationalism tends to become very strong and resistant to change in Australia. Cooper, in a study of English and Japanese students, identified a "patriotic filter" which was in existence by the age of 9 or 10, and which screened out negative images of the home country, thus inducing a "we"-"they" dichotomy. 3 It seems reasonable to assume that both of these processes operate among children in the United States.

This early positive attachment to one's national community is established largely with the aid of national symbols. Since the child's initial identification with his country is associated with little real information about it, symbols like the flag and, in this country, the Statue of Liberty provide concrete links. The connection between prominent symbols and abstract terms like liberty and freedom is illustrated by this interview with a second grade boy:

I: What does the Statue of Liberty do?

R: Well, it keeps liberty.

I: How does it do that?

R: Well, it doesn't do it, but there are some other guys that do it. I: Some other guys do it for the Statue of Liberty?

R: The Statue is not alive.

I: Well, what does it do?

R: It has this torch in its hand, and sometimes they light up the torch. If the Statue were gone, there wouldn't be any liberty.

4

According to Hess and Torney, throughout elementary school, American children focus on symbols like the flag and the Statue of Liberty. There were

some differences between children in the 2nd-4th grades, whose pride in their American national identity was linked to material elements (e.g., "Americans are generous" or "America has beautiful parks'), and those in later grades, who stressed ideological factors such as freedom and the right to vote. A further difference noted by the same authors was that young children tend to focus on personalized representatives of government rather than upon institutions as being important.

In the same study it was observed that a strongly positive affective attachment to the nation is developed by the second grade, when an overwhelming proportion of students agree, for example, that "America is the best country in the world." Although their knowledge about America may be full of misconceptions about geography and our system of government, and naive with regard to political realities, this strong sense of national identity is present quite early and does not change during elementary school. It is only late in the elementary school years that America is seen as part of an organized system of countries. These findings suggest that there is little need for the school to devote extensive resources to socializing a positive national identity for the older student since that is already a relatively stable aspect of his orientation. The study conducted by IEA (The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement) of thirty-thousand pre-adolescent and adolescent students in nine democratic nations 5 demonstrates some variations between countries in the strength of this sense of national identity, specifically in the emphasis placed on national patriotic rituals or symbols and in the strength of positive evaluations of the government. For example, students in Israel are very much like those in the United States in having a strong national identification, and considerable time in school is devoted to patriotic practices; students in the Federal Republic of Germany, Finland, and the Netherlands, on the other hand, are very different and present what might be called an anti-nationalistic position.

8

Studies conducted by Piaget in Switzerland," by Jahoda in Scotland, 7 by Jaspars in the Netherlands, and by Lambert and Klineberg" with small samples in eleven parts of the world (including the U.S. and Japan, as well as African and European countries), have demonstrated common developmental trends in the cognitive aspects of national identification, beginning with a very concrete and undifferentiated world view (both geographically and politically) and progressing to a more sophisticated one. However, some differences in the strength of positive orientations are observed when two or more countries are compared. An unwavering support for one's nation and attachment to national tradition is clearly more important in some countries than in others.

Some possible parallels may be found between the development of personal self-esteem and national esteem. Some research has indicated that individuals with a moderate level of self-esteem are capable of a high level of interpersonal functioning. These individuals are not so convinced of the validity of their own point of view that the views of others are considered unimportant, nor are they

lacking in a feeling of the basic worth of all people. The same principle may hold with respect to the level of national esteem. An individual who has an exaggerated level of positive feeling for his country may downgrade other nations and cultures, while an individual with a moderate level of such feelings will be more open to international contacts.

It appears that young people also have the ability (which may be underestimated) to relate to and identify with a variety of membership groups. In connection with intercultural education in this country, through the study of domestic ethnic groups, attempts have been made to inquire whether intensifying a student's Italian-American, Irish-American or Mexican-American heritage and identity will weaken psychological ties to the nation as a whole. One can ask children themselves "whether it would be better if everyone forgot about being a -American (naming the child's own ethnic group) and just concentrated on being an American." The younger children frequently support cultural identity by reference to celebrations and concrete aspects of their ethnic heritage:

A 10-year-old Polish-American boy responded: It would be a bad thing because if you forget about your nationality you won't be able to do those special things in your nationality. Like if you are Spanish, you celebrate birthdays with Pinatas, and you wouldn't have Pinatas if you were just American.

A 9-year-old Lithuanian-American girl answered: I think that every person should have his own nationality; he could celebrate the things their way. If it was just American then it would be a boring place to live in. Many older children, on the other hand, have a remarkably sophisticated view of the values of pluralistic ethnic identification in American society.

A 12-year-old Italian-American girl answered: A law to forget your nationality would be bad. I like being Italian; it's people's identity. This is what America is about.

A sixteen-year-old Croatian-American boy said: It would be bad to have a law like that because America couldn't be as constructive in views and things that she does. Different groups make America unique and strong.

B. Views of Other Nations

One's own national identity may also set a kind of perspective for viewing other countries. Remy, Nathan, Becker and Torney concluded that:

Developing a sense of self is predicated upon an awareness of others and their expectations. . . Identification with one's own country (we) may be predicated upon an awareness of other countries (they). 10

This differentiation of "we" and "they" may be an adversary one involving considerable chauvinism; on the other hand, it has the potential to foster an ability to see the interdependence of ourselves and others and to appreciate the views of those in other countries.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »