United States – Page 65 – understand-culture

Reality TV

One of the most popular genres of television in the U.S. is reality tv. In 2001, two of the top ten most popular primetime television shows in America were reality tv shows, compared to six in 2011.

Many of these shows focus on conflict and personal drama as their main premises. Even when the show’s premise is about something unrelated to the dispute, such as singing on the “X Factor” or cooking on “Top Chef”, the actual episodes invariably focus on the conflicts between the cast members and/or their family and friends at home.

In 2011, an American reality TV show H8R filmed various celebrities as they confronted people who were critical of their success. It was marketed as giving celebrities a chance to try to change the minds of the people who hated them. The primary appeal of this show was that it would allow these conflicts to be discussed publicly.

References

Conflict in a team affects its people. People have personal perspectives. Subjective, not objective. Both real and a factor. Opinion counts, for it is among the fundamental drivers of behavior.

Americans value as evidence both facts and personal opinion. See an American curriculum vitae (resumé). It always either cites or offers references. See the sales/marketing efforts of any American company. They always either cite or offer a customer list. See the American judicial system. It always allows for supporting witness testimony.

“Give them a fair hearing.”

“Give them a fair hearing.”Means to listen to each side’s arguments or explanations openly and impartially.

„Show good judgement“

All parents in all cultures strive to teach their children how to show or exercize good judgement. They want to prepare them for difficult situations in life, in which they will have to make difficult decisions, without the benefit of parental help. American parents will, time and again, advise their children to show good judgement.

Judges – team leads – base their judgement on three sources: on any existing laws, regulations, statutes, rules, regulations; on precedents, meaning how those laws, regulations, etc. have been previously applied; and on the specific circumstances of the conflict. Good – fair – judgement balances the influence of all three.

The higher in the American legal system one looks, the older the average age is of the judges. Americans equate judgement with wisdom. And wisdom is based on intelligence and experience. It is defined as: Accumulated philosophic or scientific learning; ability to discern inner qualities and relationships, insight; good sense; generally accepted belief; a wise attitude, belief, or course of action; the teachings of the ancient wise men. Middle English, from Old English wīsdōm, from wīs wise. First known use before 12th century

A judge conducts a trial in an open court. The judge is impartial. Judges hear witnesses and any other evidence presented by the conflict parties. Judges assess the credibility and arguments of the parties, then issue a ruling based on their interpretation of the law and his or her own personal judgment. In some cases, the judge’s powers may be shared with a jury.

Americans expect their managers to resolve a conflict the way a judge would rule on a case: impartially, considering all of the facts and witness testimony (if any), using their own common sense and experience, but not in any way sharing their responsibility to „make the call“ with other members of management (no jury).

Scopes “Monkey” Trial

The Scopes “Monkey” Trial (1925): In this landmark case, teacher John Scopes was tried for teaching evolution in Tennessee. The trial featured direct, public debate between the defense and prosecution, and became a national spectacle, reinforcing the American expectation that all sides be heard openly and directly.

private confessions

The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne: The novel explores the consequences of adultery in Puritan New England. Community leaders and townspeople act as moral judges, considering both public evidence and private confessions as they mete out social punishment and reconciliation. The book highlights how American society has historically balanced objective facts (the visible scarlet letter) and subjective testimony (personal guilt, confession) in resolving moral and social conflicts.

Sacco and Vanzetti

The Sacco and Vanzetti trial had a profound influence on American perceptions of conflict resolution by exposing the limitations and vulnerabilities of the open hearing system when prejudice and social tensions are present.

Public Hearing as a Double-Edged Sword: The trial was highly public, with both defendants and accusers present, embodying the American expectation that justice is served through open hearings where all sides confront each other. However, the proceedings revealed how such openness could be compromised by widespread nativism and anti-immigrant sentiment, leading to a process where the accused were judged as much for their background and beliefs as for the actual evidence against them.

Exposure of Systemic Bias: The case became an emblem of injustice, demonstrating that even in a system designed for fairness through open confrontation, outcomes could be deeply affected by societal prejudice. The trial and its aftermath showed that “who you are and, in this instance, what you believe, has an enormous amount to do with how you’re treated by the judicial system”.

Catalyst for Reform and Debate: The public outcry and international attention the case generated led to calls for legal reforms, such as changes in Massachusetts law to allow the Supreme Court to review facts in death penalty cases, rather than only procedural matters. The trial forced Americans to confront foundational questions about equality, fairness, and the role of bias in conflict resolution.

Symbol of Ongoing Debate: Sacco and Vanzetti’s case turned into a rallying point for those seeking to combat injustice and prejudice, and it remains a touchstone in debates about the American justice system, open hearings, and the treatment of minorities and dissenters.

In summary, the Sacco and Vanzetti trial revealed both the strengths and vulnerabilities of the American approach to conflict resolution through open hearings, highlighting that true justice requires not only procedural openness but also vigilance against bias and prejudice within the system.

analysis, truth, causes

German literary themes often mirror the country’s approach to conflict resolution by emphasizing rational analysis, the search for truth, and a deep engagement with the causes and consequences of conflict. This is evident in several ways:

1. Analytical and Evidence-Based Narratives: German literature frequently adopts a methodical, almost investigative approach to conflict. Works often reconstruct the origins and dynamics of disputes, reflecting a cultural preference for understanding “why” something happened rather than simply assigning blame. This mirrors the German mediator’s focus on reconstructing causes and seeking objective evidence.

2. Focus on Structural Causes and Complexity. German literary works tend to explore not just individual conflicts, but also the broader structural, historical, and societal factors that give rise to them. For example, literature from the post-Cold War era and after World War II often grapples with the legacy of violence, the trauma of war, and the processes of reconciliation and rebuilding . This reflects a systemic approach to conflict resolution, where understanding the underlying structures is key to lasting peace.

3. Didactic and Reflective Elements. Many German literary texts serve a didactic purpose, encouraging readers to reflect critically on conflict, violence, and their own roles in society. This aligns with the German tradition of using literature as a tool for public conscience and collective learning, fostering dialogue and self-examination as part of the resolution process .

4. Emphasis on Dialogue and Multiple Perspectives. German literature often presents conflicts through multiple viewpoints, highlighting the importance of dialogue, empathy, and understanding different sides. This narrative strategy supports the idea that resolving conflict requires not just evidence, but also the integration of subjective experiences and perspectives.

5. Transformation and Peacebuilding. Themes of transformation—both personal and societal—are central in German literature. Works frequently depict the journey from conflict to reconciliation, emphasizing the possibility of change through understanding, evidence, and dialogue. This reflects the German peacebuilding approach, which seeks to address root causes and foster sustainable solutions.

Law & Order

Law & Order (and spin-offs): Each episode follows the investigation of a crime (gathering evidence) and the subsequent prosecution in court, where lawyers and judges weigh facts and witness statements. The series consistently shows the process of building a case with hard evidence while also scrutinizing the credibility and motives of witnesses, mirroring the American business approach to resolving disputes.

merchant courts

Historical German legal traditions, such as trade and merchant courts in Imperial Germany, also favored conflict resolution through structured, procedural means rather than confrontational hearings, emphasizing mediation and separate interviews to manage disputes effectively.