Assimilation refers to the progressive process through which an individual or group of people that are attached to a specific culture absorb the activities and practices of another culture hence they become part of the culture. Sociologists often contrasts between compulsory and voluntary assimilation. In compulsory assimilation an individual or group of pe3ople is forced to adapt to the cultures of another group of people namely: language and religious beliefs. In voluntary assimilation, an individual agrees to take the customs and practices of another culture. They do so without being compelled or coerced .Sociologists use the theoretical perspective of assimilation to elaborate and describe a particular way an individual or group of people of a specific culture e.g. immigrants can react to or mix with another civilizations culture. Or how an outnumbered cultural body might have the ability to relate to another majority and dominant cultural group of people (Barth, 2010).
On the other hand the opposite of assimilation is pluralism which comes into existence when an individual or group of people retain their original identity. In plural community groups usually retain the original culture in terms of identity and rituals. This essay will discuss assimilation and its advantages and the disadvantages that come along with it (Ellinghaus, 2006).
Assimilation is differentiated from adaptation to different situations .It is usually characterized by a stable, steady and continues procedure. It is usually slow and takes time before it finally materializes. For a person or group of people who were once not alike to become alike or similar it takes time. That is, become recognized due to their interests and point of view. Hence assimilation is the period within which a particular cultural group which is in association with another different cultural group borrows from that group certain specific cultural components and include them into their very own culture hence adjusting it (Barth, 2010).
Although it is good to note that contact between two cultural groups, usually affects both of the groups naturally. But it is a natural phenomenon for the weaker group to borrow and adapt more of the concepts of the stronger cultural group. The majority group would in turn have very little to borrow from the minority cultural group. For example the indigenous Indians from America had to embrace some of the essential cultural aspects of the white Europeans amongst whom they came into contact with. The white Europeans also embraced some of the cultural component from the indigenous Indians. Thus assimilation consists of two levels or stages. One of the stages is the source of culture and the other stage is acquiring of the new cultural practices and ways such as language, culture and among other rituals. The two stages may lie over each other at a particular point in time (Barth, 2010).
Embracing some of the elements of the majority culture by the minority culture initiates and commences the absorption of the other smaller cultural group of people by the larger culture. Some characteristics are embraced more directly and with ease even if the various groups met only briefly. For example the red indigenous Indians quickly acquired the utilization of modern weapons such as guns from the Europeans and the Europeans learn to use traditional toxicants from the red Indians. Another example is that of the ancient American dwellers immigrants were readily to embrace without any hesitation the various foods the Indians ate such as potatoes, millets, rice and bananas. The Indians embraced European fashion of coats and trousers as soon as the Europeans immigrants landed in America (Barth, 2010).
Social interactions therefore sets the pace and establishes a platform that facilitates assimilation. The pace with which the entire assimilation process proceeds with depends entirely on typical nature of the communication and influence that will emerge from the social interactions and connections that will be established thereafter. If the connections are primary, assimilation will take a very natural and swift route. On the other hand if the connection form that result from the social interactions are secondary in nature that is very superficial and unintended, the outcome will be that of accommodating and not actual assimilation (Ellinghaus, 2006).
Assimilation is a complex procedure and it is not simple as it is made to look at face value perspective. There are a lot of factors that may hinder or distort this assimilation. The speed with which a small cultural group embraces another cultural group entirely depends on whether factors that facilitating are more or factors that disorient assimilation are less. Factors that are favorable to assimilation are usually permissiveness, equitable and favorable economic circumstances; a concerned feeling on the side of the majority cultural group directed towards the minority cultural group; disclosure and openness by the minority toward the dominant; shared observable similarities between the two groups and finally mixed marriage (Ellinghaus, 2006).
On the other hand factors that deter or cripple assimilation are situations that insulate and separate a certain group from another; negative reactions and attitudes by the exclusive culture group; major differences in terms of social, physical and cultural between the two group entities; discrimination of the minority cultural group by the exclusive cultural category .These are some of the factors that can impede assimilation in its entirety (Ellinghaus, 2006).
The kind of reception that the immigrants will get from the host group will go a long way in determining if assimilation will take place. For example immigrants got a warm welcome in the united states in the years before 1880.After this period when variety of various skills were required in various parts of this country. But those who came in years like 1933 were viewed as threats to the locals (Léticée, 2009).
It is very essential for humans to assimilate. Humans are social beings and in order to gain crucial information on various things, it is only necessary that people need to assimilate. Without assimilation there would be a lot of assumption in the entire world that would lead to disunity. If a condition requires one to assimilate so that one can survive, why not assimilate? Assimilation is solely the way one can benefit and gain mileage into facts and insight that belong to another group of people, in my own researched opinion (Ellinghaus, 2006).
By assimilation, to an object or culture that is common to an individual or group of individuals, it can help to improve and enhance skills that go a long way to help a group of people. For example, Africans gained a lot by embracing European education and skills, it helped them to become modern and manage their resources in a better way. Africans were altered by the European education and it assisted them to advance their economy in the changing world (Léticée, 2009).
Persons who become assimilated from their own culture and into a new one have an easier time maneuvering the society and elements that come with it .Contrast brought about by different rituals often bring hate and lack of trust among the dominant community (Ellinghaus, 2006).
In today’s society assimilation can occur in health, educational and other sectors of the community. It can take a linear approach which will requires adjusting and upgrading to a society one finds him or herself in (Léticée, 2009).
Assimilations strengthens various relationship due to the unity that comes as a result of similarities and bonds that are fostered during social interactions .This boosts human resource that will in turn offer their skills and labor in different areas. A more united society with a single identity gives purpose to people and can boost the economy (Barth, 2010).
In today’s society assimilation can range from citizens nationality, property, possession of property and post status. While there are a lot of basic things that can be assimilated namely: good standards and values, it is very hard for a government to single out one ethical cultural principle because a lot of cultural based values and beliefs are very general and should not be favored against other cultural practices of outsiders .Assimilations naturally carries with it the risk of improper interference from the superior culture (Léticée, 2009).
Some cultures should not always be permitted due to their faiths and rituals, some of which practice female genital mutilation which is very harmful to the female body. Other cultures are cannibalistic in nature. This are some of the barbaric acts and cultures that should be prevented and should not be given any chance. Therefore barbaric cultures should not be given the same rights as cultures that are similar to the dominant culture’s law (Léticée, 2009).
One of the common argument against assimilation is that it focuses on discriminating other cultures and beliefs through incrimination. For example some people belief that Muslim veils that women wear are meant to signify that men can physically abuse them and no one will notice as the veil will cover all the body part. This accusation ignores the simple fact that most women wear hijabs and veil voluntarily. (Ellinghaus, 2006).
Should a minority cultural group be forced to assimilate to another culture? Some people may think it wise and essential to assimilate and integrate with a new culture. In my own perspective I think it wise too. Sharing ideologies and concepts is very important as it brings about unity and peace in the society .Integrating most of the times usually results to a richer cultural diversity in which all people have an identity.
References
Barth, K. (2010). Assimilation. Detroit: Green haven.
Ellinghaus, K. (2006). Taking assimilation to heart: Marriages of white women and indigenous men in the United States and Australia, 1887-1937. Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
Léticée, M. (2009). Education, assimilation and identity: The literary journey of the French Caribbean. Coconut Creek, FL: Caribbean Studies
