4 ms·
I don’t know if I agree, that seems more tribalism than collectivism. In comparing Bob, Jane and smith or similar nondescript lao baixing names vs distinguishin
by mint2 4y ago
I don’t know if I agree, that seems more tribalism than collectivism. In comparing Bob, Jane and smith or similar nondescript lao baixing names vs distinguishing family/non family plus exact hierarchical familiar relation, it doesn’t seem hierarchical exact relations is more communal. Opinions can differ.
- hosh 4y agoCollectivist, as I am using it, is not the same as being communal, as in having no hierarchy. I am using “collectivist” to mean a deemphasis on the individual and an greater emphasis on the collective. How exactly that collective is structured is not a part of this assertion. It could well be tribalism, and the way I mean “collectivist” is not exclusive to tribalism.
- gsinclair 4y agoYour explanations are nice and clear. I’ve observed this as an outsider with my wife of Vietnamese background. Just one example — amazing to western eyes — is that our wedding invitation to her uncle, aunt and two cousins (i.e. one nuclear family) contained not one name. It was (if I translate) “aunt ten, husband-of-aunt ten, older brother two, older brother three”. And the two cousins are younger then her! But because the aunt is older than her mother, the “older” status transfers down the generation. That older status is reflected in the inter-family relationships and perceived obligations. It is fascinating to see the structure of language being persistently deployed to reinforce the sublimation of self and reinforcement of familial status and responsibility.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]