My understanding of the struggle in Burma began with of a few distant news reports surrounding an uprising of monks last fall and the shocking stories of a cyclone devastating the area on May 2nd.  In the aftermath, the media drew my attention to difficulties stemming from clashing cultures far beyond my recognition.  I was outraged upon news of the government’s role in restricting aid to people clearly in need.  Frustration ensued and I dismissed the situation as one I could do nothing about.

Today I revisit this place in my mind from a perspective enabled through recent studies in multicultural communication.  Spurred by the need to fulfill the requirements for a class assignment, curiosity led me to an article titled “Burmese Junta Stonewalling on Cyclone Aid” by Tyche Hendricks, staff writer for the San Francisco Chronicle.  The issues presented by Hendricks again bring frustration, but I see that the greatest source of this emotion is the thought process by which I evaluate the information.  I am only able to make sense of what is before me based on my own culture, or systems I may use to make meaning of behaviors around me.  The endless cycle of misunderstanding produced by this method of reasoning gets me nowhere.  The ideologies of class readings begin to take the shape of tools to help me through unfamiliar territory.  In order to gain a full understanding of the dynamics at work, I realign my thoughts to approach the information in the correct context.

Burma, also known as Myanmar, operates within the framework of a triangular society.  Three unique systems are at work, the Junta, the Burmese monks, and the country’s civilians.  As I seek to uncover some meaning behind the conflict these groups face, an understanding of the similarities and differences between them begins to replace some of my earlier frustration.  Though a vast majority of the country’s people are practicing Buddhists, the peace I would expect from this commonality is challenged by great differences in each of the three system’s values, world views, and norms.  The Junta operates by the perspective referred to by Hall as “The Golden Purse”, easily explained by the phrase, “He who has the gold, rules” (335).  This perspective allows the Junta to promote their value of strong military control within their country.  On the other hand, the clergy operates from a different perspective, commonly known as “The Golden Rule”.  Within this system, a change of leadership in favor of democratic rule is valued.  Behaviors to gain ground toward each value originate from different perspectives.  Clear opposition of practices is revealed, and tensions within Burma begin to take on meaning.

By applying an understanding of values, world views, and norms, and how they relate within different systems, the information presented by an article such as this one provides an opportunity.  The ability to recognize meaning in the unfamiliar replaces frustration with personal empowerment, freedom from ignorance, and the fulfillment of productive relationships.  (Word Count 513)