AbstractMany differences are seen in the comparison of the traditional culture of Cambodia and the nontraditional culture of The United States. The teaching of values is done through traditional means in Cambodia while Americans hold values high they do not participate in traditional ceremonies when learning values. Both Cambodia and The United States primary religions believe in a higher power, but the practice of religion varies. Behaviors are derived from traditional and nontraditional thinking.
Traditional and nontraditional cultures have similarities as well as differences. This paper compares and contrasts the traditional culture of Cambodia and the nontraditional culture of The United States. This paper also considers the values, beliefs, and behaviors found in each of these countries and shows the impact traditional and nontraditional cultures have on the people of these nations. Cambodia and The United States have similarities and differences based on their culture.
Cambodia and the United StatesTraditional and nontraditional cultures differ in many ways.
The foundation of traditional cultures' rules, beliefs, principles and symbols are found in the particular cultures past (Shiraev & Levy, 2007). Traditional cultures are usually, "confined in local or regional boundaries restricting and mostly intolerant to social innovations," (Shiraev & Levy, 2007, p. 28). Traditional cultures are characterized as rural, non-urbanized and non-industrial cultures (Traditional Societies, 2001). An example, of a traditional culture is the country of Cambodia. Cambodia's population is comprised of 90% of Mon-Khmer also referred to as Cambodians or Kampucheans (Khmers, 2005). According to Pulsipher (2000), Cambodia has a population of about 10.8 million; however, only around 13% live in urban areas.
The basis for nontraditional or westernized cultures is found in modern beliefs. According to Shiraev and Levy (2007) nontraditional cultures are, "absorbing and dynamic, science-based and technology driven, and relatively tolerant to social innovations," (p. 27).