Amidst the rise of globalization, social media and other Internet-enabled channels have

become the means for intercultural communication. Regarding this, it is suggested that
youngsters devise measures to preserve their cultural identity, which can be affected by facets
of numerous cultures. Personally, I partially agree with the aforementioned proposal.
On the one hand, traditions spanning the globe impact the young generation in a myriad of
ways. Firstly, this age group expectedly adopt a diverse set of values upon collaborating with
other peoples and foreign institutions. In developing a harmonious relationship, a key factor
concerns one party adapting to the principles of another, for it would foster the much-needed
mutual appreciation. Accordingly, were they to cooperate with people from diverging
backgrounds, young individuals would be prompted to embrace the latter’s traditions.
Meanwhile, those working for overseas firms inevitably adjust to their code of conduct,
alongside work ethics promoted by the boss’ host country. In either case, one’s cultural
identity is to a certain extent diluted. Furthermore, youngsters are likely to perceive their
nations’ core characteristics differently when confronted by a welter of cultures. At times
when these cultures can offer seemingly fresher perspectives, traditional values may appear
somewhat dull and monotonous to a generation inclined to novelty. Much worse are notions
that conflict with one’s customs as they potentially prompt the abandonment of the latter. Part
of what facilitates these changes in perception pertains to youngsters’ age, which implies that
national values may yet to be deeply entrenched in them, hence easily altered.
On the other hand, it is the government rather than these young citizens that should take
measures to preserve cultural identity. Neither are the youth suitable for nor benefited from
this conservative enterprise. In regard to suitability, compulsiveness, part of their nature,
forbids them to directly withdraw contact with multifarious cultures, and the fascinations that
potentially follow. Even if these young manage the withdrawal, they, from a biased viewpoint,
would be ignorant of the extent of other cultures’ impact, hence taking inefficient initiatives.
On top of that, though, youngsters might deny themselves grand opportunities for learning
and experiences from such traditions – necessary ingredients in this era of globalization.
Meanwhile, the elites should shoulder the responsibility of maintaining cultural identity.
Undeniably, it is the remit of every nation’s leaders to ensure a connection between their
civilians and their country. Furthermore, their partial control over the media permits them to
apply filtering practices to preclude conflicting, subversive beliefs, often surreptitiously. This
would ensure youngsters still procure educational chances regarding more benign cultures.
Last but not least, the governing body has either the wherewithal or power to organize
campaigns reinforcing traditional values, hence young people’s commitment to their nation. It
stands to reason, therefore, that governments should undertake the task of preserving cultural
identity.
To encapsulate, an array of cultures can prompt youngsters to adopt their values, whilst
making them alter their views of their own traditions. In the face of this, governments should
take charge of reinforcing their cultural identity with their various powers, rather than the
young themselves.