Globalisation and Cultural Identity

Globalisation and Cultural Identity
by John Tomlinson

Another piece on globalisation and cultural identity. It was informative and i thought it explained brilliantly the argument of globalisation just being western cultural imperialism.

"To begin, let me sketch the implicit (for it is usually implicit) reasoning behind the
assumption that globalization destroys identities. Once upon a time, before the era of
globalization, there existed local, autonomous, distinct and well-defined, robust and
culturally sustaining connections between geographical place and cultural experience.
These connections constituted one’s – and one’s community’s – ‘cultural identity’. This
identity was something people simply ‘had’ as an undisturbed existential possession,
an inheritance, a benefit of traditional long dwelling, of continuity with the past. Identity,
then, like language, was not just a description of cultural belonging; it was a sort of
collective treasure of local communities. But it was also discovered to be something
fragile that needed protecting and preserving, that could be lost. Into this world of
manifold, discrete, but to various degrees vulnerable, cultural identities there suddenly
burst (apparently around the middle of the 1980s) the corrosive power of globaliza-
tion. Globalization, so the story goes, has swept like a flood tide through the world’s
diverse cultures, destroying stable localities, displacing peoples, bringing a market-driven, ‘branded’ homogenization of cultural experience, thus obliterating the differences
between locality-defined cultures which had constituted our identities. Though glob-
alization has been judged as involving a general process of loss of cultural diversity,
some of course did better, some worse out of this process. Whilst those cultures in the mainstream of the flow of capitalism – those in the West and, specifically, the United
States – saw a sort of standardized version of their cultures exported worldwide, it
was the ‘weaker’ cultures of the developing world that have been most threatened.
Thus the economic vulnerability of these non-western cultures is assumed to be
matched by a cultural vulnerability. Cultural identity is at risk everywhere with the
depredations of globalization, but the developing world is particularly at risk.
This, then, is the story that implicates globalization in the destruction of cultural
identity, and in the threat to that particular subset of cultural identity that we call ‘national identity’. But another, quite contradictory, story can be told: that globalization, far from destroying it, has been perhaps the most significant force in creating and proliferating cultural identity. This story involves a rather different understanding of the idea of ‘identity’ than the somewhat reified understanding of an individual or collective possession. And it also involves a rather more complex understanding of the globalization process: one, at least, which allows for a degree of unpredictability in its consequences..."

Megan

Globalisation and Culture

This article discusses Globalisation and its affect on cultures through out the world. I found it to be quite interesting.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:h3GBL7qcHtsJ:www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v25n3/globalization.pdf+culture+and+globalization&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjozn1cA6-Vbp1jYcznXPl5xUcy3fV3jEZUobLhXnPWrApApodUrEdYtOnBadScnh3FI9kGj-diEJXob1msP0sbG291Pmwe50Z3v6vBzFX11_Dxhy_DZbckRZEVFRD0-PQxihgr&sig=AHIEtbRhy1BCn_6Y0DP5kR9MJLMjcr-fAw&pli=1

Megan

India and China: Conflict, Competition, and/or Cooperation in the Age of Globalization

India and China: Conflict, Competition, and/or Cooperation in the Age of Globalization

by Aqueil Ahmad

"India and China are two of the world’s most ancient civilizations. For centuries they shared advanced ideas, inventions, religious and philosophical traditions. But their economies and societies stagnated during the colonial period. In the post-colonial era mutual relations suffered a setback due to political and boundary disputes. In contemporary times they have reemerged as leading techno-economic nations. It is high time for them to move beyond conflicts and start cooperating politically, economically, and technologically for mutual benefits. Recent developments and exchanges indicate that the ball is already rolling in that direction. Globalization for common good requires coming together rather than falling apart, sharing resources and assets rather than wasting them in endless conflicts. In the context of currently shifting global political and economic power, no two nations are better equipped than India and China to show the world how the common concerns of humanity can be addressed through mutual respect, friendship, healthy competition, and sharing of resources. This paper discusses some of these possibilities in the age of globalization..."

This piece by Aqueil Ahmad shows that economic globalization is driving and shaping national politics, economies, histories, social structures, environments, and international relations, and connecting them through interdependent networks as never before. A global power shift is indeed occurring that is still unseen and unrecognized by many among us. There are two major implications of this power shift. Ideology and politics are becoming the handmaidens of global economic forces, rather than the other way round, as the case used to be. The other development is unraveling of erstwhile hegemonies and the United States of America and Europe are no longer in the drivers’ seats.

Megan

“Globalization, Education and the Birth of a Democratically Active Global Citizen”

“Globalization, Education and the Birth of a Democratically Active Global Citizen”
By Agreement Lathi Jotia

"The whole subject of globalization has faced a number of criticisms from some world
leaders, the business sector, trade unions, economists, environmentalists, the list is long.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank (WB) and the World Trade
Organization (WTO) have been, and continue to be blamed for perpetuating globalization
policies, which are seen by many as having caused, and continue to cause a lot of
economic disparities in a number of countries, especially those in the Global South (GS).

This economic phenomenon is viewed as geared towards further burying the economies
that are currently struggling and see no hope in “economic resurrection.” Contrarily,
other theorists and pro-globalization groups contend that the globalization wave is a true
messiah to global socio-economic and politic hiccups which currently negatively affects a
lot of lives."

I found this article by Agreement Lathi Jotia to be quite helpful in gaining a better understanding of globalisation, it gave a balanced view of the issue which was good as quite a few pieces I read gave a rather biased opinion either for or against it.

http://globalization.icaap.org/currentissue.php


Megan

"Maritime transport costs represent a high proportion of the imported value of agricultural products — 10% on average, which is a similar level of magnitude as agricultural tariffs. This study shows that a doubling in the cost of shipping is associated with a 42% drop in trade on average in agricultural goods overall. The tendency to source imports from countries with low transport costs is therefore strong. Trade in some products is particularly affected by changes in maritime transport costs, in particular cereals and oilseeds, which are shipped in bulk."


I think this speaks for itself really. It is a piece of information released by the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). They seem t be quite reserved with their information, and the database this information is from is now unavailable to the public.


I think the issue is quite clear and telling of however easy it may seem to "just buy local goods", the issue is much larger than that. Maybe it is as simple as every person only buying local produce, but in reality, most people cannot or will not, and the circle of importing goods gets worsened.


Fionn

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/view-point/the-future-of-globalisation/articleshow/4096586.cms

The article above got me thinking more about the future of globalisation.

"Globalisation, however, has also been linked to colonialism, underdevelopment and to external shock"


I realise now that there are more people out there than I thought with strong views against globalisation. The links between giant companies expanding into lesser developed countries and using the land for factories/farms, etc and colonisation are easy to see.

I wonder if negative trains of thought like this could eventually permeate the subconscious of the masses and we begin to view globalisation the same way we view global warming or overpopulation.

Fionn

The initial paragraph

Globalisation (n) is the “process enabling financial and investment markets to operate internationally, largely as a result of deregulation and improve communications” (Collins) or from the US  to “make worldwide in scope or application (Webster).

In the late 1980s, something that was globalized was an entity that  had more than just an economic impact on the parts of the world it touched. There are many anti-globalisation arguments that argue against the methods many big businesses use in attaining globalization such as low paid labour, sweatshops selling off state-owned property to qualify for loans and many are worried about the low input of the public on big business decisions.

So here's the paragraph we wrote at the beginning, how does everyone feel about it now? Personally I think that this barely even scratches the surface, there's so much more that we didn't even consider at the beginning that we've learnt now. I also think Globalisation is pretty much impossible to define!

- Claire