Cultural Gloalization

Cultural Globalization

1) Summarize
One way of defining globalization is to say that it is a complex, accelerating, integrating process of global connectivity. This increasing connectivity is part of our life. Understanding globalization as a generalized process of increasing connectivity helps us to think it as the multidimensional complexity of the process. But this has assumption that the economic dimension is the most important. But we must resist the temptation to attribute it with casual primacy in the globalization process. First reason to resist the temptation to economic reductionism is that it operates on a narrow conception of the economy. Second reason is that it distorts our understanding of the sphere of culture. The idea of culture as being originally constitutive of globalization remains relatively ambiguous. To make it clear, we have to probe a little more into the peculiarly complicated and often elusive concept of culture.

One common assumption about the globalization process is that it will lead to a single global culture. But, increasing connectivity do not mean that the world is becoming economically or politically unified. We have to be careful not to confuse cultural goods as the practice of culture. Globalization certainly not regard effortlessly installing Western culture as global culture. This tendency toward unwarranted universalizing can be seen at the core of European Enlightenment rationality.

There is another way of approaching globalization. This is to understand the effects of globalization as they are felt within particular localities. Globalization is rapidly changing our experience of locality and the way of grasping this change is in the idea of 'deterritorialization'. This implies 'the loss of the natural relation of culture to geographical and social territories.
The idea of deterritorialization is quite radical theoretical implications for traditional ways of understanding culture. This deterritorializing aspect of globalization is felt in very ordinary everyday practices. The phenomenon of deterritorialization arises from a complex set of economic, political and technological factors. And it is not a phenomenon which can usefully be tied down to one dimension analysis.
 What we named a ‘telemediatization’ of culture is a key distinction in twenty first century life. This distinction is a form of mobility that does not practice actual physical movement. The Internet, and some degree of television is described as a form of ‘virtual travel’ and popular expression often employ metaphors of mobility,
The core of the cultural-political problems lies what Amanda Anderson has describes as the 'divided legacies of modernity': two sets of strong rational principles pulling in different directions. Universal human rights and cultural difference. We may get some question of the formaion of 'cultural identity. But the mistake of those who regard globalization as a threat to cultural identity is to confuse this Western modern form of cultural imagination with a universal experiences of human being.

2) Interesting items I learned
At this paper, the writer told about the idea the 'deterritorialization'. It was very interesting since I’ve never heard about this idea before. The term we’ve read last time ‘glocalization’ can guess what is meaning. Because it was really similar to ‘globalization’. But this term of ‘deterritorializaion’ couldn’t guess the meaning. When I first read this, I really want to know about this term. The writer said that the idea of deterritorialization implies 'the loss of the "natural" relation of culture to geographical and social territories. It means that the significance of the geographical location of a culture is eroding. As the development of communication the location is no longer important. This was very interesting. Development of the communication doesn't mean that the earth is actually get smaller. We can get anywhere in the world in one day but we can't live a life everywhere. I think the world is quite wide space. If we are not important geographical territory now, I think the world is really can gather as one in the future. I live in the world where I can get anywhere in one day. But I still thought that world is too wide. Because I always live a life similar situation. Compare to the past, it was really remarkable process. And I want this world much closer than now.


3) Discussion point
The writer said that the wrong idea of globalization process is that it will lead to a single global culture. Then what can we call about what is happening now? We can get anywhere and the world getting closer, and people share language, and we can even share culture. Even long before ago, we are tried to reach to other countries. It was really hard in past but now, it is getting easier. I agree that world never going to become one. Can we say that all this process is for making new culture? Not the world is become one? Then, the world never going to be totally united as one?