Cultural Globalization

1.

One common speculation about the globalization process is that it will lead to a single global culture. This is only a speculation, but the reason it seems possible is that we can see the ‘unifying’ effects of connectivity in other spheres – particularly in the economic sphere where the tightly integrated system of the global market provides the model. And indeed, globalization in some of its aspects does have this general unifying character. Whereas it was in the past possible to understand social and economic processes and practices as a set of local, relatively ‘independent’ phenomena, globalization makes the world in many respects, to quote Roland Robertson, a ‘single place’. Obvious examples of this are the way in which nation-states are locked into a complex global capitalistic system which restricts their autonomy independently to order their economic affairs, or the now evident tendency for environmental effects of local industrial processes – for instance CFC emissions – rapidly to become global problems.

As I suggested in discussion of the prospects for a global culture, the idea of a progressive, cosmopolitan cultural politics deserves to be taken seriously. This does not necessarily mean endorsing grand projects for ‘global governance’; rather it means trying to clarify, and ultimately to reconcile, the attachments and the values of cultural difference with those of an emergent wider global-human ‘community’. This is a dilemma. On the one hand there are the attractions of what we might think of as a ‘benign’ form of universalism, preserving some key ideas of human mutuality and underlying the broad discourse of human rights and the hope of wider horizons of global solidarity. But on the other, the equally attractive principles of respect for the integrity of local context and practices, cultural autonomy, cultural identity and ‘sovereignty’. At the heart of the cultural-political problems posed by contemporary globalization, lies what Amanda Anderson has described as the ‘divided legacies of modernity’: two sets of strong rational principles pulling in different directions. Universal human rights or cultural difference? We don’t really know which fl ag to stand beside because in most cases there seem good reasons to stand beside both.


2.

Before I read this article, I didn't know conception of ‘deterritorialization’.

And I can't imagine this relation between deterritorialization and globaliztion. Deterritorialization makes is that the culture produced by locality is no longer and is 'the loss of the "natural" relation of culture to geographical and social territories.

Development of communication is more and more, but the location is no important. It is amazing fact to me.

And Marx's opinion is impressed to me. In another lecture, we learned Marx but I don't know his view about communism in cultural globaliztion.

 

 

3.

 

As read this writing we learned many thing on cultural globalization. Food, Movie, Actors etc. There are many element in culture but I think the Internet is very important. We can know another country's cluture, manners, tourist attractions and theirs lifestyle, thinking. For example, nowdays, instargram(SNS) is very popular all over the world. We can see foreigner's life, foreign country figures through that. I wonder other students' thinking about importance of Social Network Service(SNS) in cultural globaliztion.

3.