Cultural Globalization

 

1) summary

 

Generally accepted general proposition is that globalization is a multidimensional process within economy, politics, technological developments-media and communications technologies, environmental change and of culture. Although there are some conflicts about precedence or causal primacy to any one of these dimensions, globalization is a complex, accelerating, integrating process of global connectivity. Connectivity defines our communications technologies such as mobile phones, computers and the Internet. It also affects the urban environments most people inhabit. It increasingly influences the way people earn, foods people eat, the music, cinema and television that forms our entertainment, and our experience of mobility and travel. Understanding globalization as a generalized process of increasing connectedness helps us to keep in mind the multidimensional complexity of the process. But there is an implicit agreement that relative important sphere is economy. We have to resist the temptation to attribute economic sphere with causal primacy in the globalization process. Writer mentioned two reasons. First, temptation to economic reductionism operates on an unrealistically narrow conception of the economic. Second, it distorts our understanding of the sphere of culture. Some expressions like ‘the impact of globalization on culture’ contain meanings that globalization operates outside of culture. According to Anthony Giddens (1990), cultural globalization involves the increasing ‘reflexivity’ of modern life: the systemic integration of countless individual actions into the workings of the social institutions which appear autonomously to govern our lives. Culture is a significant dimension globalization both has its effects and simultaneously is generated and shaped.

 

 

People commonly speculate globalization process will lead to a single global culture. Although it is just a speculation, it seems possible because we can see the unifying effects of connectivity in our other spheres – particularly in the economic sphere. Cultural globalization implies the cultural imperialism, the spread of Western capitalist, culture to every part of the globe, and the consequent threat of a loss of distinct non-Western cultural traditions. Another way of approaching cultural globalization is understanding the effects of globalization as they are felt within particular localities. Deterritorialization means that the significance of the geographical location of a culture. It means not only the physical, environmental location, but the self-definitions, ethnic boundaries and delimiting practices that have accrued around this – is eroding. Culture is no longer restricted to local circumstances. The positive effect from deterritorialization is that it promotes a new sensibility of cultural openness, human mutuality and global ethical responsibility while changing our experience of local life. Amanda Anderson has described the core part of cultural-political problems posed by contemporary globalization as the ‘divided legacies of modernity’. It represents two strong rational principles pulling in different directions, universal human rights and cultural difference. It’s hard to solve. We need to create and develop more flexible cultural concepts to deal with future world.

 

 

2) Interesting things I learned;

 

During class, I thought I tried to think globalization within wide point of view. I considered aspects of cultures. However, I really consider cultures as a result of globalization. Unconsciously, I thought that way. I couldn’t figure out why I thought globalization in a narrow point of view. I can realize why I did from this article. I can learn a desirable attitude when we study globalization. I am also interested ‘deterritorialization’. I felt ambiguous about deterritorialization before. I am impressed that we aware of distance only in terms of a time difference. It can certainly explain deterritorialization. Actually we can know events everywhere worldwide with our mobile phone or internet. We also know presidential election pledges in the US. We can go Shanghai in 2 hours and talk with friend anywhere at the same time by internet. It changes widely our daily life and cultural experiences. Technical developments widen our environments really.

 

 

3) Discussion points ;

 

In this article, there are some stories that certain cultures denigrated different cultures. And it was related to religions sometimes. While I read this, I was wondering the criteria we have when we judge something or have belief. Internationally major religions are Christianity, Catholicism, Buddhism and Hinduism. However, religion is not a science that can be verified. It’s one of faith. Within this thoughts, there is no priority within religions. Nowadays, In Korea, people regard some people who believe a cult as people who have mental illness. Before read it, I also thought a cult is bad although I don’t believe a certain religion. Who can define certain religion ‘cult’? Why people think that way even though there is no criteria and universal truths. Can we see this phenomenon is affected by major cultures? As a result of Westernization, some minor cultures have disappeared. If our religion would be regarded as cult, what should we do?