Monday, September 30, 2019
Examining Globalization and Imperialism’s Parallelism Essay
Introduction            Globalization cannot be merely described as a one-time event. Neither can it be defined as a pure passing fad nor a made-up term invented by various economic experts. Globalization is a social experience that has been predicted and expected to occur at the turn of the century. In recent years, it can be observed that not a single day pass by wherein globalization’s direct effects and impacts are not felt. According to Mishkin (2006), the plain and simple act of consuming foreign goods is already reflective of globalization’s power and influence. Globalization’s massive scope and reach further increase with the aid of highly modernized and sophisticated technological materials that are very much capable of breaking the barriers of space and time. Apparently, the global village that was once espoused by the renowned technological determinist, Marshall McLuhan is fast becoming a reality (Garson, 2006). Individuals, regardless of their age, culture, race and social class become connected in this seemingly borderless society.            But while a borderless society may seem to be beneficial to the growth of commerce and trade, geography’s untimely death (Murray, 2006) is clouded with doubts and animosity. Globalization thus presents a double-edged sword wherein its consequences can be either beneficial or detrimental (Collier, 2007). While globalization may actually trigger the rise of different emerging markets, which, in turn would lead to an increase of employment opportunities and product creationâ€â€these scenarios are perceived by globalization critics and detractors as yet another way of widening the economic gap between the rich and the poor. The destruction of geographical parameters enables transnational corporations to easily penetrate poverty-stricken communities with promises of wealth and prosperity. However, on a deeper contextualization of the matter, the luxury and abundance are no less than myths. Realistically speaking, globalization articulates the needs and demands of a capitalistic system that blatantly thrive on exploitation and cheap labor.            Globalization’s seemingly capitalistic nature as well as its wide scope and reach are some of the reasons behind its close association to imperialism. Going back to historical discourses it can be seen that imperialism began in an era wherein land explorations and discoveries were rampant. However, it is also important to note that imperialism in the earlier days was not merely concerned on unraveling new domains and territories. Along with it was the aim to conquer and rule over newly discovered lands and communities, which in turn resulted to territorial disputes and conflicts between Spain and Portugal. The success of each and every exploration equates to having greater chances or possibilities for geographical and economic expansion. The kingdom with the most number of colonies can readily utilized the latter’s natural resources and labor forces. Natives are subject to harsh working conditions in order to feed the colonizers’ economy.            Under these circumstances, indeed, the overt parallelism between globalization and imperialism is very much manifested. Globalization is imperialism redefined. Globalization is imperialism that operates and expands at a faster pace primarily because it is highly supported by sophisticated technology and communication channels (Janssens, 2004). Empires are continuously established by ruling parties. This is despite of Negri and Hardt’s assertion that Empires are different from conventional imperialism wherein the latter needs to distinguish a concrete spatial scope and range, while Empires are basically â€Å"decentralized and deterritorialized (Held & McGrew, 2007).†Based from a critical perspective, the ideological connotations and underpinnings of globalization, imperialism and Empires of Hardt and Negri are all the same, except for the tools used for expansion and the degree or speed wherein expansion materializes. Cultural Imperialism            As globalization or imperialism for that matter, continues to disguise as a worldwide economic approach that seeks growth and development among participating nations, another dilemma occurs. This is something that goes beyond the unequal distribution of wealth and massive exploitation of the workers. As the rally for economic prosperity goes on, globalization has also permeated the cultural boundaries and slowly transformed as an impending threat to timeless beliefs, customs and traditions. Ancient practices that have been long kept and preserved by various indigenous groups are slowly eradicated and given derogatory treatments for such are viewed as no longer applicable or valuable within the context of highly modernized and digital world. This unfortunate situation thus places marginalized groups into very uncompromising situations. Indigenous groups are further pushed into the periphery. The so-called â€Å"globalization of culture (Inda & Rosaldo, 2008),†which, ideally, should promote convergence and connectedness is no less than a strong manifestation of cultural imperialism.            There are three aspects that highly characterize or define the mechanisms of cultural imperialism (Hesmondhalgh, 2002). First, there is an apparent overflow of â€Å"cultural products†that are mostly derived from the West (Hesmondhalgh, 2002). These â€Å"cultural products,†are consistently enforced or spoon-fed to other cultures (Hesmondhalgh, 2002). Since cultural products are widely disseminated and seemingly forced into non-western communities, cultural imperialism thus opens the possibility of cultural homogenization (Hesmondhalgh, 2002). Lastly, the outcomes or consequences of cultural imperialism result to the death of indigenous cultures (Hersmondhalgh, 2002). Given this situation at hand, Sztompka (1993) expressed that cultural imperialism is most likely to affect or influence indigenous groups situated in communities that have had their own share of their colonial experience.            While this discussion sees the importance of sharing the practices of indigenous groups for the sake of awareness and preservation, these aspects become endangered as globalization enters into the limelight. The aim for awareness transforms into close-minded stereotypical views and preservation turns into total eradication. Death of the native tongue            Golding and Harris (1997) discussed that imperialism greatly impacts the use of language. In as far as globalization and imperialism is concerned, the massive utilization of the English language cannot be merely attributed to the fact that it is the so-called â€Å"international lingua franca (Thomason, 2007). Rather, on a closer look, it is an overt manifestation of western dominance and hegemony that readily jeopardizes language multiplicity (Tomlinson, 1999). Held (2000) shared that much of the valuable in formation is written in English. Likewise, such has been the primary medium for instruction in the academe and is very much employed in business communication. In as far as ethnic minorities are concerned, globalization’s emphasis on modernity and connectedness forces the former to learn and use the language (English) to ensure and maintain their â€Å"global competitiveness.†Although appropriations have been made by local or non-western cultures, such as â€Å"Spanglish (Spanish and English) or Hinglish (Hindi and English) (Christensen & Levinson, 2003), for example, appropriations seem to miss the larger picture. Appropriations can be viewed as a direct insult to other languages, for it implies the inability of non-western languages to ascertain competitive advantage not unless they operate under the shadows of the English language. Since many individuals utilize English, minority groups are further marginalized. Its small size cannot possibly go against the majority. Take for example the case Native Americans, the Navajos, which are surprisingly alienated in their own domains primarily because there language orientation differs from the large number of the populace (Baker, 2001). The incorporation of English in Malawi’s curricula also created adverse effects in one of ethnic groups, Lomwe, wherein, the number of its native speaker has experienced a considerable decline (Kaplan & Baldauf, 1999). Obviously, such situations do not only exemplify language dominance. More than anything else, such readily projects cultural homogenizationâ€â€one of the most important determinants of cultural imperialism and / or globalization. Cultural homogenization encourages the rise of a global culture wherein issues of race and ethnicity are no longer deemed important. Consequently in order for a global culture to materialize, there is a strong need for participating entities to converge and interact via a common languageâ€â€which in reality, does not really upholds equality but a plain and pure reiteration of western interests. Global Americanization On the other hand, globalization is also perceived by experts as the seemingly tyrannical assertion of Westernâ€â€or to be more exact, American culture (Horton & Patapan, 2004). This occurs as cultural products in the form of art, music, film, lifestyle etc. continues to infiltrate different communities (Pearson & Simpson, 2004). Although cultural sharing and transmission are very common, the problem with this set-up is that it tacitly imposes the American way of life and perspective, with a total disregard to ethnic roots and practices. This process is described by Pearson and Simpson (2004) as â€Å"Americanization.†Americanization further threatens non-western cultures primarily because it is aided by mass media. The diffusion of values, customs and beliefs rapidly occurs. Basically, Americanization greatly affects and influences the ideological stance of indigenous groups as they are constantly bombarded by images that promote and uphold the grandiosity of the American life. The frequent exposure of natives to western thoughts and ideas can readily affect their views regarding the practices of their respective ethnic groups. As the agenda-setting theory purports, mass media is very much capable of shaping ones views and impose which topics should be deemed important or not (Woodward, 2007). Mass media, under the context of Americanization also operates as a tool for biased and stereotype representations of other cultures. Hollywood for example, is known for its seemingly impartial portrayal of Asians. More often than not, individuals with Asian descents, or to be more specificâ€â€Chinese are often presented as villains in many films (Benshoff & Griffin, 2004). Likewise, Hollywood has also managed to dominate the movie industry of other countries, thus bringing death to local films. Compared to India’s Bollywood, it can be seen that in terms of the number of movies produced, the former readily outnumbers Hollywood (Wasko, 2003). However, since Hollywood has already established itself as the epitome of high quality films, this basically contributes to the decreasing appeal of Indian-made or Asian-made films. In addition to that, the seemingly negative notions attributed to Asians have readily prevented individuals from patronizing not only Bollywood, but also films which are outside the Hollywood enclave. The above-mentioned situation readily impacts the perception of Asians regarding the value and importance of their historical roots. This is most especially true as for the case of individuals whose parents have different ethnic origins. Affected parties are trapped in a situation wherein they have to choose and decide which culture is more superior and which cultural practices should be readily exercised. The matter becomes even more complicated as Americanization leads to intense consumerism of Western products which delimits the role played by local producers. According to Lockard (1998), consumerism is the result of the overlapping segments of both economic and cultural imperialism. Economically speaking, transnational companies Andersen and Gray (2008) implied that commodities such as food and dresses can alter the individual’s attitudes and orientations. Take for example, the case of fast food chains that have emerged in non-Western countries, which, in return, gave birth to a fast-food culture that readily upholds the notion that western products represent progress and modernity (Allen, Albala & Nestle, 2007). The corresponding effect of this is that fast-food culture has transformed the ways wherein food is served and prepared. Those that do not adhere to the practices of fast-food culture are immediately dismissed as way too traditional (Allen, Albala & Nestle, 2007). Allen, Albala and Neslte (2007) mentioned that such scenario has readily taken the attention of concerned parties from China, Mexico and even a progressive country such as France. The noise created by the growing fast-food culture expresses high tendencies of devouring not only the local practices of non-western communities, but also the survival of local individuals that rely on such industry. In the meantime, the apparent decline of musical traditions and oral lore in the Igorot (a Philippine tribe) also signifies the adverse effects of consumerism. According to Reyes (cited in Craig and King, 2002), the introduction of radio in the early 70s exposed the youth western popular music that they can enjoy on a daily basis via purchasing the cassette tapes of their favorite western artists. This situation prevented many Igorots, most especially, the younger generation from taking some time to produce songs, most especially during memorable or special events (Reyes cited in Craig & King, 2002). Since youngsters are bombarded with pre-packaged music, they no longer need to exert extra effort in song making for all they have to do is purchase a copy of their favorite artists and push the play button. The problem with the consumerist approach of Americanization is that it forces indigenous cultures to believe that they actually need the cultural products that are being offered to them. Americanization tends to create false needs in order to serve the western interest. Since Conclusion            Indeed, undoubtedly globalization and imperialism are the same. It subdues both the economic and cultural aspects of indigenous and non-western cultures by using the idea of progress and modernity as a disguise or as a defense. With the availability of sophisticated technology, globalization or imperialism spread much faster thus bringing death to historical practices and customs. Globalization or imperialism also results to identity problems and further marginalization of ethnic groups. The consumer-driven approach have totally bastardized and transformed the cultural expression of indigenous groups into mere commodities that readily lack the artistry and intricacies of traditional works via standardization. References Allen, G; Albala, K. and Nestle, M. (2007). The Business of Food. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Inc. Andersen, R. and Gray, J. (2008). Battleground: The Media. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Inc. Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Benshoff, H. and Griffin, S (2004). America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender and Sexuality at the Movies. Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Christensen, D. and Levinson, D.  (Eds). (2003). Encyclopedia of Community. California: Sage Publications Inc. Collier, P. (2007). The Bottom Billion. New York: Oxford University Press Inc. Garson, G. (2006). Public Information Technology and E-governance. Canada: Jones and         Bartlett Publishers Golding, P. and Harris, P. (1997). Beyond Cultural Imperialism Held, D. and McGrew A. (2007). Globalization/ Anti-Globalization: Beyond the Great Divide. Cambridge: Polity Press Hersmondhalgh, D. (2002). The Cultural Industries. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Horton, K. and Patapan, H. (2004). Globalisation and Equality. London: Routledge Inda, J. and Rosaldo, R. (2008). The Anthropology of Globalization. Malden, MA: Blackwell    Publishing Ltd. Janssens, R. 2004. Of Mice and Men: American Imperialism and American Studies. Netherlands:            Amsterdam University Press Kaplan, R. and Baldouf, R. (1999). Language Planning in Malawi, Mozambique and the Philippines. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Lockard, C. (1998). Dance of Life. USA: University of Hawaii Press Mishkin, F. (2006). The Next Great Globalization. New Jersey: Princeton University Press Murray, W. (2006). Geographies of Globalization. New York: Routledge Pearson, R. and Simpson, P. (2001). Critical Dictionary of Film, Television and Theory. London: Routledge Reyes, M. (2002). Under Attack: Mass Media Technology and Indigenous Musical Practices in the Philippines. In T. Craig, & R. King, (Eds.). Global goes Local: Popular Culture in Asia (pp. 40-56). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Sztompka, P. (1993). The Sociology of Social Change. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Thomason, S. (2001). Language Contact: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Wasko, J. (2003). How Hollywood Works. London: Sage Publications Ltd Woodward, G. (2007). Center Stage. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc. Â
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.