Cultural Globalization

1>Summarize in your own words of materials you read.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GLOBALIZATION AND CULTURE

According to John Tomlinson, Globalization is a complex, accelerating, integrating, process of global connectivity. It causes ‘flows’ around us. These flows are jump over the borders. However connectivity also accompanies international problems such as global warming, influenza security and so on. In Globalization, we can’t avoid the global dominance of the capitalist system, but we have to resist the temptation to economic reductionism because it operates on unrealistically narrow concept of economy and it distorts our understanding of the sphere of culture. ‘The cultural consequence of globalization’ contains a tacit assumption which is based on ‘cultural imperialism’. Culture seems to be a powerless category which is associated with cultural assimilation. However Clifford Geertz said ‘Culture is not a power, something to which social events can be casually attributed’. His comment extends to question for the purpose of culture. Culture generates meaning in life. The need for ‘meaning’ is at the deep centre of the human condition for shelter and sustenance. Moreover, culture inspires individual or collective actions which are themselves consequential. In short, cultural signification orients ‘people’.

A GLOBAL CULTURE

In globalization, Africa is fated by global economic system. Also globalization forced us to toward an all-encompassing ‘global culture’. By spread of Western capitalist culture, non-Western cultural tradition is threatened of a loss. Furthermore, cultural goods are not a culture itself. When people consume cultural goods, they get symbols or meanings. In thirteenth-century Europe, globalization was occurred by maps. In the past, people consider maps or something visible are more important than invisible things. In the process of making maps, cartographer applies a religious view through the whole world. Karl Marx said ‘Communist society is a world with a universal language and cosmopolitan cultural tastes’, but his vision is a deeply Eurocentric attitude to other cultures. His view of culture firmly rooted in a European tradition. Nonetheless we can take a lesson from Marx that global culture can coexist with otherwise rational progressive humanistic vision. ‘World citizenship’ works in a way that does not impose any one particular, culturally inflected model.

DETERRITORIALIZATION AND COSMOPOLITANISM

Globalization is rapidly changing our experience of locality. Culture has long held connotations tying it to the idea of a fixed locality. Locality is ethnic identification or cultural distinctiveness. Because of globalization, however, No longer is culture so tied to the constraints of local circumstances. Deterritorialization implies the loss of the natural relation of culture to geographical and social territories. From the optimistic perspective of deterritorialization, it makes is that the culture produced by locality is no longer the single important factor in our everyday lives. Telemediatization promotes deterritorialization and culture of telemediatization is taken for granted aspect of everyday life. In technological development, speed or immediacy is more emphasized. Deterritorialization not only disturbs and transforms local experience, but also potentially offers people wider cultural horizons. But we could faced with two sets of strong rational principles which are Universal human rights and cultural differences. Human rights can be invoked to defend cultural difference in just the same way that they can be used to argue for universal standards of justice. Also pluralism of identity position is important. But identities are constructs, not possessions. The appeal to human universalism is itself dependent on context. Clifford Geertz said ’pressed-together dissimilarities variously arranged, rather than all-of-a-piece nation states grouped into blocs and super blocs’. We need to come up with flexible cultural concept than we so far possess.

2>Mention of any new, interesting, or unusual items learned.

I used to come up with ‘Americanization’ when I heard the globalization. Most countries adopt capitalistic system, so it may be a natural result that the country which has strong capital power becomes a centre of globalization. Also I used to think about the globalization and localization can’t compatible. But I read this article, I expended my view of globalization. Globalization is not just destruct local’s culture or tradition. It could be added dimension of important factor in our lived reality.

In addition, I impressed Clifford Geertz said ’pressed-together dissimilarities variously arranged, rather than all-of-a-piece nation states grouped into blocs and super blocs’.

When I read ‘Third World’ part, I thought of Africa’s mono-culture. In third world, every country has one main item to grow. But this is not their choice. They are forced to grow such as cacao. To expand this situation in Korea, Korea was forced to grow rice by Japanese needs. In some aspects, Globalization has colonialist character.

3>Identify at least one question, concern, or discussion angle that is either problematic in some respect or could have been elaborated more.

I concerned about Globalization which exclude ‘Third World’. Can we call Globalization in the true sense? I concerned about the exploitation of the third world countries are justified in the name of globalization.

My second concern is about ‘flexible cultural concept’. I think, in morality, there are no objective truth except for extreme case like opposed to human rights. Right and wrong are just a matter of perspective in some cases. The perspective is different from various cultures. For example, How to say hello courteously varies in different cultures. Also taboo foods vary by country. In this situation, is ‘flexible cultural concept’ possible?