Epilogue: How wikipedia has contributed to understanding globalization

All students in Globalization Class chose free topic which is relevant to globalization. And we did that assignment using 'Wikipedia'. I used it many times when I wanted to get some information about certain subjects but it was my first time to write in wikipedia directly. It helped me understand globalization in some ways.
First of all, anyone is free to access to wikipedia. If it is not free, only people who can pay money would have been able to use it. And anyone can participate in producing information so anyone can be beneficiary as well as producer of information. In this aspect, wikipedia contributes to reducing inequality between people who have more information and who don't.
Wikipedia works as representative example of "Collective Intelligence". Numerous members of wikipedia cooperate with other members and sometimes compete and express better opinion, and through this process they can create synergy overwhelming sum of intelligence of individuals.

People from all over the world can add text and edit them. They can create good quality text as a native people's point of view. People who know well about their country, their specialization(area, major) make numerous pages which contain information that is useful to many people. Quality of text can be controversial sometimes because they are not clearly verified experts. But despite of weak point, they can contribute to wikipedia and equal spread of information and only this point can be meaningful.

Global Life Expectancy in the future

Global Life expectancy

Life expectancy at birth reflects the overall mortality level of a population. It summarizes the mortality pattern that prevails across all age groups in a given year – children and adolescents, adults and the elderly. In 2013, life expectancy at birth for both sexes globally was 71 years, ranging from 62 years in low-income countries to 79 years in high-income countries, giving a ratio of 1.3 between the two income groups. Women live longer than men all around the world. The gap in life expectancy between the sexes was 5 years in 1990 and had remained the same by 2013. The gap is much larger in high-income countries (more than six years) than in low-income countries (around three years).

Since 1990, life expectancy at birth has increased globally by 6 years, but during the 1990s the value in Europe has showed a stagnation, and in Africa it has even decreased. For Europe, the phenomenon is due mainly to adverse mortality trends in the former Soviet Union countries. The decrease in Africa has been caused by HIV/AIDS, but the increasing availability of antiretroviral therapy has reduced the spread of the epidemic, and the mortality due to HIV/AIDS has been decreasing since about 2005, allowing life expectancy at birth to increase again: average life expectancy at birth in Africa, was 50 years in 2000, whereas it was 58 years in 2013.

Life expectancy at age 60 reflects the overall mortality level of a population over 60 years. In 2013, the global population aged 60 years can expect to live another 20 years on average, 2 years longer than in 1990. Life expectancy at age 60 in high-income countries (23 years) is 6 years longer than that in low-income and lower-middle income countries (17 years). Life expectancies at age 60 were longer and the increases larger in high-income countries. In such countries, life expectancy at age 60 had increased by almost as much as life expectancy at birth – around three years for both men and women.

"Life expectancy." World Health Organization. Web. 8 December 2015. <http://www.who.int/gho/mortality_burden_disease/life_tables/situation_trends_text/en/>.

4. Economic Globalization

1.Summary
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this text is providing a more distorted depiction and explanation of the nature and significance of TNC(transnational corporation)s in the processes of economic globalization, an approach that is firmly grounded in the empirical reality of a highly differentiated geography while, at the same time, providing a theoretical basis for understanding what is, indeed, a highly complex phenomenon.


THE SCALE AND GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS
The first firms to engage in manufacturing production outside their home country did not emerge until the second half of the nineteenth century. Nevertheless, by the eve of World War I, in 1914, considerable numbers of US, UK and some continental European manufacturing companies were
becoming increasingly transnationalized. Since then, and especially during the past 50 years, the number of TNCs in the world economy has grown exponentially. The most comprehensive definition of a modern TNC, and the one that underpins the discussion in this chapter, is ‘a firm which has the power to coordinate and control operations in more than one country, even if it does not own them’. Using a more restrictive definition, based on ownership criteria alone, UNCTAD estimates that around 61,000 TNCs currently carry out international production in over 900,000 foreign affiliates. These operations represent roughly one-tenth of total world gross domestic product and generate one-third of total world exports.


WHY (AND HOW) FIRMS ‘TRANSNATIONALIZE’
1st Motivatios: Market-oriented investment
Despite recent developments in TNC activity, much of their investment continues to be market-oriented. A firm may have reached saturation point in its domestic market. Increasing profitability may well depend, therefore, on being able to expand its market beyond its home territory. It may have identified new markets that require a direct presence in order to serve them efficiently.. Access to the market may be restricted because of political regulatory structures (such as import tariffs).


2nd Motivatios:Asset-oriented investment
The geographical unevenness of markets is one major set of reasons why firms engage in transnational investment. The second set of reasons derives from the fact that the assets that firms need to produce and sell their products and services are also geographically very unevenly distributed. Traditionally it was the geographical localization of many natural resources that drove much of the early development of TNCs. It is no coincidence that many of the early leading TNCs were in the natural resource sectors, including energy and industrial resources as well as in agricultural products. Firms in the natural resource industries must, of necessity, locate at the source of supply, although it is often the case that subsequent processing of the resource takes place elsewhere, generally close to the market.


SEQUENCE OF TNC DEVELOPMENT
First, overseas markets are served by direct exports, normally utilizing local independent sales agents. Second, as local demand grows, it may become desirable for the TNC to exert closer control over its foreign markets by setting up overseas sales outlets of its own. This may be achieved either by setting up an entirely new facility or by acquiring a local firm. Acquisition offers the attraction of an already functioning business compared with the more difficult, and possibly more risky, method of starting from scratch in an unfamiliar environment.


‘WEBS OF ENTERPRISE’: TRANSNATIONAL PRODUCTION NETWORKS
Both the organization and the geography of large TNCs, and of their transnational production networks, are immensely complex and dynamic. In a very real sense, the global economy can be pictured as intricately connected localized clusters of activity embedded in various ways into different forms of corporate network that, in turn, vary greatly in their geographical extent. Some TNCs are globally extensive, others are more restricted geographically. In all cases, however, firms in specific places – and, therefore, the places themselves – are increasingly connected into transnational networks.

2.Interesting items I learned

About MNC & TNC

Multinational corporations are very often known as transnational corporations. Many people do not see any major difference between the two terms. However, there is a slight difference between them. Contrary to MNCs, transnational corporations are known for the fact that there is no centralized office in a certain country (Cromwell n.d.). MNCs, in their turn, have headquarters in a single country; however, the main activity of these companies take place in several countries, continents (Encyclopedia Britannica 2012). Hence, both types of corporations operate beyond the national borders. Furthermore, MNCs are known to be independent from government. There are no orientations on specific countries while conducting direct business activities. Moreover, they are known to produce and deliver goods and services to numerous countries (Boundless n.d.). According to Michilie (2003), TNCs are able to plan, control and implement business activities across different nations, countries. In other words, the perfect scenario for multinational corporations is to use skilled workers from the developed economies and have plants in emerging economies. Moreover, the products that are made in the host country are supposed to be easily transported to developed countries and sold there with a certain added value.

    

Multinational companies gained popularity some twenty years ago. They have their origins back to the years of the escalation of globalization. Up till now, there has been seen a double increase in the number of such corporation comparing to the number of corporations some twenty years ago (Kotler&Amstrong 2012). There are 150 largest economies in the world, however; only 81 counties can be called largest economies (Kotler&Amstrong 2012). Therefore, there are about 69 corporations that are considered to be world economies (Kotler&Amstrong 2012).

    

The most known ones according to the Economist (2012) are the following: General Electric, Royal Dutch Shell, BP, Exxon Mobil, Toyota and many others. Many of these companies have about ninety per cent of their assets in foreign countries (The economist 2012). For instance, General Electric has about fifty two per cent of its foreign assets (The economist 2012). Nestle is the leading country when it comes to the percentage of foreign sales. It accounts for almost ninety nine per cent of assets that are foreign (The economist 2012). The sectors where most multinational corporations operate in are manufacturing and finance (UN 2009). However, financial industry has lost recently its popularity and credibility among TNCs due to many crises. Consequently, there are some opinions that nowadays corporations tend to prioritize more ‘soft industries’ and concentrate on producing/selling food and drinks, apparel and books (Bremmer 2014). Multinational companies are rarely competitive in such spheres as aircraft manufacturing (Bremmer 2014).

 

 
Krystsina Lapko. “The role of transnational corporations in the world economy.” Linked in. 20 January 2015. Web. 7 December 2015.

3. Discussion

I'm gonna give you some information about role of MNCs and we need to discuss role of MNCs in good way and bad way.

First, MNCs modernize the world economy. It is reflected as a result of constant promotion of new technologies and introducing innovations across the world. Especially they are active by introducing technologies to relatively remote places. By bringing progress to the poorest economies, MNCs employ people and educate them.

Second, such corporations promote efficiency and growth of the world economy. Multinational corporations are likely to establish interconnection between the domestic economies of some isolated countries and the world’s greatest economies. In addition to that, they promote globalization. By doing this, multinational corporations are viewed very relatively by different people.

3. Political Globalization

1. Summary


INTRODUCTION
The concept of globalization as used in this chapter refers to the multidimensional, accelerated and interconnected organization of space and time across national borders. Specifically with respect to political globalization it concerns an approach to the social world that stresses changing processes as well as a consciousness of the compressed nature of space and time. Political globalization has been much discussed in the globalization literature where the emphasis has been on the decline of the nation-state under the impact of global forces, which have created different kinds of politics arising from, on the one hand, the development of transnational networks and flows, and, on the other, processes of de- and reterritorialization.
The approach to political globalization adopted in this chapter highlights the multifaced nature of globalization, which is best seen as a relational dynamic rather than a new kind of reality. Political globalization, we argue, can be understood as a tension between three processes which interact to produce the complex field of global politics: global geopolitics, global normative culture and polycentric networks.
There can be little doubt that one of the most pervasive forms of political globalization is the worldwide spread of democracy based on the parliamentary nationstate. Democratic government exists in some form in most parts of the world and where it does not, as in China, there is a considerable demand for it by democratic movements. This is a territorially based kind of globalization and largely confined to the political form of the nation-state. It takes traditional forms as well as constituting a new kind of global geopolitics. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the communist regimes in Europe after 1991, democracy has become the universally acceptable form of government. In this sense then, globalization does not undermine the democratic nation-state but gives it worldwide acceptability. The famous thesis of the ‘end of history’ misinterpreted this to be the end of ideology, since the spread of liberal democracy did not lead to the end of ideology but to the proliferation of more and different kinds of ideology. The democratic nation-state in many parts of the world has given rise to very different kinds of political cultures. The globalization of democratic politics has been the basis of the so-called ‘new world order’ that has been associated with the bid for worldwide supremacy by the United States and the legitimation of global wars, from the Gulf War to the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.




THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE NATION-STATE, NATIONALITY AND CITIZENSHIP
The notion of the decline of the nation-state in a post-statist world of governance without government – or in a ‘new medievalism’ of regional economies (Ohmae 1996) – should be replaced by the idea of the continued transformation of the nation-state. The idea of a zero-sum situation of states disappearing in a global world of markets or replaced by global structures of governance, on the one side, or as in the neo-realist scenario the survival of the so-called Westphalian state as a sovereign actor must be rejected. States continue to be powerful actors but exist in a more globally connected world that they do not fully control. The following arguments have been given with respect to the transformation of the nation-state under the conditions of largely economic globalization. According to Susan Strange (1996), in the most well-known formulation of this position, states have been usurped by global markets. With the transition from a world economy dominated by national economies to a global economy new economic forces come into play challenging the power of the nation-state. Instead of struggling to gain territorial power over other states most states are struggling to control firms that have become rivals to states. The result is that states have to share sovereignty with other global players. In other approaches, where the emphasis is more on the impact of global civil society the argument is that the nation-state must share sovereignty with non-governmental actors, leading to multi-governance. It is clear that in all these accounts the state is only one source of political power. Much of this revolves around the question of whether states are getting weaker or stronger as a result of global forces. In the case of Europeanization, which is a major area for the application of many of these arguments, at least two positions have emerged: the thesis that transnationalization enhances the power of the nation-state and the thesis of the rise of the regulatory state. According to Alan Milward (1993), European integration, as a movement that has led to the progressive erosion of national sovereignty, has paradoxically rescued the nation-state rather than undermined it. The movement towards transnational authority allows a more functional state system to operate since it is only those functions – for instance, regulation of finance markets and cross border trade – that the solitary state is less well equipped to perform that are transferred upwards to the transnational level. But the result is an unavoidable loss of sovereignty, which does not necessarily translate into a loss of autonomy. According to Majone (1996) the transnationalization of the state in Europe is best seen in terms of a regulatory kind of governance rather than the creation of a new state system that challenges the nation-state. The European Union possesses a large number of independent regulatory authorities, working in fi elds such as the environment, drugs and drug addiction, vocational training, health and safety at work, the internal market, racism and xenophobia, food safety, aviation safety. States have always had regulatory functions; what is different today is simply these functions are being performed at a transnational level through cooperation with other states. According to Robinson (2001) a transnational state has come into existence. This is a multilayered and multicentred linking together on a transnational level of many of the functions of statehood. The nation-state does not ‘wither away’ but becomes transformed by becoming a functional component of this transnational apparatus and a major agent of global capitalism. In this analysis, globalization reconfigures the state around global capitalism, making it impossible for nation-states to be independent.




THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE AND COMMUNICATION
Communication is central to politics. Nation-states have been based on centralized systems of communication ranging from national systems of education and science, national newspapers and media such as TV as well as national commemorations and popular culture in which national narratives and collective identities were codifi ed, reproduced and legitimated. Most nation-states have been based on a national language, which was increasingly standardized over time. In addition, political parties have been at the centre of large-scale apparatuses of political communication which they have used for social influence. If the Enlightenment public was based on alleged free discussion, the public today is based on professional political communication and mass persuasion through systematic advertising and lobbying: for Mayhew this amounts to a ‘new public’ (Mayhew 1997). However, as argued by Habermas (1989), communication is an open site of political and cultural contestation and is never fully institutionalized by the state or entirely controlled by elites and their organs of political communication. The public sphere is the site of politics; it is not merely a spatial location but a process of discursive contestation.




THE CENTRALITY OF CIVIL SOCIETY
We have seen how political globalization is associated with the changing relationships between state, society and the individual, and the new transnational or global communities, networks and publics which have come into existence and which are in turn driving new forms of politics. Central to understanding these developments is the idea of civil society which perhaps more than any other development has come to symbolize the political potential of globalization, and signals the onset of globalization from below. Before looking at the emerging reality of global civil society it is necessary to give consideration to a related development which we can term the ‘civil societalization’ of politics, a development stimulated, on the one hand, by the spread of governance practices which coordinate policy both beyond the nationstate and in partnership with a range of social actors not traditionally involved in the mechanisms of government, and, on the other, by shifts in the scale of the local, with social movements and grass-roots politics increasingly coordinated across national boundaries. The ‘civil societalization’ of politics both reinforces the idea that politics is increasingly informed by a normative global culture and points to the transformation of the nation-state as a site of political struggle. In other words, the ‘civil societalization’ of politics signifies a commonality of political forms which link the local and the global, the national and the transnational, and mobilizes a range of actors around common political codes: competitiveness, sustainability, personhood rights and social justice. ‘Civil societalization’ has also resulted from the erosion of the state/society distinction inspired by the ‘governance turn’, the concomitant transformation in the institutionalization of social and political cleavages, and the increasing connectivity between global and local political forms. Significantly, ‘civil societalization’ has permeated international relations, and nation-states increasingly choose to mobilize actors in global civil society, and contest politics in the global public sphere.




2. Interesting Items I learned
I searched Sweden political system and constitution.
A PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY
In Sweden, general elections are held every four years, with the last one held in September 2014. Around 7 million people are entitled to vote and thereby influence which political party will represent them in the Riksdag (the Swedish Parliament), county councils and municipalities. People can also influence Swedish politics in other ways – by taking part in referendums, joining a political party or commenting on reports presented by the Government.


THE SWEDENISH CONSTITUTION
The Swedish Constitution defines how Sweden is governed. It regulates the relationships between decision-making and executive power, and the basic rights and freedoms of citizens. Four fundamental laws make up the Constitution: the Instrument of Government, the Act of Succession, the Freedom of the Press Act and the Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression. Among other things, the Instrument of Government guarantees citizens the right to obtain information freely, hold demonstrations, form political parties and practise their religion.
The Act of Succession regulates the right of members of the House of Bernadotte to accede to the Swedish throne.
The Freedom of the Press Act sets out the principle of public access to official documents in order to guarantee an open society with access to information about the work of the Riksdag, the Government and public agencies. This law allows people to study official documents whenever they wish. Another principle in the Freedom of the Press Act is the freedom to communicate information. Under this principle, everyone in Sweden is entitled to give information to the media that they consider important and that they feel should be made public. The publisher of the material is not entitled to reveal the source if the individual in question wishes to remain anonymous.
The Law on Freedom of Expression, which came into force in 1992, largely mirrors the Freedom of the Press Act, in regards to the prohibition of censorship, the freedom to communicate information and the right to anonymity.

The Swedish system of government, 7 September 2015. Web. 9 November 2015. https://sweden.se/society/the-swedish-system-of-government/


3. Discussion
As we know, democracy is the most dominant political system. Few countries in Europe still has monarchal system like Sweden and Netherland. In korea,  monarchal system existed before 200 years ago. Koreans will be against of instituting monarchal system these days. But country that has monarchal system govern their nations effectively and they also has good welfare system. Only a few people isn't happy with their political system and deny it. So we need to consider that democracy which is used widely has no side effects.

Functions of Political Parties in Democracy

Political parties are indispensable for the working of modern democratic governments. The importance of Political parties lies in the fact that democracies cannot function without the existence of political parties.

 

1. It makes the working of parliamentary government possible: A parliament consists of the representatives of the people. The political parties organize these representatives on party lines. The electorate chooses their representatives on the basis of their party affiliation. The party which gets the majority of votes forms the government and runs the state and the other parties in the legislature constitute the opposition and try to find fault with the government, thus making it more responsible. In the absence of political parties, the elected representatives may work at cross purposes just making the formation of a government or opposition an impossibility.

2. Political Parties formulate public policies: Each political party fights the election to achieve its objectives incorporated in their political manifesto. Soon after the election the majority party forming the government seeks to formulate its policies of administration on the basis of promises made in the election manifesto. Besides, each party has its own ideology. It is assured that the majority party gets the mandate of the electorate to implement its own political programme.

3. Political parties educate Public opinion: Parties in any system of government educate, formulate and organize public opinion. They also help in the growth of the level of political consciousness of common citizens, who otherwise have no time to peruse and study issues of the state. The political parties in their effort to come closer to the people organize public rallies, meetings, press conferences on important issues and make their views clear. This provides the common people with an opportunity to analyze the pros and cons of various important issues. This process leads to organize and formulate public opinion on important issues. The common people who otherwise have no time to devote to politics immensely benefit by these meetings etc. and understand different aspects of the basic issues involved in administration.

4. Political parties provide political stability: The political parties in more than one way unite, simplify and stabilized the political process of the country. The destabilizing forces of localism, section, interests and geographical situations are tackled by political parties by making these parts of their party ideology thus pacifying the disintegrating forces and inducing cohesion. The political parties mainly perform the functions of ‘aggregation of interests’. Besides the political parties in a representative democracy play a great role in maintaining the stability by performing their roles in the legislature. The majority party forms the government and the other small parties in the opposition. The party in power has to conduct itself very responsibly. Because any unwise move on their part would throw it off the power and help the opposition (parties) to take over the reins of administration. Opposition not merely criticizes the government; it also provides an alternative program and alternative government in the eventuality of any crisis in the government. As such it contributes to the stability of the government.

5. It helps in the recruitment of leaders: The essential function of any party is to recruit men of integrity, letters, action, leadership to its fold as members and prepare them for election in future. Because it is these members of party who propagate the party ideologies, discuss the burning issues and hold meetings and press conferences to mobilize public support. It is these leaders again who contest in the election and form government if elected to power. Such leaders being drawn from public life are expected to understand expectations of the common people and formulate public policies accordingly. Parties always get popularity and recognition though their leaders only.

 

Goel, Amit. Important India, 21 July 2015. Web. 3 November 2015. http://www.importantindia.com/16621/functions-of-political-parties-in-democracy/.

 

Crime Level ‘Critical’ in Cambodia

This is the article of crime level in cambodia released by THE CAMBODIA DAILY. We can see crimes are so pervasive in Cambodia.


Sudden increase in violent crime over the past year has seen Cambodia receive a “critical” rating in a report outlining the potential dangers for U.S. Embassy staff operating in the country.
The Cambodia 2015 Crime and Safety Report, which was compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Diplomatic Security and released Wednesday, cited armed robberies, youth gangs and break-ins as some of the dangers facing U.S. diplomats.
“Violent crimes, especially armed robberies, continued to occur, while the chances of being a victim increase dramatically at night, daytime robberies are also very common. The frequency of armed robberies involving weapons continues at high levels,” the report says.
It stated that “random gunfire incidents” and road-rage-induced shoot-outs occurred frequently, while youth gangs “operate unimpeded” in Phnom Penh.
Embassy officials reported a rise in “snatch and grab” thefts, particularly when the victims are riding in tuk-tuks or on motorbikes.
“foreign diplomat had his smart phone stolen after being punched in the mouth. The perpetrator used brass knuckles and approached the victim as he was stopped on the side of the road,” the report says. It also mentioned the murder of Dutch U.N. consultant Daphna Beerdsen and her daughter in Phnom Penh last April.
U.S. officials were also told that they should avoid “dimly lit areas,” “socialize at reputable restaurants and bars” and avoid food that might contain illicit drugs.
“Embassy employees are prohibited from ordering food items from local restaurants that contain marijuana or other illicit ingredients, which are usually marketed under the term ‘happy,’” the report says.
Last year’s crime and safety report had a similar tone but contained no rating.


George, Wright. THE CAMBODIA DAILY, 3 April 2015. Web. 3 November 2015. https://www.cambodiadaily.com/news/crime-level-critical-in-cambodia-us-81312/.

South Korea in comparison with Singapore and Switzerland.

Why level of masculinity and power distance is high in Korea and Singapore?
I already tell my opinion in class today. But after class, I thought deeply why masculinity and power distance score is high not only in South Korea and Singapore but also in many major countries like Switzerland(스위스) and America.

I accept that there can be many resonable explanations about this. Most of all, I'm gonna look through 'history'. I'm not familiar with history much but I can figure it out when I look through history slightly. South Korea and Singapore have got through lots of  hardships and were under control of other countries. Singapore was under domination of Portugal in 16th century and under influence of Netherland in 17th century. Since 1867, Singapore was incorporated to colony of United Kingdom. And Singapore was colony of Japan from 1942 to 1945.

Countries like Singapore and Korea were surrounded by many strong countries in history. So they got invasion from other countries easily and many times. In this situations, any countries in the world should protect their territory, lives and property of nation. Governments mobilize the military forces and that becomes first priority to their country because exsitance of their country depends on defense. This made masculinity become serious and contribute to the begining of society which goes focussing on man. In masculine society, we tend to learn self-denial rather than indulgence. And women can be discriminated easily. So power distance and glass ceiling for women can get serious as well.

What is interesting is that Switzerland which was nutral country during the World War II has higer level in masculinity. Probably, there is just only little exception that masculinity is pervaded through whole world. However, important difference exsists. Switzerland has low level in Power Distance. They have advanced and matured civic awearness about equality between male and female.

2. Cultural Globalization

1. Summary
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GLOBALIZATION AND CULTURE

It may seem obvious point to begin with, but to understand the meaning of ‘cultural globalization’ we first have to understand some defining features of the two terms. At first, we need to begin with globalization.
 

Actually every serious scholar today would accept the broad general suggestion that globalization is a multidimensional process, taking place simultaneously within the spheres of the economy, of politics, of technological developments. One simple way of defining globalization, without giving precedence of these dimensions, is to say that it is a complex, accelerating, integrating process of global connectivity. Understood in this rather abstract, general way, globalization refers to the rapidly developing and compact network of interconnections and interdependencies that characterize material, social, economic and cultural life in the modern world.
 

This increasing connectivity is, in many ways, an obvious aspect of our lives. It is something we can recognize in everyday experiences at least if we live in the more developed parts of the world. Connectivity pretty much defines our use of communications technologies – mobile phones, computers, e-mail, the Internet – but it is also characteristic of the urban environments most of us inhabit and it increasingly influences the way we earn our living, the styles of food we eat, the music, cinema and television that forms our entertainment, and our experience of mobility and travel.

 

Second, we need to survey complicated and often hard to figuring out concept of culture. Culture is not a power, something to which social events can be causally attributed and this is surely right to the extent that we should think of cultural processes towards the construction of socially shared meanings. If we were to ask the stark functional question, ‘what is culture for?’, the most satisfying answer is that it is to generate meaning in life. Culture is thus not only a context in which events may be meaningfully interpreted, it is the old context in which human agency arises and takes place. Cultural signification and interpretation constantly motivate and orient people, individually and collectively, towards particular choices and actions. Actions which may seem to be fairly crucial ones, following a logic of practical or economic necessity, are nonetheless always undertaken within that set of self-understandings, plans, hopes or aspirations which we can think of as the constitutive elements of the individual’s cultural life. Even the most basic important actions of satisfying bodily needs are not in this sense outside of culture: in certain circumstances – slimming, eating ‘disorders’ such as anorexia nervosa, political hunger strikes.
 

One useful way to think about the conclusion of culture for globalization, then, is to grasp how culturally informed ‘local’ actions can have globalizing consequences. The ‘moment of culture’ in the shopping decisions of young people on Saturday afternoons – to buy this or that brand of jeans or training shoes or mobile phone: How do I want to be perceived? What cultural images do I want to conform to or contrast with? What do I value? What do I desire? These are not tiresome questions, even though we may judge consumerism incapable of providing satisfying answers. But neither are they questions that remain locked within the subjectivities of human beings.
 

Cultural globalization involves the increasing ‘reflexivity’ of modern life: the systemic integration of numerous small individual actions into the workings of the social institutions which appear independently to govern our lives. What I have emphasized here – because it is so fundamental to understanding the agenda of globalization from a cultural perspective – is that culture is a dimension in which globalization both has its effects and simultaneously is generated and shaped.

REAL MEANING OF GLOBAL CULTURE

One common assumption about the globalization process is that it will lead to a single global culture. Indeed, globalization in some of its aspects does have this general unifying character. However, increasing global connectivity by no means implies that the world is becoming either economically or politically ‘unified’.
 

Despite all this, there persists, at least amongst some Western critics, a tendency to imagine globalization pushing us towards an all-encompassing ‘global culture’. The most common way is that cultural globalization implies a form of cultural imperialism: the spread of Western capitalist, especially American culture. What is feared here is the total domination of world cultures through the unopposed advance of iconic brands such as Disney, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Google, McDonald’s, CNN, Nike and Starbuck. Eating McDonald’s hamburgers, smoking Marlboro cigarettes, drinking Coke and playing computer games may be bad for you in all sorts of ways. But they do not in themselves provide much solid evidence of a abandonment to deeper Western cultural values.
 

Indeed, one of the unavoidable implications of the current wave of anti-Western feeling in large parts of the Muslim world is precisely the demonstration of the recovery of cultural opposition to these values. Since the events of 11 September 2001 and then the invasion of Iraq, in self-conscious project of US cultural-political global hegemony, there has been apparent evidence of a rejection of this project. Without being drawn too deeply into these perplexing issues, we can at least see that the vision of Western liberal-capitalist consumer culture sweeping all before it is severely criticized by this cultural opposition. What the connectivity of globalization is doing is bringing quite disparate cultures into closer contact by no means inevitably as a ‘clash of civilizations’. What globalization is clearly not doing is effortlessly installing Western culture as global culture. A different way of approaching these issues is to view contemporary globalization in the context of a much longer historical context in which societies and cultures have imagined the world as a single place.
 

DETERRITORIALIZATION

There is another, more promising, way of approaching cultural globalization. This is not via the macro analysis of ‘globality’, but precisely in the opposite way, by understanding the effects of globalization as they are felt within particular localities. The vast majority of us live local lives, but globalization is rapidly changing our experience of this ‘locality’ and one way of grasping this change is in the idea of ‘deterritorialization’. The idea of deterritorialization implies ‘the loss of the “natural” relation of culture to geographical and social territories’. Deterritorialization, then, means that the importance of the geographical location of a culture – not only the physical, environmental and climatic location, but ethnic boundaries and unlimiting activities that have accrued around this.
 

In fact the idea of deterritorialization has fairly radical theoretical implications for traditional ways of understanding culture. Culture has long held connotations tying it to the idea of a fixed locality. The idea of ‘a culture’ implicitly connects meaning construction with particularity and location with ‘territory’.
 

If globalization is the spread of complex socialeconomic connections across distance, then deterritorialization refers to the reach of this connectivity into the localities in which everyday life is conducted and experienced.
 

Deterritorialization is not simply the loss of the experience of a local culture: it is not as though localities, and the particularities, differences they generate, suddenly and entirely disappear. Localities, on the contrary, thrive in. In less extreme terms, a swift thought about the places we live in reminds us that they all has a high degree of cultural characters. This applies not only to remote and ‘exotic’ corners and backwaters of the world, untouched by the flows of global modernity, but to capital cities and great metropolitan centers. London clearly has its own cultural ‘feel’ which is quite different from Madrid, New York, Tokyo or Beijing.
 

COSMOPOLITANISM AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

Considered formally, rather than psychologically, ‘identities’ are aspects of the differentiating and socially regulating nature of modern life. Modernity, indeed, might be considered, at a level of abstraction above that of a determining set of social institutions (capitalism, technology and industrialism, urbanism, the nation-state system) as the very tendency to form institutions and to generate regulators of social-economic-cultural behavior. Considered in this way, cultural identities are specifically modern entities – ways of categorizing, organizing and regulating the cultural practices, representations and imaginings by which we grasp our existential condition, our personal relations and our attachment to a place or a community.
 

This essentially modern, ‘regulatory’ category of cultural identity consists in self and communal definitions based around specific, usually politically inflected, differentiations: gender, sexuality, class, religion, race and ethnicity, nationality.
 

One rather interesting explanation of the impact of globalization to flow from this is that globalization has been perhaps the most significant force in creating and proliferating cultural identity. Those who regard globalization as a threat to cultural identity tend to imagine identity quite differently.
 

Rather than noticing its structural features, they tend to see identity as something like an existential ‘possession’, an inheritance, a benefit of tradition of continuity with the past. Identity, according to this common view, is more than just a description of the experience of cultural belonging, it is a sort of collective treasure of local communities.
 

However, the crucial 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 of human experience. All cultures construct meaning via practices of collective symbolization: this is probably as close to a cultural universal as we can get. But by no means all historical cultures have ‘constructed’ identity in the regulated institutional forms that are now dominant in the modern West.
 

2. New interesting things I learned

I come to learn mening of Cultural globalization. We need to see globalization at first, in order to figure it out. Globalization means rapidly developing and compact network of interconnections and interdependencies that presents material, social, economic and cultural life in the modern world. Culture constantly motivate and orient people individually and collectively, towards particular choices and actions. So cultural globalization includes meaning of systemic integration of numerous small individual actions into the workings of the social institutions. If someone ask me about relation between Globalization and Culture, I can say that people's choices and actions can be shared at the same time and can be unified by compact network of globalization.
 

3. Discussion

Increasing global connectivity never implies that the world is becoming either economically or politically ‘unified’. The most common way is that cultural globalization implies a form of cultural imperialism especially American culture. What we need to worry about is the entire domination of world cultures through representative brands such as Nike, McDonald so on. Dissemination of dominant culture can threaten the local and minor culture in certain countries even though that doesn't mean dominant culture deprives of feel or uniqueness from local culture. These highly westernized modern society, we should consider effect of dominant western culture and survey the way to preserve each country's unique cultures.

World Values Survey. That women have the same rights as men is essential characteristic of democracy?

This statistics shows how many percents of people reply to question: That women have the same rights as men is essential characteristic of democracy?

People who say that women have the same rights as men is an essential characteristic of democracy have highest ratio with 81.4% in Sweden. And Lowest ratio with 16.5% in Singapore. Sweden people think that women have the same right as men so we can see status of women in Sweden is respected.

On the contraty to this, Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore has kind of lower ratio compared with Netherland and Sweden.

Most impressive thing is that people who answer is crowded majorly to 10 level in Sweden. That means majority of Sweden people thinks STRONGLY that women have the same rights as men.

Different from this, other countries shows a pretty even distribution on answers by degree.

1. What Is Globalization?

1. Summary.

 

Globalization can be both general and specific because it is unavoidably covers a number of standpoints and worldviews in different part of the world. It is specific because we are concerned with the boundary of the distinguishable features what is called globalization. Many different topics are included under the area of globalization, such as global governance, global citizenship, human rights, migration and so on. Regardless of attempt to produce systematic way of analysing globalization, major respect globalization is an essentially controversial concept. Many books and articles indicate that there is no accepted definition of globalization but that authors try to provide one. We can understand that many people in developing countries are reluctant to accept definitions of globalization driving from more cultivated societies. And there is much deviation  about globalization from on civilization to another. For these reasons, a number of scholars talk about globalization in many ways.
Velho(1997) has spoken of globalization as and object and horizon. By Velho's view, globalization can be understood that world which is considerd whole is moving.

The Dimensions of globalization
Many books and articles on globalization suppose that there are three major dimensions: the economic, the political and the cultural. For example, Ritzer insisted concept called McDonaldization. Nevertheless, in spite of attemps to spread the consumption of goods of services around the world it is necessary to adapt brands to local circumstances.

The Form of Globalization
The issue of the form of globalization was raised most by Immanuel Wallerstein. Many scholars have used aspects of his work in quoting this topic. Therefore, Wallerstein raised an critically important point in the early stages of his work. We can say that the world has not become a single place and we reject the unidimensional, economic approach to globalization by Wallerstein's view.

Glocalization
The concept of glocalization has received so much attention within business studies. The problem that accelerated the introduction of the concept of glocalization was concerned about relationship between the global and the local. It is hard to say that local being is opposite of global being. Rather than speaking of an tension between the local and global, it is good to say that these are different sides of the same coin.

2. Interesting items I have learned.
I really fancy tang-su-uk, fried pork with sweet pineapple sauce. By globalization, tang-su-uk is spreaded from China to Korea. But by glocalization, we adapted tang-su-uk to Korean appetite. I can learn that Globalization and Glocalization is not just opposite meaning by this case. Glocalization gives off nuance that something is confined to certain area. But actually, glocalization generates new kind of culture by imitating culture from other countries. In conclusion,  tang-su-uk is the gorgeous output of interaction btween Globalization and Glocalization.

3. Discussion
I think globalization can influence whole world by good way. However, when globalization is getting increase and dominating major culture pervades to the globe, problem that cultures from every countries can be same can happen. So we need to delve into things that globalization is indeed desirable to the world or not. And if not, we need to think about how can we make globalization influence the world in good way.