Globalisation Will Inevitably Lead to a Homogenisation of World Culture - Essay Example

Running head: Globalization will not lead to homogenization of world culture. Student’s name Institution Course Professor Date Introduction Globalization has become a complex phenomenon which has become a contested issue around the world. It has allowed the expansion of flows of materials, objects and symbols around the world and proliferation of institutions and organizations. With the advances of technology, transport and communication, globalization has led to integration of capitalist economies, assimilation of social attitudes and incorporation of global regimes (Lechner & Boli, 2008). However, it has been seen to have far reaching effects that range from delivering economic prosperity and also source of ills to people throughout the world. The world culture includes cultural complex of foundational assumptions, forms of knowledge and prescriptions of actions that underlie globalized flows, institutions and organizations. To the local peoples, their culture provides a sense of dignity, continuity and security to them (Lechner & Boli, 2008). Impacts of globalization will not lead to the homogenization of the world culture. To substantiate this thesis statement discussions were made. Firstly, globalization engenders and support differentiation and diversity of culture as oppose to the homogenization of the world culture. For instance, the expansion of transnational networks has permitted national cultures such as from India and United States country of origin to be intermixed to one another. This led to emergence of new and distinct ways of expressing the world (Lechner & Boli, 2008). Multinational companies such as Coca cola, Pepsi and McDonald took greater consideration on the distinctive tastes of their potential customers with a view to foster the acceptance of their products and services. The move did not allowed homogeneity of world culture because most customers wanted to keep their unique culture from being entirely similar with other cultures. In addition, any new cultural mélanges in Japan were allowed to undergo creolization process in their own distinct ways. New musical genres and other art work when they find their way around the world, they yielded new forms of localized diversity (Agrawal & Ebrary, 2008). However the expression of these diverse forms of both local and global interactions could not contribute to a standardized and hegemonic world culture. With globalization, the local people allowed new cultural elements to be integrated to their cultures. However, care was taken into consideration to ensure that basic identities were equally acknowledged and retained (Anheier & Isar, 2010). In addition, religion globalization does not lead to homogenization of the world culture. This was attributed to the ever growing prominence of third world voices in global religious institutions. Religion traditions had diverse views of a good society which have end up promoting cultural pluralism and conflict (Lechner & Boli, 2008). The shared global values and norms were interpreted differently among the people of the world. Therefore, many religions were able to mediate the pluralizing effect of world culture. Although globalization could homogenize some aspects of the economy and the society, affirmation of distinct cultural identities were still taken into consideration. This was illustrated with the current variation of the cultures of Asia and United States as it was in 40 years ago. Also there is more diversity than it was 100 years ago, for example in London where there is availability of Indian, Chinese, Japanese, and French and Indonesian food (Anheier & Isar, 2010). Francis Fukuyama rejected the notion that globalization will lead to cultural homogeneity. Mario Vargas did argue that the era of globalization does not erode the local cultures but instead liberates them from the ontological conformity of nationalism. The key principles such as efficiency, calculability, predictability and control used in McDonald’s fast food restaurant showed the emergence of the unification of life styles cultural symbols and modes of behaviour. However, globalization contributed largely to the fusion of both global and local cultures and not the emergence of homogenous world culture (Bhawuk, 2008). In India, globalization allowed local cultures to be reinforces despite its homogenizing effects. For instance, satellite television allowed many regional channels to be increased in their numbers and also able to telecast multiple Indian contents (Bhawuk, 2008). Therefore local Indians got privileged to identify with their respective regional ties. Globalization ensured that individual freedom was promoted with the revitalization of cultures and other related cultural artifacts through foreign markets, influences and technologies. The outcomes of cultural mixing included; Paul Gauguin painting in Polynesia, the ferment of ideas that came from Eastern Europe’s Jewish Diaspora, the great British curry and African rhythms in rock and roll (Boli, 2005). Despite the flooding by media content especially from the dominant cultural group, cultural identities remained intact in the face of globalization process. Thus global culture was not homogenized. A strong resurgence of cultural identity can be attributed to the political restructuring that occur at the end of cold war and the impacts of great economic freedom. Moreover with globalization, diverse cultures were taken to many remote parts of the world (Bhawuk, 2008). The cultural identity proved to give a global significance of the local knowledge, sense of self and the entire nation. Globalization does not mean homogeneity but rather it fostered and allowed for cultural differences to exist. For instance, Hofstede confirmed that advances in information technology allowed cultural variations to be sharpened in various states around the world (Bailey, &James, 2010). Furthermore, it allowed interaction and exchange of diverse culture to be advocated in the entire world. Berber noted that indigenous people could react sharply when faced with the homogenizing effect of globalization. These reactions confirmed the existence of the local traditions and practices (Hollis, 2010). It offered a privilege to enrich the entire world in a cultural perspective. The cultural exchange among the people promoted diversity and tolerance because ideas and practices were exchanged freely and appreciated by the recipients (Redford & Brosius, 2006). Rapid transportation, global communication and commerce have accelerated change. This made cultures not to remain isolated or static. Globalization does not contribute to cultural homogenization (Bailey, &James, 2010).The protagonists of multiculturalism maintained that all cultures around the globe are authentic in their own terms and United States had no authority to impose its beliefs and values onto other cultures around the world. Despite the growing face of inflows of foreign people, music, films and other goods, the local people uphold the national sovereignty, safeguard their national culture and also preserve their ancient heritage (Hollis, 2010). The government policies involved in the regulation of advance of economic globalization such as the movement of people, goods and ideas ensured that cultural freedoms were promoted at all levels. In addition, it encouraged the invention of new cultural products. Globalization of the market place did not imply the homogenization of the world culture. However, this process helped many people to be exposed to diverse foreign cultures either through commerce, trade or media (Bailey, &James, 2010). Furthermore, globalization contributed to greater diversity and differentiation of cultures. This improved knowledge and understanding of diverse cultures, organizations and institutions across the globe. Consequently, globalization has increase the means through which citizens of one state can actively take part in another country in terms of cultural, economic and political life (Hollis, 2010). The culture of a nation-state is homogenous and integrated but this culture is not visible on the global scale even during the present era of globalization. Globalization increases interconnectedness and interdependence across national boundaries. These processes gave rise to growth in hybridization and heterogeneity within both national and regional cultures (Boli, 2005). This was experienced by Latin America. Although globalization is about markets, it too involves itself in compression and expansion of time and space. This encouraged cultural awareness and self awareness especially in an increasingly interconnected world (Boli, 2005). Nederveen Pieterse (1995, 2004) noted that globalization does not mean homogenization. He sees Japan as increasingly diverse which revealed new layers of meaning where others encounter Japanese society. Furthermore, food, music, fashion and dance have been joined by new expressive cultures and an expensive new individuality in Japan. Thus the current Japanese society does not put great emphasis on homogeneity, coherence and timelessness of indigenous cultures (Hollis, 2010). China did not want to see its culture being altered by the invasion of homogenized systems (Yong, 1997). Chinese people are subjects who can either reject or integrate culture. Sense of togetherness due to globalization does not have conflict with cultural diversity (Hollis, 2010). This has made people to be much more concerned about the uniqueness of their culture. In this new era of globalization, diversity of people and their cultures are respected. This amounted to emergence of global community which was characterized by unity in pluralism. In deed globalization does not lead to homogenization of world culture. References Agrawal, U., & Ebrary, I. (2008). Globalization poverty and culture. New Delhi: Global media Anheier, P. H. K., Isar, P. Y. R., & EBL Ebook Library. (2010). Cultures and globalization. London: SAGE Publications. Bhawuk, D. P. S. (2008). Globalization and indigenous cultures: Homogenization or differentiation? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32(4), 305-317. Boli, J. (2005). Contemporary developments in world culture. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 46(5-6), 383-404. Frank J. Lechner, John Boli, (2008).World Culture: Origins and Consequences, Wiley, 2008 Frank J. Lechner, John Boli, (2011). The Globalization ReaderEditorsEdition4, John Wiley & Sons. Garrick Bailey, &James Peoples (2010).Essentials of Cultural Anthropology, Cengage Learning. Hollis, N. (2010). Globalization does not imply homogenization. Marketing News, 44(11), 8. Hopper, P. (2007). Understanding cultural globalization. Cambridge: Polity. Redford, K. H., & Brosius, J. P. (2006). Diversity and homogenization in the endgame. Global Environmental Change, 16(4), 317-319. http://Policybooks.com/global/pdf/GTReader2eTomlinson (accessed 06th November 2012) Wang Yong. (1997). Globalization won’t be homogenization. China Daily, pp. 4. Read More