Abstract: Abstract: Abstract
Abstract: Abstract: Abstract
Abstract: Abstract: Abstract
INTRODUCTION:
Understanding Globalization:
What is globalization? Is it the integration of economic, political, and
cultural systems across the globe? Or is it Americanization of world culture
and United States dominance of world affairs? Is globalization a force for
economic growth, prosperity, and democratic freedom? Or is it a force for
environmental devastation, exploitation of the developing world, and
suppression of human rights? In sum, is globalization "good" or "bad"?
Globalization is the acceleration and intensification of interaction and
integration among the people, companies, and governments of different
nations. In the 1990s "globalization" has become a particularly fashionable
way to analyze changes in the international economy and in world politics.
Advances in technology and modern communications, we
are told, have unleashed new contacts and intercourse
among peoples, social movements, transnational
corporations and governments. The result is a set of
processes which have affected world politics in a new and
extraordinary way. Yet the argument itself is not a new
one—nor is the phenomenon. Globalization is neither good
nor bad. Rather, certain aspects of the complex, and multi-
faceted process of globalization have impacts that can be
viewed in different ways depending on the values at stake.
Globalization has become one of the most popular
buzzword of our time frequently used by people.
Globalization is the increasing interaction of national
economy with that of the First World which ultimately
aims at creating a state of frictionless capitalism. It is a
process of creating a global market in which increasingly
all nations are forced to participate
Here is what Amartya Sen a Nobel Laureate and
Economist has to say: “Global interaction, rather than
insulated isolation, has been the basis of economic
progress in the world. Trade, along with migration,
communication, and dissemination of scientific and
technical knowledge, has helped to break the dominance of
rampant poverty and the pervasiveness of ‘nasty, brutish
and short’ lives that characterized the world. And yet,
despite all the progress, life is still severely nasty, brutish
and short for a large part of the world population. The
great rewards of globalized trade have come to some, but
not to others.”
35
Concept of Culture:
Culture specifies what behaviors are desirable or
proscribed for members of the culture (norms), for
individuals in the social structure (roles), as well as the
important goals and Principles in one’s life (values).
Culture also specifies how things are to be evaluated
(Carnevale, 1995). This implies that people of different
cultures will have greater difficulty In interaction, in
understanding, and in valuation. Culture is ones
recognition and identity through which he is being
recognized. Culture has been defined differently by people.
The different definitions attach to culture is based on the
differences in the orientation of the people. According
Ekeh (1989), culture is constructing used in an attempt to
analyze and integrate events and ideas in broad spectrum
of areas of society. Jekayinfa (2002) states that from wider
perspective, culture includes the total repertoire of human
action which are socially transmitted from generation to
generation. Tyler (1871), in Jekayinfa (2002), views
culture as configuration of institutions and modes of life.
Furthermore, he states that culture is the complex while
which includes knowledge, belief, arts, morals, laws,
customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by
man as member of the society.
7
Among the feature that
characterize culture is that has its own personality and
identity. The fact that we are human does not mean we are
the same. However, it is noted that every moment, we are
being transformed, always growing like the cell in our
bodies. Culture changes exactly the same way as the
human being change. In other words, culture is dynamic.
According to Odiora the transformation of culture is
gradual and not sudden. Obiora contends that culture is a
continuous process of change. In spite of the change
culture continues to give a community a sense of dignity,
continuity, security and binds society together. Another
attribute of culture is that it is learned, acquired,
transmitted or diffused through contact or other means of
communication flow from one generation to another. For
instance, in the old days a young Nigerian Girl from
Yoruba culture would knee down to greet their elders. For
the Britain a Girl may stretch hand shake. In the modern
day third world countries, absolute kneeing down may be
fading as noted by Tardif (2002) opines that culture is not
genetically transmitted rather it takes place by process of
absorption from the social environment or through
deliberate instruction. This is to say that culture is learned.
Such learning does not occur through natural inheritance.
Probably that is why Jekayinfa (2002) maintains that the
man learns culture through the process of socialization,
enumeration, personal experience and through deliberate
endocrine nation or teaching. It should be noted that
learning of culture is a lifelong process. That is, learning of
culture is from birth of death. Further observes that what
is learnt differ from society to society and from one stage to another. However, all that
is learnt is geared towards the realization of the goal of the society. Culture
specifies what behaviors are desirable or proscribed for members of the culture
(norms), for individuals in the social Structure (roles), as well as the important goals
and principles in one’s life (values). Culture Also specifies how things are to be
evaluated. This implies that people of different cultures will have greater difficulty in
interaction, in understanding, and in valuation. To sum up, culture as a way of
human life is constantly undergoing change. Certain developments in modem times
have helped to accelerate this process of change in an exponential manner
involving two major consequences: (a) reduction in cultural diversity; and (b)
increasing hegemonic control in the name of free trade and freedom of communication,
at all levels. The implications of this change are varied and there are no indications that
they are in any way increasing the social, material or spiritual well-being of
humanity. There, are different cultures across the globe but it is quite clear that
these cultures have been affected by the western domination. It was the planning of
west that how to rule over the world, especially over those who were
underdeveloped and marginalized. What they did? They projected their type of polity,
consumer and pop culture, capitalist economy, and this all was made in the name of
globalization, to bolster and enhance their power and potential and to pave a way to
start worst form of colonization. It is obvious that no culture of the world remain in
its same conditions now we can see it as a mix culture but it is wrong to say a mix
culture rather to quote it is the western culture, which can also be explained as a
cultural imperialism, where “have-nots” have no status and dignity but it remains a
world of “haves” those who are capitalists. When you are saying that we are the
custodians and protectors of freedom then why not there is freedom for others as for
as performance of culture is concerned. Let us return to culture at large.
Globalization is accompanied by a need to homogenize the product, even the cultural
product.8 The more homogenous the product, the greater the market it has weather.
Where ever you go in the world, you will have the same soaps, same toothpaste,
and the same sort of other products that you will find in our country. The
homogenization of the product is the first step in a globalised economy for
maximization of profits by the multinational corporations. Homogenization of products
also has a natural consequence in the homogenization of culture. Studies have
shown that in Sub-Saharan Africa, people may not have anything to eat; they may not
know how to read and write but the moment you show them Walt Disney's Mickey
Mouse, and they will recognize it. This is homogenization of a certain thought
process and homogenization of certain symbols. Homogenization of symbols
requires cultural products to be produced on mass scale. One immediate impact is that
all the rich variations in the cultural legacies will be eliminated in order to create the
homogenized product. This is the essence of culture of globalization -- homogenization
of cultural products and symbols. In some ways the effects of free trade in images
and information are more far-reaching than those of trade in tangible objects, for here
we are talking about forces that
mould minds, tastes and values. Faced with the
inevitability of a high degree of globalization, it is
necessary not to lose sight of the ideal of a better kind of
globalization, an exchange among equals in which cultures
borrow from each other judiciously and selectively, and
where what crosses borders most easily are not brand
names but good ideas. One of the principal concerns about
the new globalization of culture that is supposedly taking
place is that it not only leads to a homogenization of world
culture, but also that it largely represents the
"Americanization" of world cultures. The spread of
American corporations abroad has various consequences
on local cultures, some very visible, and others less
obvious. For example, the influence of American
companies on other countries' cultural identity can be seen
with regard to food, which matters on two levels. First,
food itself is in many countries an integral aspect of the
culture. Second, food restaurants can influence the mores
and habits in societies where they operate.
9
The French are
proud of having a unique cuisine that reflects their culture,
such as crepes and pastries. Because of their pride in their
cuisine, some French people are concerned that U.S.
restaurant chains crowd out their own products with fast
food. Some French people would argue that fast food does
not belong in French society and is of lower quality than
their own. Moreover, restaurant chains not only affect
eating habits, but they also influence the traditions and
mores in countries where they are located. Starbucks
causes cultural concerns in Italy because of the association
that Italians make between coffee and leisurely sidewalk
cafes. Coffee in Italy is more than a drink; it is part of the
way of life and Italian mores. While in the United States it
is common for people to buy takeaway coffee for drinking
in the street or office, in Italy people usually prefer to relax
and chat with peers while drinking coffee. Coffee shops
offer a personal, friendly atmosphere that many Italians
believe a large chain could not provide. Similarly, many
people would prefer to frequent coffee shops that are each
unique, while Starbucks offers a standard formula. Another
example can be seen with the introduction of the
McDonald's restaurant in China. In the past, it was not
considered proper for Chinese children to buy food with
their own money, as they were expected to eat what was
put in front of them. Because of McDonald's marketing to
children, however, kids developed an interest in choosing
their own food when going to McDonald's. After some
time, it became more of a common practice for children to
buy their food with their own money. McDonald's also
popularized birthday parties in China. In the past,
festivities marking a child's birth date were not celebrated
in China. McDonald's established a new tradition by
successfully promoting American-style birthday parties as
part of its marketing strategy. This example may appear
trivial, but it shows that the spread of American companies
in foreign countries can have unexpected consequences. In
contrast to these homogenizing effects, some people would
argue that globalization can also reinforce local cultures. In
India, for example, satellite TV permits an increase in the
number of regional channels, many of which can and do
telecast Indian content. This gives an Indian individual
new opportunity to identify with his regional ties.
Similarly global companies have to take into account the
culture of all the countries where they conduct operations
or sell products. This can also enhance cultural awareness.
Many observers have speculated that the homogenizing
effect of globalization on national cultures in fact tends to
produce a reaction among people, which leads them to
want to reaffirm their own local traditions. Author
Benjamin Barber in particularly has made the case that the
sometimes violent reactions against the West by elements
within Islamic society may be seen in this light. Barber
argues that these movements may be seen as negative
manifestations of a broader desire to reaffirm their
traditional cultural values, against the disruptive onslaught
of Western beliefs. For example, capitalism favors a more
fast-paced environment and a consumer culture, which
differ from the lifestyle that people in some countries are
used to. This is particularly hard to accept for people who
are afraid of change and want to preserve their traditions.
CONCLUSION: