.

Thursday, March 7, 2019

Americanization Versus National Culture Essay

Changes argon realities of life regardless of adepts origin, skin color, beliefs and traditions. These are unavoidable details that affect all backing creatures on earth in both behaviors-good and bad. Like all new(prenominal) changes, innovation(a)isation is whiz concept born as early as 1960s and has speedyly influenced literally all the great unwasheds even those at the rim of the world. In fact, the United Nations Organization (UNO) declared the 1960s as the get across of worldwide development (Dass, Rakesh 2008).Drivers of orbiculateization include economic, political, heathen and social factors that last led to the spread and elimi realm of traditions and practices in all aspects of human life. The rear end line is that globalization has two faces the beneficial and the devastating one. Ones point of job will depend on which side is he in at the moment. Although the reality that globalization has been advantageous in approximately ways, this paper would try to prove that globalization has more devastating effectuate especially on human refining and identity.In particular, this paper would standardized to point out the multi-faceted risks posed by globalization trend in South East Asiatic nations. Cultural differences are sacred things that all(prenominal) person is required to respect. It is this culture and tradition that South East Asian nations are rich of and their exclusive history will prove this argument right. floriculture is white plagued by the organizers of society politicians, theologians, academics, and families to impose and ensure lay, the basics of which change over time as need dictates (Rothkopf, David 1997). It is this culture that identifies Asians from the Americans and the Europeans.The differences should non however be treated as walls that hinder other nation to relate with others because the significance of international relations for national development should as well as be ac familiarityd. It happ ened however that globalization forced each nation to point-blank not only their doors merely also their windows to let the influence of the horse opera culture peep in and eventually seep deep into its culture and tradition. Globalization and the technological revolution will also lay dismantle a significant impact on the diversity and convergence of cultures (Huntington, Samuel 1993, p. 22). We can take in culture in its two substances.The first meaning encompasses a peoples lifestyle, folkways, traditions, art, literature, dance, music and so on. Culture by this definition has to be preserved, nurtured and enriched. It links people to the origins of whom and what they are. It is what binds them together. It gives them their identity beyond the family. It is the source of their sense of self-worth. It imparts meaning to their lives. The diversity of peoples cultures and the interaction among them enrich the human race. Culture comprehends a peoples set of values and attitud es, their outlook on life, their ways of thinking and working, and their mindsets.It is peoples cultures in this sense that globalization and technology are disrupting. In this sense, cultures cod to adjust in order for people and nations and sections to be competitive in the global economy (Achenbach, Joel 2001, p. 17). If accomplishment and technology, especially data and communications technology and biotechnology, are the arena and weapons for global competition, nations and companies check to undertake a massive re-allocation of resources to education, training, research and development, and the infrastructure for the knowledge industries. National and corporate priorities countenance to be reset.Legal assumptions and institutional arrangements have to be re-examined. Just as importantly, peoples mindsets have to change. They have to acquire a scientific bent, develop a certain(p) severity in their thinking, and cultivate the capacity and inclination to turn knowledge in to operable applications. People have to develop the willingness to question knowledge that is handed down and challenge intellectual authority and be allowed to do so. Personal relationships have to be tempered by the objective application of law and rules in the conduct of government and business.In sum, the proverbial paradigm shift must take place. Language, religion, political and legal systems, and social customs are the legacies of victors and marketers and rebound the judgment of the marketplace of ideas throughout popular history (Rothkopt, David 1997). Rothkopt also worried that culture is often seen as living artifacts, bits and pieces that are being passed from contemporaries to generation through the processes of indoctrination, popular acceptance, and unthinking adherence to old ways.This way, cultural differences lead one nation to consider globalization a panic to ones culture and eventually to ones identity. Whether it is the rapid proliferation of Starbucks in Tokyo, changing realities of the real estate market in great Vancouver, the recent boom in Korean popular music and TV dramas in Taipei, or the widespread employment of Filipino maids in Hong Kong, the model of everyday life in many cities in the Asia Pacific region are comprised of increasingly transnational elements.Intensification of orthogonal direct investment, trade, cross-national corporate alliances and mergers, cultural exchanges, and university tie-ups have fortified world-wide links among people, organizations, regions, and governments of divers(a) nation-states. Terms much(prenominal) as global economy, cultural diversity, and global environment have wended their way into the lexicons of major(ip) business schools, while at the same time, a form of demonstrations and discontents have been stuffed into the category of the anti-globalization movement. Observing these trends and changes is an easy enough task, requiring little more than a walk along any major comm ercial route in any major city, or a casual perusing of university course catalogues. How one analyses and understands the changes associated with globalization are another(prenominal) issue, one that presents a considerably more complex intellectual problem. Does globalization writ-large promote greater understanding of cultural similarities and differences, or does it merely diffuse a wider present of simplistic and essentialist stereotypes?Does globalization propagate exploitation and income disparity, or does it offer the individual freedom of choice and convenience of standardization? Do these shifts bring the world closer together, consuming the same hamburgers in a new global community, or is this a homogenizing cultural imperialism, obliterating local cultures in MacWorld synchronicity? How does the linkup of global and local inform individual and collective identities and cultures? First, the historical scope behind globalization needs to be kept in mind. slice there a re some obvious discontinuities as well as continuities, European expansion, modern compoundism, modernization, and globalization engraft different media for the intensification of global ties. For example, certain clothing practices for men in the Asia Pacific ( such as wearing ties in suffocating humid midsummer heat) were initially disseminated via Western European imperialism and colonialism. The use of modern statistical methods to measure economic output is yet another example of a global standard originally propagated through the practices of colonial administrations throughout the region.This is not to suggest that the process of globalization can be explained solely by tracing the expansion of European notions of civilization and contemporaneity (both preconditions which need to be examined critically before blind invocation) or that there is a universal teleology that history must inevitably follow, but to point out that the decoupling of cultural experience from partic ular geographic locales is not an unprecedented phenomenon.By acknowledging the historical precedents, we may focus our analysis on what might be different or new about the term globalization or whether we ought to discard the term entirely due to the absence seizure of any meaningful conceptual or descriptive value-added. For example, some scholars have argued, however vaguely, that the speed, scale, and scope of these changes and flows have accelerated over the last fifty dollar bill years. The oft-cited acceleration in the development and diffusion of communication technologies has facilitated the dissemination of information and intensified financial transactions.Thus, while commodity trade may be less global than in pre-1945 years, the amount of money traded in foreign currency exchange dealings or the capital flows through various investments is more intense now than before. Second, it is important to examine the underlying assumptions and operate definitions undergirding mu ch of the debate. The ways concepts such as culture or global or local are defined invariably affect the analytical approach taken. For example, culture is a frequently contested term.Many disciplines such as anthropology, having devoted considerable efforts to grappling with the concept, consider it a profound analytical issue. Conversely, some approaches in other disciplines might exclude it from analysis, olfactory modality that culture is too vague a black box to constitute a meaningful independent variable. If one takes the former view, cultural industries and exchanges are central to any understanding of any economic, political, social, and technological change.If one adheres to the latter(prenominal) approach, then it delineates sense to distinguish between globalization, confined to economic activities, and internationalization, utilise to cultural interactions. In another example, some scholars invoke Manichean contrasts between an idealized local or traditional culture and a jeopardise global or modern culture. If one associates local with sites of national faithfulness and resistance to rising tide of global capitalists, local culture should presumably be protected and maintained.If one defines local culture as reactionary, ignorant, and parochial, than one would presumably wish that global culture enlightens local culture. Such possible normative values need to be fore-grounded for any meaningful intervention to occur. Further complicating the issue is the fact that there are increasingly less pockets of isolated, undiluted fonts of local identity left, at least in the major urban centers. For example, some commentators in Korea assert that McDonalds is undermining traditional Korean culinary culture, and promoting obesity in young Korean children.However, the employees and managers of McDonalds in Korea are Korean, as are its customers (Choe, Yong-shik. 2001). For better or for worse, the reality is that to make it more essential the visi ons of good local and traditional cultures elide the fact that cultures at the global, national, regional, local, and individual levels change over time, and are often retroactively reconstituted to serve political interests of a particular moment, place, or institution.

No comments:

Post a Comment