Join in on our 'Guess the Rep' Competition! >>

Globalisation

hi there

i have been set an essay asking me whether the 'world is a global village'? Now, obviously i can answer for how it could be seen as a global village, in regards to globalisation, but how do i go about arguing against this notion?
All ideas would be appreciated.

Many thanks

Reply 1

Chris.Livesey

Is this an A2 or an undergraduate essay?

Reply 2

DENNIS_MENACE

oh yeh, forgot to mention that. It's an undergraduate essay thats why i can't get help from teachers and i have contacted various tutors but have been told to try and do it independently. I'm not even doing it at degree level (wrongly chose it as an extra module) and didnt do it either at A2 so i really am lost. Might just have to persist with pestering the tutor for help but if anyone could advise me i would really appreciate it.

Reply 3

Chris.Livesey

I'll try to dig-out some pointers / info for you tomorrow...

Reply 4

Chris.Livesey

Although you don’t say what the exact question was, your answer could involve thinking about three aspects to the “global village”.

1. Definition - McLuhan’s (1962) popularisation of the idea reflects what Giddens has called space-time distanciation - in basic terms, the idea of collapsing barriers to communication previously hindered by time and space considerations. In one sense (the communicative) movement has probably been made towards a “global village” (although we could add the qualifier that this may not be the same as thinking in terms of a “globalised village” - an important distinction in an area (“globalisation theory”) not known for the precision of its conceptualisations…

In critical terms you could question the significance of this “communication revolution” in terms of its possible impact on (and shaping by) three theoretically discrete dimensions to globalisation:

2. Economic - despite the hype about “globalised production, distribution and exchange” the (empirical) jury is still out on this one. You might like to think if you can identify any truly global corporations (not as easy as it sounds). The evidence here is that corporations still operate within clear-cut economic blocs and spheres of reference / influence.

Political - similarly, although there is (and has been for some time) evidence of various forms of “globalised political hegemony” this is both not particularly new (think about Imperialist adventures in the past) and, arguably, not strong evidence for the development of a global political culture (even if you stretch the definition of political culture to breaking point by arguing “capitalism” is a political culture it’s debateable as to whether you would still be able to identify a “global village” scenario here).

Cultural - this is the most fruitful area to consider in terms of globalisation and the possibility of a global village based on cultural similarities, uniformities and convergences. Even here, however, there’s a debate over whether globalised cultures actually exist (outside of the idea that instantaneous electronic communication may involve the potential for such a situation - although this is, once again, highly debateable).

3. The “global village” involves either a combination of economic, political and cultural convergences / hegemonies or is indicative of one global dimension (probably “the cultural”, but “in reality” how do we disentangle the three?).

If you’re looking for evidence against the idea of a global village I think there are plenty of arguments you could muster here (from looking at cultural differences, through political differences and economic divergences) - the choice is yours, I think.

I haven’t got the time to go further into this, but if you Google “Economic globalisation” / “Political globalisation” and “Cultural globalisation” you should find the arguments / evidence you need for your answer.

Reply 5

DENNIS_MENACE

That is brilliant thanks! I have had a look on the internet but it seemed to be more about general globalisation rather than whether we are not a global village. i have got the Giddens 'sociology' text as well as Mcluhans 'Global Village'. may i ask where u got your info from?

Reply 6

Chris.Livesey

Where did I get my information? Errm...it's all inside my head (although I probably got some of it from somewhere, once upon a time). :biggrin:

Here's a list of info / links you might like to check out (not all will be useful...).

Also, when you focus directly on the concept of a global village this has (historically) been taken to mean cultural globalisation. You can critique this in a number of ways:

1. Question the concept itself (what does it actually mean, are there competing meanings, etc.).

2. Question the concept of globalisation (different things to different people, different dimensions, etc.).

3. Use empirical evidence to question "globalisation of culture" - the problem with "globalisation" is that it's generally expressed in a tautological way - as both a cause and effect of "something" (whatever that something may be - a real problem I think).

Hope this helps.

http://www.sociology.emory.edu/globalization/debates.html

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/theorizingglobalization.pdf.

Journal of World-Systems Research, Vol V, 2, 1999, 143-162
http://jwsr.ucr.edu/

http://www.infed.org/biblio/defining_globalization.htm

Frank Lechner What is globalization ?

Globalization broadly refers to the expansion of global linkages, the organization of social life on a global scale, and the growth of a global consciousness, hence to the consolidation of world society. Such an ecumenical definition captures much of what the term commonly means, but its meaning is disputed. It encompasses several large processes; definitions differ in what they emphasize. Globalization is historically complex; definitions vary in the particular driving force they identify. The meaning of the term is itself a topic in global discussion; it may refer to "real" processes, to ideas that justify them, or to a way of thinking about them. The term is not neutral; definitions express different assessments of global change. Among critics of capitalism and global inequality, globalization now has an especially pejorative ring.
The following definitions represent currently influential views:
• "[T]he inexorable integration of markets, nation-states, and technologies to a degree never witnessed before-in a way that is enabling individuals, corporations and nation-states to reach around the world farther, faster, deeper and cheaper than ever before . . . . the spread of free-market capitalism to virtually every country in the world " (T.L. Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, 1999, p. 7-8).
• The compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole . . . . concrete global interdependence and consciousness of the global whole in the twentieth century" (R. Robertson, Globalization, 1992, p. 8).
• "A social process in which the constraints of geography on social and cultural arrangements recede and in which people become increasingly aware that they are receding" (M. Waters, Globalization, 1995, p. 3).
• "The historical transformation constituted by the sum of particular forms and instances of . . . . [m]aking or being made global (i) by the active dissemination of practices, values, technology and other human products throughout the globe (ii) when global practices and so on exercise an increasing influence over people's lives (iii) when the globe serves as a focus for, or a premise in shaping, human activities" (M. Albrow, The Global Age, 1996, p. 88).
• Integration on the basis of a project pursuing "market rule on a global scale" (P. McMichael, Development and Social Change, 2000, p. xxiii, 149).
• "As experienced from below, the dominant form of globalization means a historical transformation: in the economy, of livelihoods and modes of existence; in politics, a loss in the degree of control exercised locally . . . . and in culture, a devaluation of a collectivity's achievements . . . . Globalization is emerging as a political response to the expansion of market power . . . . [It] is a domain of knowledge." (J.H. Mittelman, The Globalization Syndrome, 2000, p. 6).
Competing Conceptions of Globalization
In this Journal of World-Systems Research article, Leslie Sklair argues that globalization encompasses a distinct set of changes, which can be studied from four perspectives he labels world-systems, global culture, global society and global capitalism.
Economist Schools Brief
In a series of articles, The Economist systematically examines different aspects and views of globalization and argues that it is neither all-pervasive nor irreversible.
Globalisation
This brief OneWorld guide argues that globalization is a strategy of liberalization that becomes an economic nightmare for the poor.
Globalization as the End and the Beginning of History
Arif Dirlik, Duke University, argues that globalization is not only a process but also a paradigm, a novel way of thinking about the world that has contradictory implications.
Globalization: A World-Systems Perspective
In this Journal of World-Systems Research article, Christopher Chase-Dunn outlines the main claims of world-systems theory and argues that global capitalism provokes socialist forms of resistance that can lead to a more just system.
Globalization: Challenges and Opportunities
G.B. Madison, McMaster University, reviews economic, political, and cultural aspects of globalization to argue that a new form of capitalism is emerging.
Globalization or the Age of Transition?
Immanuel Wallerstein, SUNY Binghamton, argues that globalization is a form of discourse advanced by powerful groups that describes old features of the world economy but ignores the uncertain transition the world system is actually going through.
Issues and Debates: Towards Defining Globalization
Global Policy Forum links to articles on globalization.
No Globalization
Paul Treanor argues that most analyses of globalization express a mythical belief system falsely assuming that nation-states once were independent and now have collapsed.
The Globalization of Finance
Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve (U.S. central bank), argues that the expansion of efficient global financial markets is largely beneficial but also presents new risks.
The Lexus and the Olive Tree
Book excerpts and columns by Thomas Friedman argue that the "new era of globalization became the dominant international system at the end of the twentieth century" in an irreversible process affecting everyone.
5. Does globalization diminish cultural diversity?
There are many reasons to think that globalization might undermine cultural diversity:
• multinational corporations promote a certain kind of consumerist culture, in which standard commodities, promoted by global marketing campaigns exploiting basic material desires, create similar lifestyles--"Coca-Colanization"
• backed by the power of certain states, Western ideals are falsely established as universal, overrriding local traditions--"cultural imperialism"
• modern institutions have an inherently rationalizing thrust, making all human practices more efficient, controllable, and predictable, as exemplified by the spread of fast food--"McDonaldization"
• the United States exerts hegemonic influence in promoting its values and habits through popular culture and the news media--"Americanization"
But there are also good reasons to think that globalization will foster diversity:
• interaction across boundaries leads to the mixing of cultures in particular places and practice--pluralization
• cultural flows occur differently in different spheres and may originate in many places--differentiation
• integration and the spread of ideas and images provoke reactions and resistance--contestation
• global norms or practices are interpreted differently according to local tradition; the universal must take particular forms--glocalization
• diversity has itself become a global value, promoted through international organizations and movements, not to mention nation-states--institutionalization
To some extent, the issue of diversity is now the subject of global cultural politics, and therefore unlikely to be settled by argument and evidence. Scholars can offer some cautions:
• whether diversity diminishes depends on what yardstick you use (e.g., linguistic diversity may be more threatened than culinary diversity)
• homogenization and heterogenization may actually operate in tandem or even reinforce each other

Culture of Liberty
Article by Peruvian author Mario Vargas Llosa argues that while some past ways of life will be eclipsed in globalization, the process also liberates people culturally by undermining the ideological conformity of nationalism

The Myths of Cultural Globalization
Paper by Joana Breidenbach and Ina Zukrigl disputes homogenization and clash of civilizations scenarios by showing how ethnographic work points to diversifying effects of globalization

World Culture Reports
1995 UNESCO world culture report (available online) and 2000 report (overview and statistical tables) chart extent of cultural diversity, promote inclusion of culture in development policies, and foster respect for all tolerant cultures in "rainbow river"; site also contains other material on UNESCO's work to preserve cultural heritage and stimulate pluralism

Can globalization be controlled?
The issue of controlling or regulating globalization concerns elite officials of states and intergovernmental organizations as well as opponents of neoliberalism in pursuit of global justice. They often share a sense that the current thrust of globalization may be irreversible and out of anyone's control. They have several good reasons to think so:
• one of globalization's driving forces, technological innovation, is inherently unpredictable
• globalization results from the interplay of many parties (economic and political), none of which exerts dominant influence
• old regulatory agencies devised by states cannot control processes that exceed their territorial authority
• apart from minimal rules of competition itself, the world lacks a single set of rules that serves to regulate transnational behavior
This concern has given rise to a now-fashionable interest in "global governance," or the design of institutions that authoritatively manage and regulate actions, processes, and problems of global scope or effect. While some believe such governance is desirable but lacking, others think it is in fact emerging in the work of various international organizations and groups active in civil society. Though advocates of global governance portray it as enhancing democracy, defenders of traditional democratic values and state interests have questioned such claims.

Commission on Global Governance
UN-supported commission of 28 leaders produced influential 1995 report "Our Global Neighbourhood" and 1999 report "The Millennium Year and the Reform Process"; proposes to strengthen global governance without creating world government, while respecting the "rights of people and the role of civil society"

J. Brecher and T. Costello, Global village or global pillage: economic reconstruction from the bottom up (Boston, MA: South End Press, 1994).

http://www.psa.ac.uk/cps/1995%5Cboot.pdf

Reply 7

ouijaouija

mate, don't help him out too much, though i haven't checked the links etc, its wrong.