Global concerns were increased about the regulation of nuclear industries and this helped confirm the Soviet Union’s weaknesses as a technological superpower. This expression was exported to other countries and might be used as an example of increasing interpenetration, when the extent of one culture’s expression is exported to other countries. (David Held,2004,p.20)
An infrastructure is the transition of information between different operation systems. For the infrastructure to work it must have a set of rules so that it functions correctly. One of the reasons the Chernobyl crisis happened could be due to dysfunctional communication systems. (David Held,2004,p.20)
There are three positions which sum up the debate on globalization. Globalists see globalization as something that is happening everywhere in the world and the impacts can be felt everywhere. This is something that cannot be resisted or influenced by human intervention. There are two types of globalists: optimistic and pessimistic. Optimistic globalists argue that these changes should be welcome, because they will bring benefits to everyone. They recognize the danger of global environmental pollution, but they argue that if everyone takes some responsibility it can be reduced. (David Held,2004,p.22)
On other side pessimistic globalists do not see, that everyone will benefit from these changes. They emphasize the dominance of major economic and political countries, for example the US or Japan who would be able to bring their own agenda on the world. Also some groups of people such as women or unskilled manual workers may be major victims of globalization. (David Held,2004,p.22)
Inter-nationalists argue that what is happening now is not new and is simply a continuation and progression of the earlier world. They say that globalization as a new phase has been exaggerated. They believe that social and economic activities are regional rather than global. The inter-nationalists see a danger of global inequalities, that the weak and poor could lose further ground to the rich and powerful. (Bob Kelly,2005,p.31)
The last transformationalists argue that contemporary globalization is happening and that it is significant but difficult to quantify. They question the inevitability of its impacts. Some individuals might benefit from a more democratic system of governance, but the unpredictable processes might bring a complex pattern of winners and losers. (Bob Kelly,2005,p.31)
Is globalization new and inevitable? Globalists argue that globalization it is new and that is inevitable. Transformationalists also argue that globalization is new but they think it is inevitable. Nationalists do not think it is new and neither it is inevitable. This essay is going to compare these theories with reference to culture.
Culture is close to everyone and all individuals see the changes which occur. Cultural goods flow from the US or Western countries to the rest of the world and bringing their values in recipient nations, this is called cultural imperialism.
Optimistic globalists argue that cultural globalization is highly significant. People can benefit from free exchange of goods, ideas or information. Twenty years ago, people did not have the opportunity to switch on a personal computer and have all the information which they needed on the internet, so the internet brings benefits and has a large spectrum of use. Rheingold sees the Internet as an electronic forum, where public can debate free from government or institutional control. There have been big changes in the last couple of decades for people, who own televisions or radios. For example “In 1965 there was only 192 millions television receivers compared to 1396 millions television receivers in 1997, in all world.” (David Held,2004,p.50) Public service broadcasting which is a national broadcasting system and is available to all, shows decreasing of viewing time by people. For example “In 1975, 100% of German people were watching national broadcasting, compared to 39% in 1995.”(David Held,2004,p.53)This change is due to cable or satellite. Owners of satellite or cable might watch programs and news from the entire world. There are countries which have far less domestic production, for example Africa, and some parts of Asia, they need to import programs from other countries. (David Held,2004,p.74)
On other side transformalists argue that the significant of globalization is difficult to quantify. In relation to television figures, audience research shows that “throughout the world, domestically produced programs attract highest audience and imports are often filling in off-peak slots.” There are also countries which do not need to import programs because they have their own production facilities, for example the UK, Brazil or Japan. (David Held,2004,p.74) Significance of cultural influence to receiver countries cannot be assumed, as an audience brings their own cultural resources to bear in making sense of television programs. For example “US soap opera Dallas, which was transmitted in over hundred countries during the 1980s, makes different impressions on different countries. Arab groups were sensitive to what they saw as a danger of Western culture and Russians were critical of the politics of Dallas.” (David Held,2004,p.78)
Pessimistic globalists see contemporary cultural globalization as highly significant. They see growing inequalities between those who are “information rich” and “information poor”, not all people have the opportunity to use electricity, communication technologies or access to information. (David Held,2004,p.57) Cultural imperialism can be seen in France. Thirty years ago strong French characteristics and values were obvious and stood out. However now due to global corporations and Western culture France now seems more Westernized which has worked to the advantage of the USA and Western nations.(David Held,2004,p.60) An example of this can be seen in Disneyland in Paris. Language is important for all countries. What is happening in the contemporary globalizes culture is that the English language is beginning to be an international language due to US or Western cultural goods and practices. (David Held,2004,p.63)
Same as Transformationalist also Inter-nationalists argue that the national TV and press remain dominant. Inter-nationalists see cultural globalization as a little significance. They do not say that nothing has changed, but that the changes are not so huge and that are only continuity from the past. The history shows many dramatic transformation of the world hundreds years ago. “Especially between 1850 and 1860 was a dramatic change, when Samuel Morse introduced telegraph; device that changed the world. It was the first device which allowed people to communicate faster than the speed of person on a horse. In 1858 it was successful in connecting two continents by cable, which enables people to communicate from one continent to another within a few hours, before that it took even few years.” (David Held,2004,p.70) The history of telegraph suggests that there is nothing new about recent communication technologies and global communication.
The Internet might be new, but globalization had already begun. Examples can be seen in the Victorian times when two continents were connected by telegraph. Before this globalization existed when people from different continents transferred goods such as food or inventions. However globalization may be seen to provide more benefits now in the form of the internet as it is more efficient. Globalization may be inevitable in the way transformationalists suggest but it is very unlikely that globalization will not continue to connect and unite all societies within the world. Globalization is dependent upon the people within each separate society and their willingness to cooperate.
Word count: 1516
References: Kelly, B. and Prokhovnik, R. (2004) ‘Economic Globalization?’ in Held, D. (ed) A Globalizing World? Culture, Economics, Politics, London, Routledge/The Open University