Cultural Globalization / Tae-yong Lim

Information Sociology

2013052090 Tae-yong Lim

1.     Summary

 This article is about cultural globalization. Tomlinson first explains its components to understand cultural globalization. Globalization means a network in which the interconnections and dependencies that characterize material, social, economic and cultural life in modern society are rapidly increasing and dense. The society we live in is connected to almost everything. This is unprecedented, and this growing connection is routine in our lives. In other words, globalization is already deeply in our lives. At the heart of globalization is the capitalist economy. To understand cultural globalization, capitalism can not escape. But capitalism should not be seen as a superior position in the process of globalization.

 First, the economic realm is the domain of the mechanical system, which is beyond the influence of culture. Second, the misunderstanding of capitalism distorts our understanding of the cultural realm. We often misunderstand cultural globalization as 'cultural imperialism' or 'Americanization'. But Clifford Geertz says that "culture is not a power, something to which social events can be causally attributed." In other words, the cultural process is shared in a social context. Culture is a fundamental context in which human beings arise. So even though human behavior may seem to follow the logic of economic necessity, it depends on the self, which is a component of cultural life. Tomlinson says that it is important to understand globalization from a cultural point of view because culture is made and made available in the process of globalization.

 So, what type of globalization will be done? There is much speculation that there will be a single global culture at the end of cultural globalization. In the past, social and economic phenomena have been local and relative, but connected systems through globalization have made the world function as a single place where various areas are integrated. However, the increase in connectivity does not mean economic and political unification. For example, economic growth in African countries in the Third World can not be said to be part of a unified world. Nonetheless, Western critics say that cultural globalization means cultural imperialism. This means global brand domination of developed countries. However, Tomlinson argues that cultural products and cultural practices should not be confused. The method is to look at modern globalization as an old historical context. An example is that the world map of Europe in the 13th century shows Christian theological globalization. The future communist society Karl Marx has spoken of is a world of universal language and cultural tastes integrated. This is similar to the increasing interdependence of our current society. However, Marx has a European-centric attitude at the same time. The socialist and communist eras can only have a civilized 'world-historican existence'. Through Marx's example, we can see that the nationalistic tendency and the humanistic vision can coexist.

 We can approach cultural globalization by observing the effects of globalization felt in a particular area. We live in an area. Globalization is rapidly changing our experience of 'locality'. Deterritorialization refers to the loss of the natural relationship of culture to geographical and social territories. Culture is no longer tied to the region. For a long time, culture had spatial limitations. However, globalization has removed the constraints of distance, which has led to the decontamination of culture. But de-territorialization does not mean the loss of experience of local culture. The region shows a paradoxical thriving in globalization. The difference is that the cultures produced in the region are no longer the most important to us. Decontamination is highly dependent on the development of electronic communication technology. In modern society, media and communication activities are a means of revealing the existence of a social existence. The Internet, television, and the like play a role in mediating the cultures of the world. In other words, modern media technologies and systems are the vehicles that promote deterritorialization. Also, de-territorialization has made the events of far-off places in the world have a big influence on us.

 Cultural identity is all modern reality. It consists of differentiated divisions such as sex, class, religion, race, and ethnicity. Those who think globalization poses a threat to cultural identity tend to misunderstand their identities. For them, identity is to ensure a cultural link between community and human beings, fragile and protective. But they confuse the modern cultural imagination of the West with the universality of human experience.

2.     What was interesting?

 I was most interested in the issue of de-territorialization. Since we are already living in a highly decontaminated society, we seem to be rather unaware of it. Historically, a human being was bound to a limited land and region. However, the development of communication, transportation, and media technology has made one person's horse a big influence on the other side of the globe. The example of a US president across the Pacific tense Korea. From a microscopic point of view, a change in the food culture of Koreans can be an example.

3.     Discussion Point

 ‘Immediacy’ is a value that comes to light as globalization progresses. In this article, Tomlinson says that immediacy is a dimension of cultural power. Globalization is certainly centered on modern media technology. People in the Third World who did not have access to the modern media technology that has developed so far can not be considered to have cultural power. Is there any way to share our cultural power?