Please read the chapter article I sent out on Friday. If you did not get it, please email Amber (our TA) at iswimaar@gmail.com.
You will notice that the reading somewhat follows my lecture on the first day of class.
Think about the questions "How is the world becoming worlds apart?"
and
"What is the good and bad of globalism?"
I look forward to reading your responses.
I think that the chapter on the Current Global System was really interesting. We all know and are familiar with the concept of the world getting smaller through technological advances in the communication industry. The fact of the matter is that technological advances are only benefitting fortunate nations of influence. Since advanced nations are growing more and more dense technologically, we tend to only better connect with other people and nations that are also advanced. While we advance together, the majority of the world falls further behind and finds themselves on the outside looking in.
ReplyDeleteThe bad effects of globalism include garbage imperialism, and the reality that wealthy nations force their culture on poor nations. It can be argued that the communications revolution isn’t solving communications problems, but reinforcing them.
The good effects of globalism lead to the world now being in a position to better itself if change happens. We now have the technology to connect the world and increase knowledge and understanding. The motives of system implementation are good. If we keep refining how we share technology with other countries, we can find happy medium.
The world is increasingly becoming "worlds apart," because although new technology continues to modernize our lives in the West, it is also widening the gap between the West and developing countries. The result is that the western world will continue to develop while the developing world has little chance of decreasing the technology and communications gap with the outdated and cast off technology and communications from developed nations. Therefore, they will continue to lag behind in the global financial system and other areas, which disables them from ever becoming major players on the world stage.
ReplyDeleteBad effects of globalism are that not only are developing nations forces to use outdated communications technology, but that this technology also imposes Western, and especially American, culture on these developing nations while many are still quite unstable.
However, the good effects of globalization are that developing nations can receive some communications technology (although often outdated) that they do not have the resources to create themselves.
I found this chapter to be an intriguing look into the complicated issue of a world becoming worlds apart. This particular line describes what makes this issue so interesting: “The idea of development means to become Western in practically every way including legal and business practices, which have profound implications for social and cultural patterns of life.” It’s as if the technological and communication advances are forcing countries to adapt to western life or be left behind in an almost imperialist way. While this may be fine for countries that are already “westernized” it poses serious problems for counties that are unwilling to adapt and they will suffer both directly and indirectly.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand there is some good that comes from globalism. New channels of communication in developing countries offer new ideas, and potentially can increase knowledge or education.
As we discussed in class and the author pointed out, the good effects of globalism do not always weigh out the bad effects. When less-developed countries receive western technologies (whether it is their wish or not) they start to lose their own identity. As the text points out, it is not for the betterment of the people, but corporations and governments are the ones that benefit from intercultural communications. With technology spreading across the globe, although people are able to become more connected instead we are becoming more "minimalistic" meaning that we are left feeling more disjointed than ever. As the author said we all have our own backgrounds, religions and ideas that make each of us unique. When faced with our own situations we will react differently because of these backgrounds. The benefits technology gives to those in western countries, may not play out for those in developing countries, and can greatly hinder their social structure.
ReplyDeleteJenn Riggs
I really liked the points brought up in this chapter about the current global system. The text recognizes that developing countries are often not even participating in the planning of their futures; rather, Western, more technologically oriented, societies are deciding what should be done for them. I thought the author was making a very powerful statement by pointing out that "most of humanity is to poor to participate in the conversation." While I obviously feel incredibly blessed to live in a nation where advanced communication technology is so widely available, I am sad to know that so much of the world does not have the same luxury. I think the world will continue to grow apart as technologies continue to develop. The text mentions western nations attempting to persuade, bribe and train policy makers of less developed countries to allow Western corporations to expand into their country. I don't think bribery is necessarily the best way to go about this. Allowing opportunities for further education, teaching the citizens of these countries about more advanced technologies, and then allowing them to choose for themselves seems like a better way of opening up the world to more global communication. This way, developing countries are able to keep their identity as a nation, while still being able to "join the conversation."
ReplyDeleteA lot of globalization's effects are like teaching someone advanced calculus without them having learned simple arithmetic. Though with calculus you can do so many amazing things, it is of little or no use to those who are not prepared for it. While it may help "advance" a culture in some aspects it hinders them in others. Not to mention that the very "advancement" is actually taking away from what makes them so unique and interesting. As this continues to happen at some point it may seem that we are all robots, thinking the same things with no individuality of our own. As the world becomes more "western" much of what made people unique is being filtered out leaving them disconnected from their country and their culture. Even between countries, though we are more connected now than ever, we are also so disconnected as a gap slowly grows between first world and third world countries due to this globalization. It truly is something so interesting in its scope of bringing good into the lives of some and devastating the lives of others.
ReplyDeleteI think this topic is so interesting, especially after our great discussion on whether technology actually improved our lives or not. Because it all stems back to the fact that we associate technology with a life improvement. At this point there really isn't a discussion. Whether or not you agree that its better for you, technology is coming- or I guess I should say is affecting your life.
ReplyDelete"So, the choice comes to this: Be enfranchised and attempt to steer development in a way that one wishes or be disenfranchised and have one’s future planned by others. One constant seems certain: change. For most of the globe, it is not a choice. Most of humanity is too poor to participate in the conversation."
I find it so interesting that the ability to communicate and the accessibility to technology are so well connected. We have been given voices, its just more difficult to hear them now that some are so loud. Something I didn't consider was that regardless of the access to resources, most people now have the knowledge of this unequal distribution of resources. Where as before there was probably a lack of this knowledge.
"One consequence for populations who buy into the development ideology is the agony of unrealistic expectations and the painful knowledge of uneven distributions of resources."
Thoughts on Globalization,
First off how did development and becoming Western become the same thing? "The idea of development means to become Western in practically every way including legal and business practices, which have profound implications for social and cultural patterns of life." Do we have a proven number of happier people living here and thus must be living the way that everyone else needs to live? I clearly think this is a bad effect. I don't think that we should have imposed our culture on everyone else. Its kind of a vicious circle, countries get TV systems so they can have a voice, and then end up filling those stations with content from the US thus making our voice all that much louder. Very interesting.
Good effects, of globalization would be education in general. I think education is always a good thing. I also have lots of internal battles about weather change is good. Overall I think it is, we have been placed on earth to learn and with knowledge make decisions and with decisions make changes.
Martha Davidson
The world is becoming worlds apart because some of us are privileged while others suffer. They don't know how good it gets because they've never had it that good. A lot of these people haven't even seen how good it gets. Statistics say that only 0.85% of Cambodians have a television. That means most of them have never even seen what life looks like with a tv. Globalism is good for those who are involved and have the opportunity to get gain from it. Globalism is also bad because most people in the world don't have that luxury and so they stay in their uneducated world. I'm thankful to live in the United States.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this chapter on the current global system I thought one of the more interesting sections was about why and how some countries went about securing their own broadcasting and televisions. I found it interesting that a lot of times the technology surge to country was to show the public that it's political leaders were bringing progress to that country.
ReplyDeleteAs far as how the world is "becoming worlds apart" I do believe that as we continue to grow and progress with technology, there are many countries struggling to keep up with the demand and ultimately this highlights their lack of technology and growth even more. As much as we feel new technology has helped connect countries, it has also emphasized which countries are failing to join in on the conversation.
Worlds apart because today the gap between the have and have not is bigger. Globalism is giving more power to developed countries, and in some way developing countries have being influence negatively loosing some of their cultural roots. This roots have been changed like fr example the native music of developing countries have loose power against American music. However, globalism has also brought the positive side of knowledge today people all over the world are more connected, and developing countries even though have almost no power against developed countries. Even though some countries have lost their voice in this conversation o globalism or are struggling to join it, I believe this force have helped some countries to emerge like Brazil.
ReplyDeleteThose who have traveled internationally will know how common it is to see an American movie star or politician on the cover of a foreign magazine or newspaper. What might seem to be a mere fascination with the United States is more accurately an example of our global influence. The western world has become so proficient with creating media and technology that it has begun to overrun less developed countries. The world seems to have grown smaller with the easy access to western culture, but at the same time the world has become more segregated between those that have adopted the western culture and those who have not.
ReplyDeleteWhile it might seem like a great thing that people around the world are having increased access to high quality news and advanced technologies, this is not without its negative consequences. Unique cultures and alternative ways of thinking are under constant attack by the westernization and globalization of society. As the distance between different countries and cultures decreases, so do the differences in lifestyle.
It can also be argued that we are helping less developed areas by increasing their access to better technology or higher quality media. Unfortunately, the push for globalization is rarely designed to improve someones life, but is more frequently for financial gain. When trying to determine the positive and negative consequences of globalization, there are a few questions we can ask. Will the new technology actually increase their quality of life, or is it simply egoism? Also, what are its effect on the culture of a society?
I found this article very thought provoking, causing me to reflect on the real and increasing gap between first and third world countries. The world is becoming worlds apart in the sense that the difference between a well-developed country with access to life-conveniencing technology in communication, healthcare, and transportation and a less developed country with a population struggling to eat and sustain life is nearly black and white. The article makes the point that just 200 years ago, most of humanity was fairly even in wealth and lifestyle, and today "differences not in aspirations but in ability are enormous." What changed? Technology. Think about the last 200 years. This is when the "defining" technology of the west like television and the internet became popular and widespread. This development has left two thirds of the world in the dust. Literally.
ReplyDeleteI would say the "good" in globalism is that many countries can preserve their unique culture if they cannot afford mass communication technology to make them all speak the same or dress the same within their country, but that is not true. If they don't have it, the government or private companies are building it for them for advertising, so instead of being more like each other, they're becoming more like us. I discovered this when I traveled to South Africa a few months ago and realized that for some families, a typical dinner conversation is about an American movie they want to see or their favorite American celebrity. I found it odd that they were admiring people so far away, but then realized that they don't have much programming of their own. So the bad in globalism is that countries yearning for technological advances are breaking their backs to build the structures to keep up with the west, but once they've got the TV set, they're enticed by the ritzy lifestyle and want to mimic it rather than relish in their own identities.
The world is growing apart with a type of technological and modernization gap. There are countries that cannot keep up with the technological advancements that we have in the US. It used to be that most of the world was lived about the same, but now third world countries are dropping further and further behind. I really like the quote, "Most of humanity is too poor to participate in the conversation". They are not participating the conversation and therefore cannot "plan their own futures". They cannot just join in and give their people the technology that we use, and they cannot invent their own. They are just left behind in the technological dust.
ReplyDeleteGlobalism is good for corporations and governments, they are able to spread their ideas and businesses throughout the world. However, for poor countries, they are being told what to think and how to think it. They don't have many choices anymore. I mean even France, which is a developed nation, follows American television and movies. They were so excited when they met an American because that is all the things that they watch and listen to. Globalism is the spread of a culture and today I would even say language. It is so imperative in Europe and other countries that children learn English in school. They have English classes all through their schooling. It is becoming the worlds language, if it hasn't already made it there. Globalism is good though because I believe that it gives everyone a good opportunity to live life as they want to. I don't believe that a culture is imposed on another, but rather it enriches the already present culture.
The world is becoming worlds apart by advancing so much in technology in the west and technology and development being so stagnant in the developing countries. One of the problems with this is while we are here in the west watching these amazing technological advances and thinking it is solving world communication problems, we fail to realize we are not communicating with the entire world. For the most part, we are separating ourselves further from the developing countries.
ReplyDeleteGlobalism seems inevitable to continue, because for the most part it is good. One of the definitions of globalism is putting the interests of the world ahead of those of individual nations. So, as Dumbledore would have said as a young boy, globalism is for the greater good. However, to what extent should we put the world’s interests ahead of individual nations? At what cost? If globalism hurts an individual nation so bad, is it worth it for us to have a small technological difference in our lives?
I agree that the world is continually growing apart. The text used the example of how many people per thousand own a television in different countries. I know that I have always taken a TV for granted in my life and to me that is an "old invention." Using these numbers truly put into perspective for me how different the world is. Here in the US, we have many technological devices. We have iPads, iPhones, etc. and we all use them daily. However, in many developing countries, they most likely will never have this technology because they are limited in what they can have. I think that globalism can be good for the countries who have the resources and can keep up with current trends. But, I think it hurts those that don't have the resources. The established countries will always have more than the less established and the established will control what the others can have. I see both positives and negatives with globalism.
ReplyDeleteThe article mentions that the world is becoming 'worlds apart' through technological achievements that are extremely prevalent in some countries and absent in others. The countries that live without modern conveniences and even life-savers are usually third world countries that are separated from us in questions of success. I have seen our prejudice against less important countries based on technology. A few of the advertising networks that I use for my personal blog pay a significant less percentage per click for websites not based in the US or blogs that have readerships less than 50% from the US.
ReplyDeleteGlobalism is both good and bad by providing differences in our modern world. The light of globalism resides in the communication we have with other countries that brings the world closer together. However, the dark side of globalism depends on the decisions to communicate in a way that helps lesser countries or forces imperial thoughts from more successful countries on others.
From what I got out of the reading, the world becoming worlds apart is mostly a socioeconomic issue. With all the advances in media and technology, less-developed countries are getting left behind. This adds to existing competition between countries. So countries that can’t even afford to feed their people are establishing television networks out of pure nationalism. I had never thought too much about this before, but it’s really sad that these struggling countries are becoming even more separated from the large/powerful countries in the world. This reading made me realize how much I take the media for granted. While this is sad, there are some good things that come from globalism. We can share and send information anywhere in the world really quickly. We can also have more opportunity to experience cultures of other countries.
ReplyDeleteThe world is definitely growing apart. If we look at the gap between the western world, and the rest of the worlds population, it is frightening to see the differences. There are so many things that we take for granted. As our technology moves forward, it is sad to see other nations pick up where we left off. They are far behind us and don't seem to have a way to catch up. If the world is now one giant conversation, why cant we hear them?
ReplyDeleteGlobalism is so prevalent in today;s modern world. Having lived overseas for 21 years, I am well aware of the desire of so many nations to 'become what they see on tv'. Smaller, poorer nations want to live just like the stars they see on the set. Yet, in all realism, they know they never will. They even know they are falling further behind. We try so hard to 'educate' these other countries to live 'the right way', yet I know that some of the poorest countries I have visited have been the happiest. There are of course positives to globalism, such as increased education and wealth where it otherwise may have not been obtained.
I thought this chapter of reading was very interesting and it made some valid points. It is argued throughout the world that the concept of technology is bringing us closer together as humans. After reading this article, I don't think that is the case. Technology is making us more aware of each other as humans, but the technological advances are only benefiting those in the northern parts of the world.
ReplyDeleteI found it interesting that certain countries have so few televisions, yet they use them as a key part of propaganda and advertising for political campaigns. It puts the different competitors at such a disadvantage and it makes me grateful to live in America where people all have the same opportunity.
As for globalization, I think it can be a good and bad thing. There are many things that we in America have that can benefit everyone in the world such as modern medicine. However, there are also aspects that we need to understand and respect when it comes to globalization. First, is we need to be aware of other cultures and recognize they may not think our culture is the best. We are proud and think everyone wants what we have when that may not be the case. For example, I went on a study abroad to Italy. The family I stayed with would often tease me about how I did not know how to sit down and enjoy the surroundings. Every country has something that we can learn from each other, we just need to be open to the opportunity.
After reading the article I realized just how much I take our technology for granted. Seeing TV's, phones, and computers is normal and many homes now even have more than one TV. I agree that we are becoming worlds apart with the advancing of technology. Many nations are feeling it necessary to join in on the global conversation when many of their people can't even afford to eat. I can't imagine the pressure they must feel to adopt our ways of life, ruining their preserved culture and traditions. It makes me sad for them, and sad that we are part of the driving force behind it. Technology and globalization does have its benefits. We are able to communicate and understand other nations because of the technology and communication lines that we have, but at what cost? There are always pros and cons to change. I am just afraid that if we keep advancing so far ahead of other nations in the southern hemisphere, we really will feel worlds apart from them. Then as we advance and progress, they continue to fall apart and suffer.
ReplyDeleteThis article reminds me of a technology saturation curve that I viewed in a previous class. It showed how it took longer for the general populace to adopt earlier technologies such as the washer and now it takes much less time for their to be a higher adoption rate of this such as the internet or a smartphone. It appeared to be exponentially getting faster. I think one of the ways the world is getting worlds apart is that many nations are on the high technological adoption end and the developing countries are on the low end of this curve so the distance keeps getting greater and greater. Becoming further apart is also exacerbated by nations trying to jump ahead on the technological curve. They feel as if they need to in order to keep up with developing countries but their own economic structures really does not allow for it. If they were to pause and first adopt the technologies that would help them be more productive they would soon be in a more similar place to developing countries.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with globalism is that the developing countries try to impose ideas of what is "modern" on the smaller countries and help them become that without realizing the countries are not ready to handle it. Another problem with globalism is that it brings the opportunity for leaders in the struggling countries to use technologies that may be too far ahead for a country for their own good.
This is shown in the example of a leader that brought television to his country for his own political career while people that were starving could have been helped with that money.
A good thing about globalism is that the technology is available. When a country is ready for it the resources and knowledge is already their. They do not have to wait for it and the technologies that can help them become more developed are already there. It's really just a matter of doing things in the right order and slowing down enough that a country can handle the change.
The world is becoming worlds apart because although technology and everything is increasing in places like the United States, it isn’t increasing as much for those in third world countries. The example they use was the TV; even though many countries can barely afford food they have a TV to watch. So these countries are trying to catch up with the more advance countries, but it is hindering them. What they really should be doing is using the money to first move out of poverty and once they have accomplished this they can try to follow the new technology. This quote explains exactly how new technology and a new world is being developed; “The gap between the haves and have nots is increasing, not decreasing. In large measure this is because the acceleration of development is most pronounced in the most developed parts of the globe. Technological innovation is causing as much as solving the problem of people being worlds apart. Global communications is not solving this but rather enabling it.” Although, new developments are good because we receive technological advancement, it is bad because it is pulling our world more apart. One thing that could be good from globalism, is countries will see how much they world is changing and evolving which will them be a motivation for them to change, but in the right order. These countries can’t just jump in, they have to start from the “beginning.”
ReplyDeleteIt is ironic that with the rise of technology the world is becoming less and less civilized. When technology was first introduced, it was advertised as the cure to so many problems. However, with the introduction of technology such as television, countries that cannot afford basic necessities for their people are spending money on television and Internet capabilities. Countries that cannot afford basic household necessities are sure to have a large stereo and television in their homes. The world is becoming more and more separated because priorities are backwards. When countries put emphasis in trying to compete with western worlds, they go bankrupt and the people of that country suffer. It reminds me of how The United States out spent Soviet Russia during the cold war. Every time the U.S. would spend more on the military, the Soviets needed to copy them. In the end, the country went bankrupt because it could not afford the globalization. Although globalization can be negative, I feel the reading did not accurately point out the positives. The advances in medicine alone have increased the life expectancy of everyone across the world. Whether globalization is positive or negative does not change the fact that it will not stop but continue to grow.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting that the text differentiated between a Global Village and a Global City. i can say that in my experience, there is definitely a big difference. Many of us have been in a small town atmosphere where "everyone knows everyone." They then experience the big city where there is no semblance of closeness to anyone, even though there are so many more people around you.In this city atmosphere, we are brought closer together in some ways, but we are really pulled apart in terms of relationships in many instances.
ReplyDeleteWhen considering the good and the bad of globalism, we need to look at potential vs. actuality. We could potentially do so much good with globalism. Just like bringing more people together in a city has the potential to do so much good. It gives everyone the opportunity to partake in different industries, and it gives access to a greater variety of goods. However, it seems inevitable that some people will act in a self-interested manner. This means that people and corporations will reach out to these "developing" countries and globalize them only to take advantage of them. An example of this is Coca Cola only putting in a television system as a means for propaganda. It seems true that for every benefit of globalization, there is an equal and opposite downfall.
"What is the good and bad of globalism?"
I'm not so sure we're becoming "worlds apart." In fact, I think it's quite the contrary. This might be a somewhat cynical thought, but I think a great deal of problems have been caused by globalization's creation of a world and lifestyle that every country then tries to match. For example, the text said, "Considering television costs...it may seem strange that most of the Third World has installed it.Many a country too poor to feed itself has nevertheless built its own television service." Globalization has done many positive things to break down barriers and make people more open-minded and aware of other cultures. However, it has also created a living standard (through movies, television, available technologies, etc.) that everyone then tries to match. Rather than "evening the playing field" (sharing the worlds resources so that everyone is equal), there is an illusive lifestyle -- usually one that is higher than income and resources allow -- that countries strive to reach.
ReplyDeleteThis is manifest in extreme examples, such as starving countries with television, but a smaller-scale version can been seen in North America. Poorer classes of citizen are increasingly buying designer clothes or luxury phones/electronics that would normally be far out of their price range, because globalization dictates that they are "necessities." Even fry cooks living month-to-month have iPhones. This "reaching up" style of living causes consumer debt on an individual scale, and national debt on a country-wide scale.
Rather than becoming worlds apart, the world is trying to become homogenized, whether they can afford it or not.
I think the topic of being worlds apart is extremely interesting. Something that really struck me from the reading is when it said that, "much of the third world is excluded from the global financial system." Because of this, they have not been advancing nearly as quickly as say the U.S., Japan, Australia, etc. There has been a pattern of unevenness in communications technologies and processes. And this gap is only increasing as these technological innovations is only dividing and increasing the issue of being "worlds apart." However, as we these westernized countries attempt to increase the knowledge and technology of these underdeveloped countries, these poorer countries, who cannot afford some of the more basic necessities, are now wasting their money on TVs and other things like the Internet. The text stated, "Many a country too poor to feed itself has nevertheless built its own television service.” So has trying to decrease the gap really improved the lives of these people, or has it made them more dependent on things less vital to their health and well-being? In these countries television has become the most important method of political campaigning. However, because of the higher cost of television and TV airtime, only the wealthy can afford to run for these higher up positions. So I feel like in some ways technology, especially in these third world countries, has created an even bigger "worlds apart" gap.
ReplyDeleteEric Vincent
ReplyDeleteWhen speaking of globalization, there are wide arrays of benefits and downfalls as cultural influences penetrate to different areas. The text mentioned that in terms of broadcasting, the motivations for globalization are: “First, the colonial transfer of the broadcast apparatus for foreign national use. Second, the preservation of indigenous culture. And third, the post-colonial effort to forge a national identity from diverse ethnic groups.” These seem to all be noble reasons for wanting to spread a culture, innovation, idea, or technology, but too often the spread of cultural attributes (especially to developing or lesser countries) turn into more of imperialism and the previous culture is lost. The culture that probably spreads its culture the most and receives the most criticism for spreading or forcing their culture is the United States. We see American companies, movies, and fashion in many countries throughout the world. This spread of Americanism can be great but it may also hurt other nations and cultures.
I spent a great deal of time with people of the Sioux (Native American) tribe. The Sioux were once a proud and incredible people. They were warriors and dominated the plans of the United States. After being overcome by white Americans, they were forced to live on reservations and began to lose much of their identity. They were forced to worship like the Americans, forced to go to schools, could obtain alcohol in greater availability, and forced to speak English. Today some of their traditions are kept alive through rites and ceremonies, but overall as one dominate culture overcame another; we have seen a serious decline in a once strong culture. At one point I may have had a greater grasp of the Lakota Sioux dialect than most young people. A real negative, perhaps the greatest, of globalization is that it diminishes the unique cultures of the world.
Now it is not all bad when speaking of globalization. Using the same example of the Sioux people, from my (perhaps inaccurate) point of view they were blessed by the advances brought by the citizens of the United States. They may not admit it, but I think that the native people of this continent have been blessed by things like housing, electricity, and perhaps especially medication. When the good things from one culture go to another it can bless another culture without taking away the identity of another culture. The American imported social media sites that helped to spread causes and create an understanding of believed political injustices in the Arab Spring movement of several years ago. Automobiles, electronic devices, and other products bring jobs to people here in this nation and have been enjoyed by others.
So when discussing globalism; are there bad aspects of it? Sure. Are there good parts about it? Absolutely. Influences and strengths from one nation can greatly bless another, but cultures should not imperialize and destroy other cultures, destroying their identity.
I think that in some ways we are becoming worlds apart, while in others we are being brought together. It was surprisingly shocking for me to read about the number of television per thousand in various countries around the world. I was right in my assumption that America would be the leader in the number of televisions, but it was surprising how low the numbers were for some of the developing countries. In the technological aspect I can see that we are worlds apart, and becoming even more separated. America and other developed countries enjoy and much more technologically advanced lifestyle than those in Haiti. We live with unnecessary luxuries while they can barely feed themselves and their children. I understand the author's point in saying that we are becoming a global city. Western cultures and ideals are spreading throughout the world and taking over. Things such as Disney, Coca-Cola, fast food restaurants and even our TV shows are becoming trends in significantly different cultures. As the reading says, "Instead of telling a person what to think about, the West is telling people how to think." When we change, the world changes. One of the questions posed to us was "what is the good and bad of globalism?" I don't think that there are neither straight good or straight bad answers to that question. Globalism is what it is and has multiple sides to it. Depending on your point of view that are positive and negative aspects to it.
ReplyDeleteThe reading was an interesting perspective on what globalization is doing to the modern world. While communication is making it easier for people in the western world to connect, do business, and develop, it is also leaving those without the necessary means of communication further behind and making it harder for countries to compete and succeed on an international business level. I think another negative effect of the technology gap is that it puts an immense amount of pressure on countries that are full of culture and history to conform to our standards if they want to be able to compete on an economic level. It also creates and unfair opportunity for the western world to enforce propaganda and culture on these countries through means of westernized technology they would not have otherwise. Many of these countries are too poor to feed their people yet are trying to keep up with the technological boom of TV’s and Internet. You can’t run before you can walk. How can technology aid these countries without expecting them to skip the necessary means of survival?
ReplyDeleteI also enjoyed how the article touched on technology causing as many problems as it is solving like we discussed in class. Globalization, while it may not be the newest thing on the market, is helping countries receive technology that they don’t have the means to create themselves and idealistically giving them some sort of voice on an international level.
I love readings like this one because they call attention to important facts of life that I don't otherwise think about on a daily basis, like that many people in the world don't have access to television. Coming from a home where there are several televisions on each story of the house, accompanied by numerous laptops, desktops, ipads, and smart phones, I had not really considered before the reading what it would be like to not have access to this abundance of information, how is this information controlled, and how much money is required to make these information systems feasible.
ReplyDeleteThis chapter said the world is more of a global city than a global village, and the reasoning explains how the world is becoming worlds apart, rather than becoming as one through various media. The chapter mentions "...the qualitative difference between living in a village, among intimate acquaintances (probably kin), and living in a modern city where the vast majority of people one sees everyday are complete strangers, or even more dissociated, disembodied “netizens.” Instead of getting closer to each other, we in fact act more formally and in a more disconnected manner with the rest of the world, according to this source.
This brings us to the advantages and disadvantages of globalism. Because certain parts of the world cannot keep up financially, there is an unequal flow of information. The West is showing people how to think. A lot of countries cannot even have access to this because the people are not able to afford television. This gives us cues on how to be and how to act. I thought the remarks on treatment towards obese people was interesting in this regard. It really analyze how differently these people are interacted with in today's world.
There is a definite gap between the countries and cultures of the world that globalism is trying to bridge. It is a valiant effort, but one that I do not think should ever seek to take the homogenization of the world too far.
Preston Wittwer
ReplyDeleteThe world is growing apart due to the growing connected-ness of the already connected. As the text pointed out the gap between the technologically advanced and deprived is widening. To use a term the text uses, those with teledensity are only getting teledenser. Technological advances and improvements in communication are most beneficial to those already enjoying unprecedented access to various forms of communication and information gathering.
This reading suggests that there are many more drawbacks to globalization than there are good reasons for it (or at least the type of globalization that the world is currently undergoing). Firstly, the already developed countries are the ones "planning the future" and deciding what sort of advances in technology and needs we need to survive and thrive in the current global environment. A side effect of that is that only one version o flaw and business are considered and thrust on the world, often times forcing them to catch up to an impossible pace. But the biggest drawback is the loss (or at least distillation) of national identity and the concept of self. While globalization leads to expanded trade routes and improved access to communication throughout, countries and cultures that are nothing like the technologically advanced global leaders are forced to look, walk, and talk like the technological elite.
I really enjoyed this article. I find it disturbing and scary to think about globalism and the negative effects it is having on the cultures of the world. When we think of globalization, modern, first-world country, or other terms like these, we are most often referring to the northern hemisphere. When other countries are subject to our TV shows, our celebrities, because of cost benefits, they lose a bit of what defines them as a culture. The beautiful thing about some island cultures is the lack of punctuality because there is no need for it in their society. If you start having regular programmed shows, time starts to become an issue. Morals and cultural undertones that are praised in these TV shows are often adapted even subconsciously by cultures. I find this frightening because unfortunately, by “helping” countries “get with the times” we often strip their heritage/cultural values at the same time.
ReplyDeleteThis is not the case in all circumstances. I think helping to establish communication channels be it broadcasting TV stations, internet services or other similar technological amenities, can be a positive influence to help nations become team-players on the world market and allow more voices to be heard.
Regarding the first question about the world becoming worlds apart as sited in the article, I believe it is inevitable. We are creatures of our own demise. FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) is more prevalent now than ever with smart phones and social media. This means that the world will never stop thirsting for the next big advancement and globalization is inevitable.
Lizzy Early
ReplyDelete"From the west to the rest" really describes everything. When Lady Gaga or other artists go big, we think...well of course because they're popular in the US. But when something like Gangnam Style goes viral and battles Beiber Fever we're shocked. I think perhaps Americans' pride is hurt because something went huge that we didn't create. It's rare, but it happens.
I do believe the word is growing apart with an increased gap between groups of people, but at the same time we're growing together. Cell phones are even more readily available and social media creates ties across the word. Television shows like MTV may offer a warped perspective of life if the states to small African countries but it's a perspective WE are giving. They don't rely on myths and stories to learn about a far off place anymore. Are there still villages full of people cut off from the world? Yes and no. Yes a lot of those people are cut off and know very little, but I think 1 or 2 of the people there are in contact with bigger cities. 10 years ago, that wasn't the case at all.
The world is becoming a far more diverse and advanced place. Individuals are finally steering away from the norm and trying to influence society in their own way. While the world is growing apart and people are seen as different, the world is also growing together. When crisis happen, for example the tsunami in Thailand or the shooting in Connecticut, individuals across the world are quick to offer support or lend a helping hand. Regardless of the cournty in poverty, all across the world seem to care and are willing to do whatever they can to help. While there are many countries and villages that need a lot of help and assistance before they become what America is, Americans are working to help wthem become more developed. THe world is such a competitive place, but when an area is in true need of help or comfort that competition cant withstand against compassion. The human heart and mind is designed to help those in need and we will continue to do so, regardless of the harmfull effects of globalization or the idea of "worlds apart".
ReplyDeleteWe know the realities of third world countries, but I never really considered before how different these countries are in communications as well. It was interesting to see the comparison between the village and the city. The village analogy somewhat is true, but has some major flaws. Sometimes it does feel like everyone in the world knows about everything going on. Like gangham style. You aren't a human being unless you have seen it. Traveling to different countries I still have watched American tv shows at night in the hotel. It was nice for me to have a sense of home, but I dislike how that makes people of other nations more All-American. America is great and all, but what is the fun in everyone being the same. Plus everyone is not the same. Everyone who has blogs writes totally different things, sees the world in different ways. The world has always been "worlds apart." At least now we can travel to Africa and see what their world is like. Is being "worlds apart" technologically bad? I'm not sure. Technology is helpful, but expensive and doesn't make one happier necessarily.
ReplyDelete