The Globalization of Baseball? A Figurational Analysis

Daniel Bloyce

Thesissubmittedfor the degreeof Doctor of Philosophyof the University of Leicester

Department of Sociology University of Leicester

2004

iContents Acknowledgments Abstract List of FiguresChapter 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 Introduction

iv v viI 2 4 5

The global baseball figuration The central premises of the study Overview of the study

Chapter 2 2.1 2.2

Review the Literature: Theorizing Global Processes

9 9 11 11 12 19 22 31 39 44 45 46 51 51 57 59

Introduction Explication of the literature

2.2.1 Modernizationtheorist 2.2.2 Cultural imperialism/dependency theory 2.2.3 Global Diffusion as Cultural Diversity 2.2.4 Cultural Hegemony:Cultural StudiesApproach 2.2.5 Globalizationas multi-causal 2.2.6 Figurationalsociology 2.3 Critical appraisal 2.3.1 Modernizationcritique 2.3.2 Cultural imperialismcritique 2.3.3 Cultural diversity critique 2.3.4 Cultural hegemonycritique 2.3.5 Multi-causal critique 2.3.6 Figurationalcritique Chapter 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Figurational Sociology and the Sociology of Globalization Introduction

62 62 63 65 68 71 73

Figurations Networks of Interdependency Habitus and Blind social processes Powerratios

3.5.1 'Game models' andpower

ii3.5.2 Established and Outsidersand power FigurationalSociology andthe Sociologyof Globalization 3.6 Chapter 4 4.1 Methodology 75 77

83 83 84 88 91 92 92 95 96 96 100 101

Epistemology,Ontology and Research

4.1.1 Involvementand Detachment 4.1.2 Narrative and theory from a figurational. perspective 4.2 4.3 Research Strategy Research Design

4.3.1 CaseStudy Research: Baseballin England 4.3.2 Cross-Sectional Research: Baseballaroundthe world 4.4 Research Methods 4.4.1 DocumentaryAnalysis: Analysis of the press 4.4.2 Qualitative Interviews 4.4.3 Questionnaires

Chapter 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

Incipient Modernization and sportization of baseball

103 103 104 108 117 121 125

The emergence baseballas a modem sport of Folk bat-and-ballgames The incipient modernizationof baseball The sportizationof baseball The 'Doubleday Myth' Concludingpoints Cross-cultural comparison of baseball Baseballin PanAmericana

Chapter 6 6.1

128 131 131 136 146 154 161 166 166 178

6.1.1 Baseballin Canada 6.1.2 Baseballin Cuba 6.1.3 Baseballin Dominican Republic 6.1.4 Baseballin Mexico 6.1.5 Baseballin other partsof PanAmericana 6.2 Baseballin Asia 6.2.1 Baseballin Japan 6.2.2 Baseballin the rest of Asia

iii6.3 Baseballin Oceania 186 186 197 199 208 209

6.3.1 Baseballin Australia 6.3.2 Baseballin the rest of Oceania 6.4 6.5 6.6 Baseballin continentalEurope Baseballin Africa Concludingremarks Analysis of the Development of Baseball in England

Chapter 7 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9

211 211 213

Introduction and overview The first baseballtour to England The London baseballLeague,1906-1911 The 1914Tour and baseballduring and after World War 1 Baseballin the 1930s Baseballduring the SecondWorld War Baseballin Englandafter the SecondWorld War IncreasingMLB involvementin England

The 1889tour andthe establishment baseballin Englandin the 1890s 219 of 241 248 268 286 289 304

Chapter 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5

The Global Baseball Figuration

309 313

Early phaseof baseballdiffusion 1860-1880s Growing American influenceand spreadof baseball:1920-1945

Growth of American military, political and economicpower: 1880s-1920 314 316 MLB increasinglyinfluential in baseballplaying countries: 1945-1980s 318 Late 1980sto the present,with particular referenceto MLB expansionism321 Conclusion 343 343 344 357 359

Chapter 9 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4

Overview of the study Strengths and weaknesses different sociologicalapproaches of Reflectionson the methodologicalapproaches for Recommendations ffirther research

Appendix A: National GoverningBodiesof BaseballQuestionnaire Appendix B: Proportionof registeredplayersper population References

363 364 383

iv

AcknowledgmentsI would like to expressmy sincere thanks to Patrick Murphy, my supervisor. His hasbeenunswerving,and I am indebtedto him for all his advice, know-how, support extensivecommentaryon my work and generalgood humour throughout thesepast, long years. I must also expressmy great thanks to all other tutors basedat the now, defunct Centre for Researchinto Sport and Society. Thanks too, to the support from Ken Green,who has beena joy to work with whilst I have been labouring on my thesis, and has beena constantsourceof advice for me. In recenttimes, sociologicaldebates in with Katie Liston, Andy Smith and Kevin Lamb (psuedo-wannabe-sociologist), the 4sociologycorridor' have, no doubt, made me a better sociologist, and I hope this is reflectedin this study. On a different level, I am indebtedto the unstinting supportof my family and friends through somedifficult and interestingtimes!

Finally, I would like to dedicatethis thesisto my Mum and Dad.

V

AbstractThis thesis examinesthe extent of the diffusion of baseballacrossthe world. Tracing the diffusion of baseball,and the diverse receptionsthe game has encounteredon foreign soils, holds out the prospectof offering many insights into the global spreadof the processesof globalization in general. By sport and our understanding of different responses baseball,and developing our empirical knowledge to examining the extent of its diffusion, we will be in a position to draw more reliable and valid on than have, thus far, been offered in relation to the global diffusion of conclusions baseball specifically, and globalization processes more generally. The thesis to endeavours determinethe extent to which baseballcan be regardedas a global This objective will involve chartingthe developmentof baseballin America, its sport. diffusion to other countries and the different receptionsthe game has received on foreign soil, via a seriesof national casestudies. Given the magnitudeof global difrusion processes, is hardly surprisingthat its study it hasattractedthe attentionof academics from a numberof disciplinesand orientations. This particular thesis tests the figurational approach,assessing adequacyof this the approachin being able to make senseof the global baseballfiguration. It doesthis by first providing an outline for the incipient modernization, sportization, and subsequent of baseball in America. Then a cross-sectionalanalysis of the diffusion and developmentof baseball in various countriesthroughout the world is presented,for the most part via a critical analysis of secondary source material. In order to supplementthe secondarysource material, questionnaireswere sent to all national governing bodies for baseballacrossthe world (109 in total). The principal focus of the empirical aspectsof this thesis is on the developmentof baseball in England. Extensivedocumentaryanalysisof archival newspaper sourceswas carried out in the National NewspaperLibrary, Colindale, London. Alongside this, severaloral history interviews were conducted with baseball players who had played in this country before the 1950s. Furthermore, interviews were conducted with administrators involved in the running and promotion of the game in this country. Analysing the diffusion of baseball around the world, and the different responses attemptsto to develop the game, and subsequently analysing in much greater depth the developmentsand responses baseballin England, enablesus to engagein more to informed comparativeanalysis. On the basisof this thesis it is concludedthat the argumentthat baseballis a 'global sport', is a highly exaggerated view of baseball'sglobal profile. The fact of the matter is baseballhas only enjoyed sustainedperiods of success a handful of countriesin in Asia and Latin America. Furthermore,it is argued that the theoretical premisesof figurational sociology are both sensitising and illuminating; and provide a more object-adequateanalysis of the global baseball figuration than other theoretical allow. In this respect, the central figurational concept of dynamic and approaches differential power relationshipsis key to developingour understanding the global of baseball figuration, and globalization more generally. The concept of lengthening is chainsof interdependency a far more illuminating, and therefore more useful, way the process by which baseball has undergone diffusion, than of conceptualising concepts such as Americanization, American cultural hegemony, imperialism, or, indeed,globalization.

vi List of figuresTable 6.1: PanAmericanacountriesaffiliated to the IBAF Table 6.2: Asian countriesaffiliated to the IBAF Table 6.3: Oceaniacountriesaffiliated to the IBAFTable 6.4: European countries affiliated to the IBAF Table 6.5: African countries affiliated to the IBAF

p. 165 p. 185 p. 198p.207 p.209

Table 8.1: Timeline of the diff-usionof baseball Table 8.2: Profiles of foreign-Bom MLB Players Figure 8.1: Global Baseballfiguration map

p.310 p.334 p.342

I

Chapter 1: IntroductionThe phrase 'global village' has becomepart of common parlance.Its use is intendedto convey not so much the intimacy of village relationships,but rather the increasingextent to which the activities of physically distant human beings impact upon one another.The phraseis intendedto summonup an imageof a world in which The transportationsystems, no one is insulated from the effects of these processes. by which facilitated the earlier phasesof this process,have been supplemented new and increasingly sophisticated modesof communication:phone, fax, electronic mail, and satellite television. The substantiveforms taken by theseprocesses diffusion of may be classified as cultural, economic,military and political. All of them find partial expression in the associated spread of a range of organizational forms and administrativeprinciples. While the processof diffusion has deep historical roots, it has accelerated over the last one hundredand fifty yearsand has becomeparticularly markedsincethe SecondWorld War. The specific focusof this thesiswill be on spor and baseballin particular, as an aspectof the processof diffusion.

The study of sport offers us an excellent window onto processes of globalization. Sport has come to be extremely important to vast numbersof people across the world. International tournaments,such as the Olympic Games and the Association Football World Cup, attract huge global television audiences, like the of which is not mirrored in other aspectsof culture. Indeed, as Dunning (1999, p. 1) argues,"no activities have ever servedso regularly as foci of simultaneouscommon interestand concernto so many peopleall over the world'%Why is sport sucha prime exampleof global diflusion? Jacques, writing in The Observer(13 July, 1998,p. 19) arguesthat "sport is a peculiarly mobile culture. Most cultural forms are newspaper,

2 limited in their ability to travel, most obviously by language, but sport has anto communicate". Hence, sport is, primarily at least, an aspect of extraordinary ability

that is visual - that is to say, it doesnot suffer from a linguistic barrier to the culture sameextent that modem music, or moviesdo. It is possibleto watch, and understand, a game of football, or baseball,for example,without necessarilyunderstandingthe languagebeing used by the competitors.Indeed, it is quite possible to play against, and even with, people who have little ability to communicateverbally with one another.As Maguire (1999) haspointed out, sport was the first truly global idiom.

1.1 The global baseball figuration In this study, I intend to examinethe extent of the diffiision of baseballacross the world. I first becameinterestedin baseballwhen visiting Canadaand the United Statesof America (USA) in 1991.1 was struck, initially, by the popularity of the game in Toronto, especiallybecause team basedin the city, the Toronto Blue Jays, did the not have a single Canadianplayer in its ranks. I brought this enthusiasmfor baseball back with me and becamepuzzled as to why a sport that had becomeso successfulin the USA was largely ignored in England,a country with strongties to America. As an I undergraduate, embarkedupon a small newspaperbasedproject into the history of baseballin England. Much to my surprise,I discoveredthat the gamewas played in this country as long ago as 1874 and the first professionalleaguewas establishedin 1890. And yet, despitethese deep roots, the game has never taken in England. off Thesediscoveries,and my subsequent reflections,simply servedto whet my appetite. Tracing the diffusion of baseball,the most quintessential American sports,and the of diversereceptionsthe gamehasencountered foreign soils holds out the prospectof on many insights into the global spreadof sport and our understanding the offering of

3 processes globalization in general. When I beganto read some of the theoretical of literature in the broader field of globalization, I was struck by the tendencyof some writers to view globalization as synonymouswith Americanization. With specific to baseball,many authors (Echevarria,2000; Fidler, 2000; Gould, 2000; reference Marcano& Fidler, 1999;Rosentraub, 2000; Vargas,2000) haveconcludedthat we are presentlywitnessing an accelerationin the globalization of that sport. Vargas (2000, p.21) takes the view that "the global reach of Major League Baseball (MLB) has never been more evident". Rosentraub (2000, p. 126) is of a similar mind, and contends that MLB's organizational reach is "the most striking example of ... transnationalpower" in sport, whilst Gould (2000, p.85) predicts that, "the twentyfirst century will witness an accelerationin the globalization of America's pastime". According to Echevarria,(2000, p. 145), "the causesof this expansionare no secret". He continues, "baseball spreadto various parts of the world as the United States becamea world economic and military power Now that the United Statesis the ... only major power, it shouldnot be surprisingthat baseballis expandingfiirther and at a faster rate" (Echevarria, 2000, p. 145). However, the unanimity of these writers should not be allowed to concealthe fact that their arguments tend to havetwo things in common. Firstly, they are fundamentally ethnocentric.For example,Rosentraub's pronouncementstake no account of the superior global profile of the Fdddration Internationalede Football Association (FIFA), the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the InternationalAssociationof Athletics Federations (IAAF), for example. Secondly,their generalizations lack any substantive empirical support.It is hopedthat by examinmg different responses to baseball, and developing our empirical knowledgeon the extentof its diffusion, we will be in a position to draw more reliable

4 At the sametime, it is hoped we will be able to make greater and valid conclusions. more generally. of sense globalizationprocesses

1.2 The central premises of the study If we are to make sense of "cross-cultural-civilizational processes", as

Maguire (1999, p. 56) refers to the various global flows associated with global diffusion, then we must ask a number of questions. To this end, Maguire (1999) that several key questions that should form the basis for any empirical suggests research into global dfffusion. These include:

Is there a 'monopoly mechanism'at work within the global sport process?... Can Are cross-cultural-civilizationalexchanges feature of the sport process? a phasesof colonization and repulsion be witnessed in the development of sport?Has sport beenusedas a sign of cultural status,exclusivity and power? What has been the role of Western and non-Westem people in the the established/outsider relationsthat arguablycharacterize global sportization the What is the natureof the power networksthat characterize global process? (Maguire, 1999,p.56). sport process? This thesis will address these general questions. More specifically, it will also to endeavour determinethe extent to which baseballcan be regardedas a global sport. This objective will involve charting the development of baseball in America, its diffusion to other countries and the different receptionsthe game has received on foreign soil, via a seriesof national 'case studies'.

In order to addressthe kinds of questionsraised above, it is vital that we in empirically grounded theoretical research. This may seem like an engage however,much of the debateon globalization is characterized statement, unnecessary by a patent dearthof empirical evidence.Indeed, Robertson(1990, p. 16) hasastutely that there "is considerable danger that 'globalization' will become an observed

5 intellectual 'play zone' -a site for the expression of residual social-theoretical

interests, interpretive indulgence, or the display of world-ideological preferencee'. Wilcox's (1993, p. 131) appraisal of the literature in the area leads him to the conclusionthat: The reader can be excusedfor developing a deep senseof fi-ustrationand sociological jargon flows freely, with such central terms as confusion, as Americanization, commodification, cultural colonialism, cultural hegemony, homogenization, cultural imperialism, globalization, and cultural lacking clear and precisedefinition, aswell as being frequently modernization, usedinterchangeably. As might be expected, the explanations presently on offer are expressionsand confirmations of the conceptual and paradigmatic diversity that characterizethe debate. In this regard, a major point of contention has arisen over whether the diffusion process is more appropriately conceived of in terms of dependencyor interdependency. Similar polarization has occurredbetweenthose who arguethat this those who claim there has been processhas had homogenisingconsequences and greaterdiversity. This thesis will attempt to unravel some of these complexitiesand avoid the prevailing tendencyto erectwhat are held to be false dichotomies.

1.3 Overview of the study

Notwithstandingthe tendentiousnatureof the debate,there doesseemto be a consensus the fact we are witnessinga processof globalization. Perhapsit on general is the very intensity of the controversy that drives the contributors to be primarily concernedwith sustaining their respective ideological prejudices. In my view the ideological heat needsto be taken out of the debate.What is neededis theoretically informed, rigorous and balancedempirical research.This thesis will be guided by a desire to advance understandingrather than a wish to sustain some ideological

6predilection.In other words, I will strive to achieveand maintain a substantialdegree of detachment,and by such means I aim to provide an analysis that is, itself, by Thesebroad commentson characterized a relative high degreeof object-adequacy. the stateof the current debatedo not, of course,in any way detractfrom the needfor a more detailed engagementwith it. Such a review of the literature will form the substanceof chapter two. This will involve a preliminary attempt at critically assessingthe theoretical, empirical and methodological adequacy of the various competing schools of thought. In chapter three, I will outline the theoretical I perspectivethat I intend to apply, and whoseadequacy aim to test, in the context of this thesis.The perspectivein questionis the figurational approach,first developedby Norbert Elias. In this context, I will outline how I proposeto apply this approachto an understanding processes globalization in general,and the diffusion of baseballin of of particular. It would be less than honest if I did not concedethat the reasonI have chosento adopt this approach is becauseof my initial attraction to it. To use the languageof Elias, I see it as having the potential to generatemore object-adequate explanations.However, notwithstandingthis predilection, I will endeavourto be as detachedin my appraisal of its relative explanatory power as I aim to be in my Of approachto the empirical research. course,it will be for the readerto judge to what extent this thesis measures to the standardsI have set for myselL Chapter four up providesan outline of the proposedmethodologicalapproachtaken within this thesis. This dimensionassumes greaterimportancein view of my commentson what I judge to be the empirical shortcomings much of the globalizationdebate.Therefore,there of is a needto be transparent aboutthe methodsusedto gatherthe empirical data that are the basis for the conclusionsdrawn within this thesis. In chapter five, I provide an overview of the emergence and developmentof baseballas a 'modem sport'. It is

7 baseballemergedin its modem form from numerousbat-and-ball games clear that in the USA during the middle of the nineteenthcentury.Attention will be paid played Cricket had been, for the early how baseballachievedascendancy over cricket. as to the most popular summersport in the country. On the part of the nineteenthcentury, basis of the success of baseball's development within the USA, some of its to develop a following for the game abroad. Chapter six proponents attempted detailed account of the spreadof baseballacrossthe world. Within this provides a I aim to accountfor its differential global popularity. I will provide an initial chapter, how baseball developed extensively in some countries, and barely assessment of the population in others. This empirically detailed analysis is key to registeredwith our understandingof globalization processes.As Maguire (1999, p.38) points out, there is a "need to conductcomparativecivilizational.analysis".This is complimented by a more in-depth case study of the baseball figuration in England. To this end, chapter sevenpresentsa comprehensive account for the developmentof baseballin England,from the very first attemptsmadeto introducethe gamein 1874,up until the present day. This case study is important becausethe less detailed analysesof the in chaptersix are primarily basedon secondarysourcesand while it is other countries the possible, to some degree,to assess consistencyof these accounts and identify it when ideology is clearly informing the analyses, is not so easyto determinehow the of predispositions the authorshaveinfluencedtheir selectionof the evidence.With the case study of England, I am able to exert more control over data gathering and be when drawing upon its findings and implications for an understanding more confident the global picture. In my view, being sensitive to the interplay between insights of derived from local figurations and reflections on the global figuration is a potentially Analysing the diffusion of baseballaround the world, productive way of proceeding.

8 the different responsesto attempts to develop the game, and subsequently and in much greater depth, the developmentsand responsesto baseball in analysing, England, enables us to engage in more informed comparative analysis. Having developmentalapproachto all the 'case studies', in chapter eight I will adopted a for to compensate the resultant fragmentationof this national approachby endeavour drawing them together in order to present a developmentalaccount of the global figuration. As Kilminster (1997,p.271) argues: The interdependencies between groups within nations and between nations acrossthe globe, which has to be investigatedmuch more on the empirical level, have propertieswhich are the result of the unplannedconsequences of those compelling relations, which exceedthe scopeof individual actions but are nevertheless only the result of those actions and the cumulative effect of historical order of their development.My point is that their existenceand concreteeffectsare empirically demonstrable.In my final chapter, I will engage in some critical reflections on the relative explanatory power of the figurational approach. I will also offer an appraisal of how the present thesis might have benefited if I had had more time and resources at my disposal, and if I had known what I know now. Finally, I will offer suggestions on some of the directions that future research into sport and processes of globalization might fruitfully go.

9Chapter 2: Reviewing the Literature: 2.1 Introduction Theorizing Global Processes

it Giventhe magnitude globaldiffusionprocesses, is hardlysurprising that of from a numberof disciplines its studyhasattracted attentionof academics the and orientations.In fact, the sheer volume of Publicationsin the broad area of that to means it is simply impossible covereachandeveryoneof them globalization within this review. As a result, what follows is a review of the specifically sociologicalliteraturepublishedin the area.The review will cover both broader sociological approaches thosewith a morespecificfocusfrom the sociologyof and Even so, it will be impossibleto cover the work of all sport sub-discipline. Therefore, focuswill be sociological to the contributions the debate globalization. on on keytexts.

Not surprisinglythe multitude of approaches taken to globalizationhave found expressionin defimitionaland explanatorydiversity. This will becomecleareras this review unfolds. With regard to the definitional issue, certain terms are often used interchangeably in the literature. For example, without drawing any distinction betweenthem, some authors refer to theseprocesses diffusion as 'globalization' of and 'cultural imperialism'. By implication, this would seem to suggestthat these 'terms' have the same meaning. In response,other writers maintain the need to distinguish betweenthem, because they are held to have distinctive conceptualand explanatoryimplications. The different positions may be identified and distinguished along the following lines: Modernization theorists, who have argued that globalization processes have homogenising tendencies;

10

Dependency theorists,and advocates the "Cultural lmperialisn' thesis,who of 9 focus solely on homogenization processes; also Pluralists, who argue that cultural diversity, and as such, heterogenising tendencies, an expression global processes; of are Cultural hegemonists,who argue that dominant groups meet with some resistance and this heterogenization; Writers from a 'multi-causal' dimension. In many respects,this is a residual 9 category, since this group of authors cannot be grouped as a 'school'; they have sufficient in common to be distinguishedfrom other nevertheless writers. It is clear that, though they share much in common with cultural hegernonists, they are not 'cultural hegemony' theorists. They do argue that homogenization and heterogenization occurs, but they also argue that factors contribute to globalization processes,and that it is too numerous restrictive to concentrate analysison dominant groups; 9 Figurational sociologists,who argue along similar lines to the 'multi-causal' group. However, they adhere to an explicit theoretical approach, which focuseson the complex dynamics of human figurations, the interdependency ties and power relationships involved. Unlike other approaches,particular is emphasis placedupon the unplannedoutcomesof dynamic figurations. finds expression in both homogenization and

The position taken here is that while one requires some initial orientation to the subjectmatter, clarifying definitions are more likely to form part of the conclusion than the introduction. Ratherthan begin the researchprocesswith a rigid conception of 'how things are', a more constructive approach is to establish a provisional

11

is open to modification in light of the evidence. Although, in framework that to structurethis chapteraroundthe broad literature it seems appropriate reviewing the dividing lines established above.I will presentthe central elementsof the approaches of taken by these authors before concluding with a preliminary assessment their relative theoretical,empirical and methodologicaladequacy.

2.2 Explication of the literature2.2.1 Modernization theorist

Wagner (1984; 1988; 1989; 1990) highlights the significant contribution of former 'colonial powers' with regardto the diffusion of forms of sport. Nevertheless, his argument is not that cultural diffusion is a dimension of cultural imperialism. Rather, he proposes a modernization thesis. This modernization approach is functionalist in character and is concerned with how societies have reached 'modemity'. The modernizationapproachpresupposes global diffusion processes that are contributing to homogenizationbecausedifferent societiesthroughout the world will eventually follow the 'modem', western ideal of development.Wagner (1989, p.5) points out, however, that "those who argue that virtually all modem sports diffused from Europe are likely to haveto modify their standwith respectto Asian ...

sporte'. In this regard,Wagnerarguesthat certain 'sports' indigenousto parts of Asia for example, many martial arts, surno wrestling, ssirum, and takraw - remain comparativelypopular. Ssirum and takraw are popular only in Asia, although some martial arts and surno wrestling have diffused beyond Asia, and are more or less global in their diffusion. As suck he argues,"our Europcentricview of sport history be modified and broadened"(Wagner, 1989, p.5). Instead,Wagner(1989, p.5) must that the "total world sportsheritageis vastly more complex". He arguesthat maintains

12 international migration has been a central component of the diffusion of cultural forms and, because this, the "global sportsculture will develop in ways that are in of harmony with the likes, desires,and values of diverse peoples an over the world" (Wagner, 1990,p.402). Furtherto this, Wagner(1990, p.402) arguesthat the difflusion processhas largely reflected, and will continue to reflect, the "will of the people". Therefore, Wagner (1990, p.402) prefers to consider cultural diffusion as best characterizedby "international modemizatiolf In this respect, he holds that "the larger international processes of development and modernization ... are

fundamentallyresponsiblefor changesin the world of sport" (Wagner, 1990,p.401). Theseprocesses, argues,are "ultimately likely to leadto a global sportsculture" he ... and "toward greater homogenization7'(Wagner, 1990, p.402). As with the functionalist approachin sociology more generally, most people writing in the field today have largely rejected the modernization thesis in global diffusion, as is explainedbelow.

2.2.2 Cultural imperialism/dependency theory Cultural imperialists, and those advocating a dependencytheory approach, reject several assumptionsin Wagner's modernization theory. However, cultural imperialists share in common with Wagner the notion that we are witnessing homogenising processes. Most authors who hold that cultural diffusion is by cultural imperialism also argue that the USA is dominant. As a characterized thesehomogenising result, 'Americanization' is a term frequentlyusedto characterize propensities.This is exemplified in the work of Wilcox (1993; 1994). Although he has suggested the USA should not be viewed as the only force in the diffusion of that

13 America's contribution. For example, Wilcox (1993, sports, his work emphasizes in p.37; emphasis the original) arguesthat: The incomparableinfluence of American sport on contemporaryEuropean is undeniableand, if regional/nationalsports culture is not destroyed culture from within (in the causeof Europeanunity), it is altogether likely that the formulation of public policy will be necessary ensure condition of cultural to a isolation or resistance,thus guaranteeing state's protection of culture by the regulating American sporting enterpriseand subsidizing traditional European sport. In other words, Wilcox considersthe transferof American sportsand sportsimagesto Europe to be so powerfiil, that it will be necessary formulate state legislation in to order to protect indigenousEuropeancultures. Such a view is indicative of someone by who adoptsan Americanizationstanceand is underscored referenceto a statement he made on an American baseballtour of the world that took place in 1889. Wilcox (1993, p.3 1) arguesthat this tour represented: A significant turning point in the utility of sport, as distinct economicmotive began to supersedepolitical expansion during the twentieth century, and America replaced Britain 'as the prime mover in the diffusion of modem sportsthroughoutthe world' (Guttmann,1978,p. 185). In summary,he predicts that thesedevelopmentsare part of an "on-going universal homogenization culture" (Wilcox, 1994,p.95). of

Stoddart(1994) arguesthat economicmotive is the essentialaspect governing the diffusion process.He supportsthis position with a casestudy of the spreadof golf around the world. He argues that there are a number of facets that signify its 'globalism'. These include the global scientific searchto hit the ball further, the fact that there are courses throughout the world, the increasing global market of the golfmg manufacturers, and the global market place for golf clothing and shoes.The trans-nationalmedia, advancesin technology and manufacturingof golf equipment,

14 of courses, and tourism all contribute to the the standardizedglobal architecture "principle of globalism7'(Stoddart, 1994,p.25). All of these,Stoddart(1994) argues, have been an integral part of profit maximization in the golf industry. He holds that "globalization story" includes "historical, spatial, intellectual, economic and the (Stoddart, 1994, p.21). As such, he maintains that the cultural aspectsof sport" "globalization of sport" is more than just the "prerogative of the West" (Stoddart, 1994,p.28). He points out that the Japanese Taiwaneseinfluence in the marketing and of golf acrossthe globe is substantial.There are a limited number of multi-national (MNCs), basedin a limited number of countries,which are dominant in corporations the diftsion In this regard, Stoddart (1994, p.33) argues that the process.

is a "great economicmachine".The common theme,then, is an globalization of golf economic,rather than a cultural or political motive, and, as such,Stoddartarguesthat the economic aspectsof sports diffusion are at the fore. By implication, distinctly economicmotives have contributedto a homogenizationof the gamethroughout the Although Stoddart(1994) never labels himself as a 'cultural imperialist', it is world. that he sympathizeswith this particular view of difflasion processes, since he clear argues,"if Marx and Engelshad written a century later than they did, they might well haveregardedgolf as the purestform of capitalism" (Stoddart,1994,p.32).

Galtung (1971; 1984; 1991) arguesthat a structural domination exists in the relationship between societies. Galtung (1971) puts forth the idea that spheresof culture, economics,politics, military matters and communicationsall contribute to this domination. Galtung uses the term 'cultural imperialism' to outline the cultural diffusion between states in the 'centre' and those in the 'periphery'. This, he the broader'structural domination' that exists. maintains,encapsulates

15 Galtung suggeststhat the developmentof global culture is highly contested. He maintains that the 'motor' of globalization is a combination of various developments. Theseinclude the developmentof a worldwide media system,and the spreadof capitalism and western cultural imperialism,per se. He statesthat, "only imperfect, amateurishimperialism needsweapons:professionalimperialism is based on structureratherthan direct violence" (Galtung, 1971,p.90). In other words, culture is an additional areathrough which an imperialist relationshipis maintained.He holds that modem-dayimperialism is basedmore on structure,as opposedto just a crude military dominance.

Galtung (1984; 1991) has also written more specifically on the diffusion of modem sports.Sport, he argues,is an important elementin cultural diffusion. This is, principally, becausesport is basedon body language,which "transcendslinguistic bordershaving no need for translators" (Galtung, 1991, p. 150). This, he argues,has contributed to wider aspectsof cultural imperialism. In this respect, he posits that sports: Carry a message, message Westernsocial cosmology.Each competitive the of sport is a reinforcement of that message.It is an almost ideal-typical presentation what the West is about.As such it is very hard to believethat it of doesnot servea major socio-psychological and psycho-political function: that of reinforcing and legitimising the West as an ongoing enterprise(Galtung, 1984,p. 15) He suggests that 'universal' products, suchas 'human rights' and 'sports', are only universal because "the Center has managed to get Periphery acceptance" (Galtung, 1991, p. 150). In other words, universalism is justified by the powerful nations at the core of the capitalist world system. Furthermore,he arguesthat, "we

16 Western"(Galtung, 1991,p. 150; emphasisin still live in a world where universal = the original).

In terms of the capitalist world economy, Wallerstein has arguably produced this nature, in this particular field. He developeda the most comprehensive work of theory from a sympatheticstanceto 'cultural imperialism' theorists,which he labelled 'World SystemsTheory' in 1974. He has developedthis theory since then in several books and articles (1983/1995; 1990; 1991; 2000). Wallerstein outlines the importanceof studying the diffusion of culture from a long-term perspective.In fact, he arguesthat "globalization is a misleadingconcept", as many authorstend to argue that it is a new phenomenon,but "what is described as globalization has been happening for 500 years" (Wallerstcin, 2000, p.249). He suggeststhat, since the fifteenth century, there has been a continual reduction of the number of 'sovereign and with units'. By 'sovereignunits' he meansareaswith "clear territorial boundaries flags, money, and aboveall citizens" languages, laws, assemblies, passports, national (Wallerstein, 1990, p.42). Part of the problem facing individuals in societies, he argues,has been, and continuesto be, dealing with the issuesthat this reduction of Wallerstein arguesthat we should view sovereignty sovereignunits has engendered. in the context of the processof 'universalism'. This universalismis what Wallerstein refersto asthe 'Capitalist World System'.He arguesthat: The successive expansionsthat have occurred (from the Europeancapitalist system to a World one) have been a conscious process,utilizing military, and economic pressuresof multiple kinds, and of course involving political, the overcomingof political resistance'sin the zonesinto which the geographic was taking place. We call this process'incorporation' (Wallerstein, expansion 1990,p.36).

17 Thus, he advocatesthat the spread of cultures around the world is very much dominatedby the intentions of groups of individuals. In relation to this, Wallerstein holds that, nation-states the 'core' (what he definesas 'developedcapitalist states') at makethoseat the 'periphery' ('underdeveloped upon them. To this states')dependent theory approach,Wallerstein addsthe conceptof 'semimore traditional dependency periphery' states.This is in an attemptto accountfor the increasing'development', or at least industrialization, of certain 'underdeveloped'states.Albeit, he argues,these semi-peripheral statesare not sufficiently developedto underminethe authority of the core nations.

The 'principle of universalism', Wallerstein argues, is proclaimed by core statesacrossthe world. He specifiesthat, "each stateis proclaiming the universality of the equality of citizens as a sort of universalmoral law" (Wallerstein, 1990,p.43). ... However, in emphasising point, Wallerstein(1990,p.43) argues this that:It is precisely because there is in reality a hierarchy of states within the interstate system and a hierarchy of citizens within each sovereign state that the ideology of universalism matters. It serves on the one hand as a palliative and a deception and on the other as a political counter-weight which the weak can use and do use against the strong.

As suck he arguesthat the capitalist world systemis a westernconceptualization. He arguesthat, ",westernculture is in fact universal culture" (Wallerstein, 1990, p.45), becauseit is western statesthat are predominantly at the core of the world-system and therefore are the most powerful. Notwithstanding this, he arguesthat there has also beena tendency,at leastfor somepeople,to emphasize 'virtue of difference', the but the ultimate goal for the core nation-states beenassimilation,by any method. has As such, he holds, "a universalist message cultural multiplicity could serve as a of justification of educating various groups in their separate 'cultures' and hence

18them for different tasks in the single economy" (Wallerstein, 1990, p.45). preparing Indeed,Wallerstein(1983/1995,p.81) positsthat, "the belief in universalismhasbeen '. the keystoneof the ideologicalarch of historical capitalism!

Wallerstein (1983/1995) argues that commodity chains have been created the world-system, and these have led to vertical integration - with the core across the dominant over the semi-peripheryand subsequently periphery nations. In nations he argues,'1hey havebeencentripetalin fornf' (Wallerstein, 1983/1995, other words, 30). Over time, thesecommodity chains"have becomemore and more functionally p. and more hierarchical. This and geographicallyextensive,and simultaneouslymore hierarchizatioifl, Wallerstein (1983/1995, p.30) argues,"has led to an ever greater betweenthe core and peripheral zones of the world-economy". In this polarization he holds that "what was remarkableabout capitalism as a historical system respect, the way in which this unequal exchange could be hidden" (Wallerstein, was 1983/1995,p.31). Wallerstein (1983/1995, p.34) proposesthat the ...unseen hand' in the sensethat the 'market' set constraintson individual unquestionablyoperated, behaviour".

Wallerstein(1983/1995,p.39) arguesthat the capitalist world-systemgrows as he it seeksout new "low-cost labour forces". This is because, maintains, "virtually every new zone incorporated into the world-economy established levels of real remunerationwhich were at the bottom of the world-system's hierarchy of wagelevels" (Wallerstein, 1983/1995,p.39). He arguesthat the world-systemaroselargely to "achieve this end" (Wallcrstcin, 1983/1995,p.40-1). That is to say, Wallerstein considersthat the productionof capital lead to the creationof a world-systemin order

19 to maintain the position of core 'entrepreneurialclasses'.In relation to this, he asks: "What could be more plausible than a line of reasoning which argues that the the origin of a systemwas to achieve an end that has in fact been explanationof achieved"?

It is clear from the summaryof the four authorsin this sectionthat they share To in terms of explaining diffusion processes. differing degrees considerableground and they all arguethat the capitalistworld economyis driving diffusion processes that However, severalauthors disagree.I now this is leading to greaterhomogenization. want to move on to discussthose who argue that the prevailing characteristicof globalizationis greaterheterogeneity.

2.2.3 Global Diffusion as Cultural Diversity Nederveen Pieterse (1994; 2001) argues that it is more fruitful to view

"globalisation as hybridisation7' (Nederveen Pieterse, 1994, p. 161). Hybridization processes are "as old as history" (Nederveen Pieterse, 2001, p.222), and as such, Nederveen Pieterse takes a long-term approach to understanding global diff-usion processes. This is especially the case, he argues, when compared with the traditional view of globalization as something that is either tied up with the west, or modernity or more likely, the interrelation of the two. His argument "takes issue with both these interpretations as narrow assessmentsof globalisation and instead argues for viewing globalisation as a process of hybridisation which gives rise to a global m6lange" (Nederveen Pieterse, 1994, p. 161). This "global m6lange" is a consequence of "increasing global density and interdependence" (Nederveen Pieterse, 1994, p. 168). This, concomitantly, leads to a process of "pluralisatioW' of forms of co-operation and

20 "there are multiple globalisationprocesses work7l it competition.As such,because at "is hardly adequate" view this as a processof homogenization (Nederveen Pieterse, to 1994,p. 161). Furthermore, NederveenPieterse(1994, p. 162) argues,it is "less-likely Instead, he proposesthat the that globalisationscan be one-directionalprocesses"'. process of globalization is characterizedby an increasein the available modes of organization at 'trans', 'inter', 'macro-regional', 'national', 'micro-regional',

'municipal' and 'local' levels. "This ladderof administrativelevels", he maintains,"is being criss-crossed by functional networks of corporations, international

organisations, non-governmental organisations well as professionalsand computer as users" (Nederveen Picterse, 1994, p.166; emphasis in the original). Nederveen Pieterse(1994) concludesby arguing that statepower has beenan important element in the strategywithin this 'functional network'. Nevertheless, statepower: Is no longer the only game in town. The tide of globalisationreducesstates' room for manoeuvre, while international institutions, transnational transactions, regional cooperation, subnational dynamics and nongovernmentalorganisationsexpandin impact and scope(NederveenPieterse, 1994,p. 179). Hannerz; (1990a& b) arguesthat cultural diffusion has led to the development of a generic 'world-culture'. But, he maintains,this doesnot meanthat this is the only 'culture'. He also identifies sub-cultures that still exist, which are continually developedalongsidethe wider whole. As suck for Hannerz,it would be impossibleto conceiveof the diffision processas resulting simply in homogenization.Even when people may 'adopt' a previously 'alien' culture they often, subsequently, make this 'way of life' their own. Hannerzrefers to this processas 'creolization'. As such, he placesconsiderable emphasison 'local' interpretation.Thus, despitethe development of a world-culture, this 'culture' can be interpretedin a variety of ways. Hence, for

21 Hannerz,cultural diffusion is not basedon dependency, is not uniforrn. Insteadhe and arguesthat: There is now a world culture markedby an organizationof diversity rather ... than by a replication of uniformity. No total homogenizationof systemsof meaningand expressionhas occurred,nor does it appearlikely that there will be one any time soon. But the world has become one network of social betweenits different regions there is a flow of meaningsas relationshipsand well asof peopleand goods(Hannerz,1990a, 237). p. Hannerz (1990a & b) arguesthat two different kinds of individual can be identified in the world today. On the one hand there are 'locals', and on the other there are 'cosmopolitans'. Somepeople,Hannerz(1990a & b) posits, will always be 'locals' no matter where they work, or go on holiday, for example.In other words, thesepeople seek out aspectsof culture that remind them of 'home' wherever they are. For instancemany immigrants in certain countries attempt to createtheir own cultural backgroundelsewhere.This is what he refers to as "home-plus security" (Hannerz,1990a,p.241). Somepeople,for examplesome'British-exiles' in the south (Hannerz, 1990a,p.241). of Spain, seekto establisha kind of "home-plus-sunshine" 'Locals' will look to create a 'Home from Home' no matter where they are. he Nevertheless, argues,"if there were only locals in the world, world culture would be no more than the sum of its separate parts"(Hannerz, 1990a,p.249). There are also 6cosmopolitan'people. These individuals actively, or otherwise, Hannerz (1990a, p.239; emphasisin the original) argues,"search for contrastsrather than uniformity. To becomeacquainted with more cultures is to turn into an aficionado, to view them as art works". As such, cosmopolitans are people who thrive on learning and developinga range of cultural aspectsof life. This might include a desire to learn a plethora of languages, maybeto enjoy the 'cuisine' of variousdifferent cultures,as or well as visit regionsof the world and immerseoneself in 'their' culture, and in 'their

22 way of life'. Although, Hannerzmaintainsthat this doesnot constitutea homogenous culture for cosmopolitans.Instead they add to the diversity of world culture. Furthermore,Hannerz(1990a&b) maintainsthat there is a large degreeof interaction between 'locals' and 'cosmopolitans". In this respect, he argues, "today's cosmopolitans and locals have common interestsin the survival of cultural diversity" (Hannerz, 1990a,p.249-50). To this end, it would be impossible to conceive this lines. relationshipdevelopingalong homogenous

Whilst offering a counter-argument the notion that cultural diffusion is best to conceivedas a result of increasinghomogenization,some hold that the arguments Pieterse and Hannerz somewhat overplay the notion of presentedby Nederveen. cultural diversity. Instead, the following authors argue that globalization is more adequately conceivedas involving a blend of homogeneityand heterogeneity.

2.2.4 Cultural Hegemony: Cultural Studies Approach Authors who advocate a 'cultural hegemony' stance share much in common with those who advocate a cultural imperialism perspective, and, as will become apparent, they share considerable ground with Wallerstein's world system theory. The significant difference is that those who adopt a cultural hegemony stance on global diffusion processes argue that the cultural imperialist view is "an overdetermined view" (Donnelly, 1996, p. 243). "A more subtle approach",, Donnelly (1996, p.243) argues, "is to regard Americanization in terms of cultural hegemony". Thus, for Donnelly (1996, p. 243), "Americanizatioie' is still his preferred term to illustrate

global diffusion processes but he considers that the "transfer of cultural products is not just one-way".

23 (1996) recognizes that of the four most significant American sports, -Donnelly basketballand ice hockey are played on anything approachinga global basis only (American football and baseballare only played to a comparativelyhigh level in a handftil of nations outside the USA). This fact does not deter Donnelly from Americanizationas a conceptual tool. In relation to this, he argues: preferring What is important is that the American style of sport has become the international benchmarkfor corporate sport - 'show-biz', spectacular,highthe ability to attract sponsorsby scoring, or record-settingsuperstarathletes; for desiredaudiences; having the characteristics necessary good and providing (Donnelly, 1996,p.246). television coverage In other words, insteadof actual 'American sports' being significantly disseminated, it is the characteristics these American sports that have becomemore pervasive. of Hence, many sports are increasingly marketed along American lines. The media he argues,hasbeenincreasinglyinfluencedby the 'American of representation sports, As a result, he considersthat global sport is an example of a "monoculture" style'. (Donnelly, 1996,p.248).

If we were to acceptthe term "globalization7'as a satisfactoryexplanationfor in the diff-usionof sports,Donnelly (1996, p.248; emphasis the original) argues: We would have to acceptthat various countrieshad contributed in relatively ways to the observedchangesin sport, that such changesdid not have a equal source but were so blended that we have lost sight of any specific similar that there was evidenceof interdependency rather than national origins, and interestsinvolved in assertinga particular set evident and specific hegemonic; of meaningsand a particular way of playing and presentingsport as the only true meanings the only way of playing and presentingsporL and With this in mind he holds that 'globalization' is an adequate term if only limited to the economic and environmental relationships between societies throughout the he world. This is because, argues,there are a variety of sourcesof capital, debt, and

24 pollution. Furthermore,various countrieshave contributedin "relatively equal waye' to the "globalization7 of corporate sport as "an economic entity" (Donnelly, 1996, p.248). However, as a "cultural entity, corporate sport is not globalized, nor is it Europeanized,Japanized,or Hispanicized; it is clearly Americanized" (Donnelly, 1996,p.248). Americanization,he argues,is only the most appropriateepithet if "it is defmedin cultural hegemonic: termsasa two way processin which the recipientshave interpretiveand resistantpowers" (Donnelly, 1996,p.248).

Kidd (1991) cites numerous examples that, he argues, emphasize the dependency Canadians the USA. For instance,he points out that the influx of of on American television programmes has impacted upon the amount of 'air-time' provided for Canadianmade shows. So clear is this increaseddependencyon the USA, Kidd (1991) argues, that attempts have been made to reassert Canadian nationalism through sporting contests. This has been further enhanced by the establishment a central governmentpolicy on the developmentof Canadiansport. of Even this has still broadly mirrored what has happenedin the USA. As such, he stipulatesthat "beyondthe red and white uniform and the flag, there is little in suchan approachthat is distinctly Canadiaif' (Kidd, 1991, p. 183).This is why, he argues,"the term Americanization has considerable usefulness, certainly far more than 'globalization' or 'internationalization"' (Kidd, 1991, p. 179).According to Kidd these latter terms are not specific enough.He regardsthe initial developmentof what others have referred to as a commodification process "as an, explicitly American set of practices" (Kidd, 1991, p. 179). This is becausethe "centre"t in this case,the USA, continues to "profoundly influence" the "periphery" within a "sphere of culture"

25 (Kidd, 1991,p. 179-80).He arguesthat a few MNCs basedalmost entirely in the USA largely control this "sphereof culture".

Kidd concludesthat whilst Americanization is a more appropriateterm to describethe processof cultural diffusion, it is also limited. The apparentunevenness developmentin sportshas led him to this conclusion.To this end, he maintainsthat of the term 'Americanization' is too simplistic. Kidd (1991, p. 180) holds that class, and ethnic tensionswithin Canadamean that the "terrain of assertionand gender is much more crowdedandconfused"than the term Americanizationwould resistance imply. As such, he prefers the term "American capitalist hegemony"I with its "Gramscianconnotationsconsciouslychosen" (Kidd, 1991, p. 180). This is because, he argues, American capitalist hegemony implies that there is some degree of increasingAmerican dominance. to, resistance nonetheless,

Klein also arguesthat cultural hegemonyis a more useful conceptwhen trying Americanization.Klein (1989; 1991a& b; 1994; 1997) has conducted to understand extensiveresearchinto the developmentof baseballin the Dominican Republic and what he refers to as the Americanizationof that country. Klein considersthat a crucial elementof Americanization,in general,is that it is tantamountto "neo-colonialism7' (Klein, 1991a, p.79). He emphasizesthe 'political-economic' relationships that characterizecultural diffusion and contribute to structural domination, which, by implication, is a subordinationof 'weaker' societiesand 'their' indigenousculture. In Although he doesnot dwell further on other words, the USA is the hegemonial power. this point, Klein (1991a& b) also maintainsthat to someextent this neo-colonialism has Eurocentriclinks as well. His critique concentrates the Americanizationof the on

26 Caribbean. He provides an analysis of the spread of baseball to the Caribbean, principally to the DominicanRepublic(1991b). Sincethe 1970s,Klein (1989; 1991b) argues, the development of Major League 'baseball camps' in the Dominican Republic demonstrates increasinglypowerful influence of American culture. This the is because within the Dominican Republic "the dream shines brightly for the individual ensnaredin poverty, but it blinds the society by deflecting the energiesof better spentin other pursuite' (Klein, 1989,p. 108). In this respect,he youth, energies argues,the "structural dominatiorf' enjoyed by the USA is gradually "eroding" the "cultural autonomy" of individual nation statesin the Caribbean(Klein, 1991a,p.8081). Be that as it may, Klein (1991a, p.80) arguesthat the situationof "exploitation is nevercomplete". Instead,he holdsthat: Cultural resistance colonial powers and to forces such as Americanization to to may take a variety of forms, and all aspects culture may lend themselves of interpretation and reinterpretationas aspectsof resistance.Thus, sport may easily be seenas contested cultural terrain (Klein, 1991a, p.80). In other words, Klein arguesthat American cultural valueshave not entirely engulfed in the Dominican Republic. For example,the fact that Dominicans have succeeded Major League Baseball (MLB) has been a point highlighted by several Dominican journalists (Klein 1989; 1991a&b).National pride is expressed variousjournalists by at the successes enjoyed by Dominican natives, often at the expenseof any wider coverageof MLB, frequently to the extent where performancesby Dominicans are lauded above their American counterparts.Klein (1989, p. 109) holds that this has become "synonymous with resisting American cultural colonialism". However, he argues that this cultural resistance is still comparatively "weak relative to the hegemonicopposite" (Klein, 1989,p. 109).

27 to Jacksonand Andrews(1999) arguethat it is not appropriate considersimply the 'global', we must also considerthe 'local'. That is to say "both the global and the local can only be understoodin relation to each other" (Jackson& Andrews, 1999, the 32). On this basis,Jacksonand Andrews (1999, p.32) emphasize needto focus p. being "constitutive of, and constituted by, multiple processes on globalization as to differing degrees, differing intensities,and in differing spatial at which are engaged locations". They express caution, then, in "both overstating and understatingthe (Jackson& Andrews, 1999,p.33). They arguethat frequently effectsof globalization7 too much attention to the 'victory' of capitalism or American authors pay imperialisin, and othersto the resistance the local, which are often a reactionto the of overblown claims of the former. Andrews elaboratesfurther on his considerationof Silk. Silk and Andrews (2001) the debatein a separate and more recent article with that transnationalcorporations(TNCs) have increasinglybegun to realise that argue they must engagewith the local in order to promote their productsacrossthe globe. They argue that before the 1980s,such TNCs sought to homogenizethe world by presenting a single, uniform image of their company or product across the international marketplace.More recently, Silk and Andrews (2001, p. 180) argue, "many corporations have acknowledgedthat securing a profitable global presence necessitates negotiating within the languageof the local". That is to say, for them, TNCs must market their products in a mannerthat reflects a local, national focus rather than a single global image. This amountsto a subtler meansof pursuing their interestsand extendingtheir dominance.

Silk and Andrews (2001) utilize examples from advertising campaignsthat have focussed on sport and sports products to bolster the main thrust of their

28In India COC41-COLI r-or imstancc, CUMI'mign Ilicy provide the cxAnIpleOrd argunxnt. coh)ur timt, arnongstotlxr things, linked the cok)ur red of a crUct Kill with tlw 1VUnd Coca-Cola. 'Mis, Oxy argue, is an illustration that "the commercial bruttily of India's passionfor cricket (red bill) with a desiredIumsionfor Coca-Cola synthesizes 2001, (red logo)" (Silk & Andrc%%-s, p. 193).11iii Is an example,tlwy liold, of CocaCola "tlirusting" itsclr-into the maimmurn of Indian culture by providing itscirwith Wal culture and experience" (Silk & Andrew$, a seemingly natural place within fiat in their opinion, a "vivid exampic" o,r %% Ilicy 2001, p. 193).Iniis ad%vttrcprc. %cnts, 2001, p. 193). "Cultural Toyot6n)" for "cultural Toyolisni" (Silk & Andrc%%-& term 2001, p. 189) thcm is an cxtension or Castclls' (1990; cited in Silk & Andrc%%-$, ToyotisrmToptism refers to a -nc%v flexible nuimigmicrit systcrnOuit and conceptof it in a mannerduit alk)%%Vdto rcsix)nd cffortlessly to organizedmaterial production dparnism o rajvurxw cconomicP (Silk & Andrcws, the inherent(yct unpredictable) (2001), "cultural Toplism" is the extcruion 2001, p. 189). 7lius, for Silk and Andrc%%3 into the cultural splicre, by %vay tiv nuvrLcting cultural prtxlucts in of of orthis notion the internationalniarkoplace in a flexible nuinnerIluil reflects the kwal as %%vil tlw as Thcy consider the Coca-Colaad%vrt re(effed to alm%v being an exampleor as gloWl. tIvy w %%hat call "acting globilly/thinking kxnlly'% According to tlw. autitors, th6 6 two identifiable rorms of cultural Toptism within adwrt6ing. dic other being one of "global anthcnis/localscrtsibilitici". Tlicy argue Ilia sivil 6a iwiculaily valuable

commodity with regard to the imc of 'SItAml antlicimlWal scimibilit;C3, lvcauic "within the logic of cultural Toyot6m, six)rt Is mbiliml ma nmir cultural signincr

of a tuition diat can cngige mitknuil semAbilit; Identities.and expefiencei" (Silk & c& Andrews,2001, p. 191).11is is because O'sivri is seen1byTNCsj ma gh)lmlly pmwnt cultural form. but one Iluit 6 locavily ticccnied by k)cnl dialecti" (Silk & Andrews,

29 2001, p. 191). They refer to advertsby Nike and Adidas in which the companiesused a rangeof elite sportsperformerswith different nationalitiesto promotetheir product in adverts that could, effectively, be shown the world over. This, they argue, is an example of Nike and Adidas being able to "promote their brands transnationally, effectively engagingand invoking national sensibilitieswithin a multitude of markets at one and the sametime" (Silk & Andrews, 2001, p. 197). Silk and Andrews (2001, p. 189) arguethat: What we appearto be witnessing is the capitalization on and redefinition of national belongingness by the promotional and marketing agents of transnationalcorporations intent on inserting their products into the diffuse and diversemarketsthey seekto penetrate. Miller, Lawrence, McKay and Rowe have produced various publications together in the areaof 'globalization and sport'. McKay and Miller (1991) provide a case study of the developmentof Australian sport. On this basis, they argue that British influenceswere most dominant on Australian culture right up until the early twentieth century. However, since the Second World War, they argue, influences from the USA and Japanhave beenof greaterimportance.So much so, that the Union Jackmight be betterreplacedon the Australian flag by "the Starsand Stripes,or more recently the Rising Sun" (McKay, Lawrence, Miller & Rowe, 1993, p. 11). Nevertheless, they place greaterimportanceon the notion that "sport in Australia has been Americanized" (McKay & Miller, 1991,p-90). They offer severalexamplesto support this thesis. For instance, there has been an influx of American sports television programmes, including the 'Wide World of Sport', a show with "a considerable amount of American content" on the ChannelNine network (McKay & Miller, 1991, p.89), and American football and basketball games are broadcast extensivelyon Australian television. In addition, Australian sports, they argue, have

30 "the showbiz format" and American sponsorsare prominent in Australian adopted sports(McKay& Miller, 1991, p.89).

More recently, Miller, Lawrence,McKay and Rowe (2001) have published a their approaclLThe central tenet of their argumentis accountof more comprehensive that MNCs have played a fundamentalpart in the sustainedglobal spreadof sports. The fact that suchMNCs are largely American based"is crucial" (Miller et al, 2001, 14). As such, Miller et al (2001, p. 14) are supportive, in the main, of the p. "Americanization thesis". Americanization, though, especially within global sports, "is extremely uneven" (Miller et al, 2001, p. 18). Hence, they argue that it is too to consider that Americanization is tantamount to cultural imperialism. simplistic Instead,they also prefer to considerthe processas cultural hegemony.As such,they state that "sport underminesany claim that globalization is a totality" (Miller et al, 2001, p.22). Alternatively, they claim, "globalizing tendencies must always be viewed as mediatedby local structuresincluding the nation-state"(Miller et al, 2001, p.24). Thus, they arguethat the globalizationof sportshasnot led solely to homogenization. This is in an attempt to underscore the fact that 'resistance' is an aspect of globalization.In this respect,McKay and Miller (1991, p.90) arguethat: Australia has a semiperipheralposition in the capitalist world economy, so American economicand cultural influencesare obvious. However, Australia's marginal status in the global market meansthat other countries also shape Australian popular culture. They also point out that an Australianizationprocessmay be witnessed,with the promotion of Australian Rules Football beyond Australia, and the spread of Rugby League to Canadaand the USA. Australian companieshave also sponsored sports beyond their native country. As suck they argue that the analysis must go

31 "beyond the unidirectional logic of notions of straightforward cultural domination" (McKay & Miller, 1991, p.92). Instead,they argue that the influence of MNCs are fruitfully viewed as part of the wider "capitalist world system" (McKay & more in Miller, 1991, p.92; emphasis the original).

imperialists,cultural hegemonists Compared place greaterweight with cultural local interpretation and resistanceto the dominant cultural flow of diffusion on and consider it an oversimpliflcation to place emphasis solely on processes homogenization. They instead argue that processes of homogenization and heterogenizationare taking place, although they still subordinatethe latter to the former. There are numerous other authors who agree that globalization is more homogenizationand heterogenization;but adequatelyviewed as an expressionof disagreement the weight placed on the intendedactions of dominant arisesregarding groups.I will now discussthis latter group of authorswithin this review.

2.2.5 Globalization as multi-causal Guttmann (1988; 1991; 1993; 1994) has written extensively on sports diffusion. He outlines severalfactorsthat are important in the diffusion of sports: While a number of factors determinethe processof ludic diffusion, the most important of them is the relative political, economic,and cultural power of the nations involved ... The distinctions among the forms of power are certainly not arcane.There is no need to define them here. What is important is to recognize that the power vectors are usually but by no means invariably aligned. A nation that exercisespolitical and/or economic power usually cultural power as well (Guttmann, 1991, p. 186). exercises Hence,Guttmannarguesthat it is possibleto identify 'prime-movers' in the diffusion process.In this respect,he holds that the languageof a sport providesa good measure as to the originators of diffusion. English is the languageof modem sports,with only

32 handful of exceptions(Guttmann, 1988). He maintainsthat this is reflective of the a dominant role that has been played in the diffiasion process by English speaking firstly by people from England, and more recently, by people from the USA. people; Despitethis, Guttmanndoesnot advocatea cultural imperialism or cultural hegemony Indeed, he arguesthat, "cultural hegemonyand cultural imperialism, imply stance. intentionality, which is unfortunate becausethose who adopt a sport are often the initiators of a transactionof which the 'donors' are scarcelyaware" (Guttmann, eager 1991, p. 187). In this respect, Guttmann (1991, p. 187) argues, "Wagner's is an improvement". This is because,Guttmann (1991, p. 187) conceptualization holds, that Wagner "is correct to insist that we are witnessing a 'homogenizationof As such, Guttmann prefers the term 'modernization' to describe world sports"'. diffusion processes.The term modernization, Guttmann (1991, p. 188) argues, "is because it preferable implies something about the nature of the global

transformation7. Nevertheless, he also states that, "if the tendency to confuse is one hazard,the assumptionthat modernizationis an modernizationwith progress inevitable and all-inclusive process is another" (Guttmann 1991, p. 188). Thus, Guttmann argues, is also an unsatisfactory term for explaining modernization, difflusionprocesses.

Throughout his publications,Guttmannmaintainsthat diffusion processes can in no way be regardedas uni-directional. Furthermore,he places great emphasison the 'interpretations' that various groupsof individuals have madeof 'alien' sports.In other words, he argues,analysis should not be restricted merely to the role of the 'diffusers' of sports.Peoplewho have 'adopted' sportsfrom othersoften, consciously and otherwise,place significant emphasisof their own on to them. In turn, they may

33feel that the gameis more reflective of their own characteristics culture, and thus and it is seenas 'their own' game.He also arguesthat many lessdevelopednationsregard defeatingthe mother nation at their own gameas a vital step in the cultural process. Thus, he is attempting to avoid using any term to describediffusion processes that "the motivations involved in the might imply mono-causality.This is partly because diffusion of sports have been diverse" (Guttmann, 1994, p. 174). Ultimately in attemptingto avoid mono-causallanguage,Guttmann(1994, p. 187) prefers the term "'standardizeduniversality". However, he does stress that this has not replaced diversity.

Houlihan (1994a& b; 2003) is also critical of many of the authorswhosework has beenoutlined above,because, maintains,they do not place sufficient emphasis he on an analysisof the response recipient cultures.He arguesthat: of VVhilethe literature on globalization and cultural imperialism is already large and rapidly increasing only a portion of it attempts to establish the consequences engagement of with the global culture for the recipient local cultures. Much closer attention is frequently paid to cataloging the quantity and rangeof cultural productstransferredfrom the rich, mainly westernstates. At worst this results in sweepingconclusionsusually basedon little more than an eclectic accumulationof anecdotesoften underpinnedby the patronizing assumptionthat no membersof a local culture would embracewesternglobal culture exceptunder duressor as a consequence trickery (Houlihan, 1994a, of p.360). Houlihan (1994a&b) identifies four key elementsthat he arguesare crucial to any thorough discussionon the diff-usionof sports. First, we must identify the key attributes of global culture. Secondly, it is necessaryto determine whether the direction of diffusion is top-down, or more diverse. Thirdly, and related to the to previouspoint, it is necessary identify whetherthe 'prime mover' is, for example,a particular state, a set of states, capitalism or another source. Fourthly, we must

34the role of the people in the "recipient/targetgroup" is that of understandwhether "passive acceptance" or "cooperative/contested participatioW' (Houlihan, 1994b, 179). Therefore, we must determineboth the 'reach' of cultural diffusion and the p. 'response'of recipient societies.Houlihan (1994a,p.370) argues that, "reachrefers to the depth of penetrationby the global culture of the local culture whereasresponse to the reactionof the recipient culture". Reachcould manifestitself in a variety refers for example influence through the media, or perhaps the bureaucratic of ways, the every day practicesof life. Total reach would organization of sports, or even imply completepenetrationacrossall of theseaspects.Partial reach implies that the impact of globalization could be confmed to one particular element of culture. A "passiveresponse".Houlihan (1994a,p.370-1) argues,"implies either an enthusiasm for the external culture or an inability to challenge the global culture". A ... &participative response' suggests "a process of negotiation, bargaining and accommodatiorf' between local and global cultures (Houlihan, 1994a, p.371). A conflictual response"indicates not only the possessionof sufficient resourcesto but enableresistance also a set of valuesthat leadsto rejection or attemptedrejection of the global culture" (Houlihan, 1994a,p.371).

Houlihan (2003, p.361) arguesthat "the significanceof economic power" in he relation to the globalizationof sport "must be acknowledged".Nevertheless, holds that, "simply to treat global sport as a cipher for, or tool of, economic interestsis an overextensionof the limited evidenceavailable" (Houlihan, 2003, p.361). Thus, the significance of military and political power must also be acknowledged.As such, Houlihan (2003, p.361) emphasizes role of the state in the globalization process the because "state plays a key role in shaping" the "pace, characterand trajectory" of the

35global sport processes.As such, he concludes, "the language of sport may be universal but the meaning it carries is as much determinedlocally as it is in the boardrooms multinational sportscorporations"(Houlihan,2003,p.36 1). of

Robertson(1992, p. 10) arguesthat globalization is "a very long, uneven and complicatedprocese'. He argues,globalization cannot be "equatedwith or seenas a direct consequence an amorphouslyconceivedmodernity" (Robertson,1992,p.8). of In order to attempt to clarify his position, Robertson(1990, p.26-7) identifies five skeletalphases globalization.Phase of one is the 'germinal phase', which involved an increaseof the number of nation-states betweenthe fifteenth and the mid-eighteenth Robertson'ssecondstageof globalization centuries.The 'incipient phase' represents between the mid-eighteenth century approximately up to the 1870s. During this period, he argues, there was a shift towards homogenous- in terms of structural organizations- unitary states,and conceptionsof formalized international relations beganto occur. Phasethree is the 'take off phase', which Robertsonapproximates between the 1870s and the 1920s. Increasing global conceptions of 'acceptable' national societieswere becomingmore and more apparent.Insteadof the growth in 'nationalism' being an impedimenttoward globalization,Robertson(1990) holds that this, too, was globalized. Furthermore,even beyond Europe there were increasing forms of global communicationstechnology. Likewise, global competitions were increasingly establishedculminating in the global conflict World War 1. "The struggle for hegemonyphase" is what Robertson(1990, p.27) calls his fourth stage which he dates between the 1920s and 1960s. Robertson (1990) argues that the SecondWorld War, and the subsequent'Cold War', illustrates the significance of differentiating this period. Finally, the fifth phaseis the 'uncertainty phase', from the

361960s to the present day.' This period, Robertson (1990) holds, is largely by increasing'polyethnicity', internationalcivil rights movements,and characterized a truly global mediasystem.

in that: Robertson(1992,p.183;emphasis the original) contends Globalization does not simply refer to the objectiveness of increasing interconnectedness In very simple terms, we are thus talking about issues ... the idea of the world being 'for-itself'. The world is not literally surrounding 'for-itself' but the problem of being 'for-itself has become increasingly in particular because the thematizationof humankindin a number of significant, of respects. In arguing this, Robertson(1992, p.183) is not suggesting that the world is becoming increasingly "a single place". Rather, it is the perception that the world is "an 'imagined community' (Anderson, 1983)" (Robertson,1992,p. 183)that conveysthis impression.Thus, although Robertson(1992, p. 135) considersthat globalization, "in its most generalsense",is a "processwherebythe world becomes single place"; he a is not convincedthat this has resultedin homogenization. such, he maintainsthat As diff-usionprocesses cannot be restricted to certain 'trajectories', like westernization. Robertson argues that it is more appropriate to consider processes such as homogeneity and heterogeneityas interwoven. In arguing this, Robertson (1995) refers to a processof "glocalization"Vwhich has seenthe difrusion of a diverserange of local cultures across the world. Thus, he views globalization as the "particularization of universalism(the rendering of the world as a single place) and the universalization of particularism (the globalized expectation that societies ... shouldhavedistinct identities)" (Robertson,1987,p.38).

' It is not clear in his work whetherthis uncertaintyrefers to the characteristics the phaseor more to of the fact that it is the most recentperiod and,therefore,it is too early to makean assessment.

37Featherstone (1990; 1995) expresses misgivings about some of the research that by conducted others into globalizationbecause many have failed to acknowledge it is impossible: To talk about a commonculture in the ftiller sense without talking about who is defining it, within which set of interdependencies power balances,for and to which outside culture(s) have to be what purposes,and with reference discarded,rejected or dernonified in order to generatethe senseof cultural identitY(Featherstone, 1990,p. 11). In other words, Featherstonehighlights several empirical problems concerning conductedin this area.He arguesthat the lack of clarity regardingterms such research as 'culture', 'nation', 'nationalism', as well as 'globalization', haveall hinderedmuch He analysisof of the work elsewhere. holds that in order to conducta more adequate to the diffusion process,it is necessary pay attention to the many diverse responses "within a variety of cultural contextsand that there have been.As suck the response 1990, p. 10). Although practicee' will not be "anything like unifornf' (Featherstone, that contribute to growing homogenizationand cultural we may witness processes integration,Featherstone (1995, p.6) maintains,"it is clear that they are by no means of uncontested".In this respect,he argues,"the paradoxicalconsequence the process of globalization ... is not to producehomogeneitybut to famaliarize us with greater diversity" (Featherstone, 1995,p.86). In other words, the processof globalization is an expressionof the complex interweaving of the spread of global cultures with increasing recognition and development of local cultures. In relation to this, Featherstone (1995, p. 103) arguesthat "it is not helpful to regardthe global and local as dichotomies separatedin space or time; it would seem that the processesof (1995, globalization and localization are inextricably bound together". Featherstone p. 118), like Robertson, refers to a process of glocalization, insofar as increasing

38numbers of transnational corporations are tailoring their products "to specific differentiatedaudiences markets". and

Fcatherstone (1990, p. 1) doesnot considerthat the spreadof 'global cultures' involves a "weakening of the sovereigntyof nation-states".He also arguesthat the 'response'of any group of individuals to the diffusion of culture is in no way uniform. Instead,he seesthis process"more in terms of the diversity, variety and richnessof 1990,p.2). As such, popular and local discourses, codesandpractices" (Featherstone, "individual nation-states may attemptto promote,channelor block flows with varying degrees of success depending upon the power resources they possessand the constraints of the configuration of interdependenciesthey are locked into" (Featherstone, 1995,p. 118).In this sense, "the intensity and rapidity of today's global (1990, p. 10-11) argues: cultural flows", Featherstone Have contributedto the sensethat the world is a singular place which entails While this increasingly the proliferation of new cultural forms for encounters. denseweb of cosmopolitan-localencountersand interdependencies give can rise to third cultures and increasingtolerance, it can also result in negative reactionsand intolerance. By 'third cultures', Featherstonemeans the rise of 'cultural forms' beyond 'the nation'. Inasmuch as these third cultures "themselvesare conduits for all sorts of diversecultural flows which cannot be merely understoodas the product of bilateral 1990, p. 1). He prefers to consider exchangesbetweennation-statee' (Featherstone, that the processof globalization is a consequence "being drawn together into a of progressively tighter figuration through the increasing volume and rapidity of the flows of money, goods, people, information, technology and images" (Featherstone, 1995,p.81).

392.2.6 Figurational sociology It is clear that some aspects of Robertson and Featherstone's work fits quite figurational approach. They both utilize Elias's work in their analyses. well with a Maguire, however, offers an explicitly (1991aft figurational centred approach. Maguire

1993ab&c; 1994a&b; 1999; Maguire & Bale, 1993; Jarvie & Maguire,

1994) has been the most prolific publisher of material that can broadly be identified as dealing with 'sports diffusion'. Maguire argues that the processes of sports diffusion integrally related to phases in the sportization of pastimes. He outlines a number are departure in his analysis of global sports diffusion. The first point of of points of departure "is that an understanding of the global sportization formation is bound up in inter-civilizational exchanges" (Maguire, 1999, p. 62). That is to say, it is not

appropriate to separate the globalization of sports from a broader understanding of globalization processes. In this respect, Maguire (1999, p.63) argues that a second point of departure is the need to adopt a "very long-term perspective in exploring globalization processes". He stresses that processes of globalization have no zeropoint. Diffusion processescan be traced to several different periods of time in starting several different regions. As such, a third point of departure for Maguire (1999, p. 63) is that the "longer-term links of non-occidental ancient civilizations with the making of modem sport should not be overlooked". Nevertheless, in relation to 'modem sports', Maguire argues that certain individuals and groups from the UK were initially very influential in the difflusion process toward the end of the nineteenth century. In this sense, diffusion occurred from more complex and powerful to less complex and less powerful societies. A fourth point of departure is the need to understand the "competing centrifugal and centripetal forces that characterize the new geographical arena7' (Maguire, 1999, p. 64). This, Maguire (1999, p. 64) argues, "relates to the

40 local/global debate,and refers to the internal dynamicsat work within any specific society".

Maguire (1999, p. 65) argues that "in conducting this long-term, intersport processesit is also important to be clear about civilizational analysis of global the term 'modem sport' refers to". As such, he outlines the initial two phasesof what " sportizatiorf' (Elias, 1986a) that saw the development of numerous sports in their 'modern' forms. The first sportization phase occurred in the eighteenth century and emphasized by the emergence of rules and regulations in conjunction with the was development of boxing and fox-hunting, for example, as 'modern' sports. The second by the emergence of Association Football, and Rugby, for example, was emphasized in their modem, codified forms. Maguire adds three further phases of sportization. This is because,he argues, "Elias did not fully develop his analysis of the export of these sport forms" (Maguire, 1999, p. 8 1). Maguire (1999) argues that a third, 'global sportization phase', from the 1870s to the early 1920s, is characterized by the international diflusion of elite-level male sport, in particular. During this time, westerners, and the English in particular, were dominant players in the difrusion of sport. He argues that the increasing prevalence of American sport forms across the globe in the 1920s and 1930s might be seen as signs of a fourth global sportization phase. The west remained dominant in the international diffusion of sport, but increasingly the struggle for world sporting hegemony occurred within the west itself. During this time, and beyond, "it was an American version of the achievement sport ethos that had gained ascendancy" (Maguire, 1999, p.84). Ibis period, Maguire (1999, p. 85) claims, saw the increasing influence of "management, administration and marketing of sport ... along American linee'. The fifth global sportization phase,

41 Maguire (1999) argues,can be traced from the 1960s.During this period there has beenan "acceleratingcomminglingprocessbetweensport cultures" (Maguire, 1999, p.86). This has seennon-western. nationsincreasinglyprominent in terms of success on-the-field, so to speak,and an increasinginfluenceof non-westempeople within international sports organizationsoff-the-field. Increasing varieties of sports have becomeevident during this phaseof sportization.Although, Maguire (1999, p.211) argues that "despite these new varieties of sport cultures, a series of structured indicate that a reduction in the contrastsbetweensport cultures has also processes occurred".

In attempting to summarize Maguire's work, it is important to note that he insists that the process of cultural diffusion cannot be seen as uni-directional. This is becauseglobal processesare multi-directional, involving a series of dynamic power balances; and, on a more general level, becausethe focus needsto be on relationships. He points to a number of global flows that must be considered if we are to understand globalization processes more adequately. Rather like Featherstone, Maguire argues that the global figuration is structured along the global flows of people, finance, technology, mediated images and ideologies. He holds that "the speed, scale and volume of sports development is interwoven with thefse] broader global flows" (Maguire, 1999, p.93). Therefore, he considers that it is more adequate to view diffusion as constituting a balance and blend of inter-related processes that are expressionsof people in action. The complex interweaving of the various global flows contributes, "over the long ternf',, to "outcomes that were neither planned nor intended by the more and less powerful groups involved" (Maguire, 1999, p. 21 1). As such, it is implausible, Maguire argues, to accept mono-causal explanations that

42reduce global processes solely to an understanding of political economy structures. Although, "to argue this is not to overlook or downplay the shorter-terin impact that issuesof political economy have on sporte' (Maguire, 1999, p. 21 1). Maguire (I 994a, 453) maintains that, "the current development of sport is itself being powered by a p. whole series of intended and unintended interdependency chains that characterize globalization7'. Hence, he argues, there is no hidden hand of 'progress' or some overarching conspiracy guiding processes of diff-usion. Maguire maintains that is most adequately understood in terms of the Efisian concepts of globalization 'diminishing contrasts and increasing varieties'. This developed through growing interdependenciesand power struggles, as there occurred, in its course, a reduction in the contrasts within societies. This has not, and is unlikely to, produce a homogenous culture. In relation to this point, Maguire (1999) argues that even global-marketing companies are unlikely to seek homogeneity. In this respect, he argues, transnational corporations "celebrate difference. That is, the cultural industries constantly seek out new varieties of ethnic wares. These ethnic wares are targeted at specific 'niches' within a local culture. This targeting can lead to strengthening of 'local' ethnic identitiee' (Maguire, 1993a,p. 3 10).

In concluding, Maguire (1999, p.213) argues that "globalization is accordingly best understood as a balance and blcnd between diminishing contrasts and increasing varieties, a commingling of cultures and attempts by more established groups to control and regulate accessto global flowe'. Furthermore, "the local-global struggle for relative ascendancy in power networks is also located within the unintended and unforeseenconsequences earlier intended actions" (Maguire, 1999, p.215). of

43In summary, there is a great deal of overlap between Maguire's work and that of those authors whose work is outlined in section 2.2.5. It is clear that none of them 'homogenization thesis'. This is not to say they argue that heterogenization advocate a best characterizes cultura