This essay is going to look at the phenomena of globalization and its effects on cultures of the world. Posing question such as could culture imperialism smother individual cultures throughout the world?Can globalization carouse culture clashes?Does globalization promote a smooth running of juxtaposition of cultures?

Globalization as an economic phenomenon has move from national liberalization market economies to a global liberalization market economy, and carrying the banner of Democracy and is making the world more interdependent, And has created what is known as the “global village,” where by information vie the PC and internet net works can carry information at vast speeds and a at low costs to all corners of the world. The production of goods has been internationalized, and money flows freely and instantly across borders. It is virtually trade without borders. In this system multinational corporations wield vast power, while anonymous investors can foster material prosperity or cause devastating depression in any part of the world. Due to the surge of computer power technology and of fiber optics and satellite dishes and the development of information networks, such as the Internet the “World Wide Web”. This technology has bypassed barriers and overcome the vast distance of travel. This modern revolution of technology has given birth to economic phenomenon globalization. A gateway has been crate by globalization that allows a quantitative and qualitative expansion in transborder flows of activities and ideas from different culture.

Globalization has become a noticeable catchword in most societies throughout the world. But anyone trying to determine or pin down a real meaning or the interpretation of globalization will be met with so many different opinions from people from all countries and nation from across the world. But whatever your opinion might be whether optimistic or pessimistic or just let it be. Globalization, is here to stay and will go on spreading. Technology has fired globalization at such a velocity in such a short time across the breadth of the world that it has become to be seen as something “Good or to be feared as a Threatening”.

We can see from the very first chapter of (DD100 A globalizing World) the difference opinions from the four reads p11 2.2 Interpreting globalization, here we read four views on globalization.

Source Hutton W “The State to Come “(1997, p.55)

In the first read Hutton paints a pessimistic view of globalization as a form of homogenization of cultures. Where cultures are coming under threaten and are in danger of being choked by the highbred Americanization and it’s for thirst for global power. Culturalism imperial manipulated cultures of the world. Dominating culture that is to kick other cultures throughout the world onto the touch lines and substitute for their own used. The danger of being cultured by Popeye the sailor man with a can of Monsanto genetic modified spinach is becoming a real threat. Hutton makes reference to the blue jeans that most of world wares and has become acceptable dress for work and leisure. In most societies throughout world wear blue jeans that is an Icon of clothing associated with Americanization culturalism imperial. It could be argued that culture imperialism could smoother individual cultures throughout the world.

But finding a definition for culture poses another problematic of diversity of an interpretation in its strengths and weakness from nation and societies from all corners from the world. Culture is link to Identity and could be described as the roots or of the teeth of a nation. Cultures are closely interwoven just like a length of rope that is set of binds of complexities of ways and meanings. Any outside influence could under mind cultures from the more undeveloped countries. UNESCO on p61 raises its concerns about inequality of flows by cultural imperialist.(p61 DD100 chapter 2 THE GLOBALIZATION OF CULTURE) Sciller H (1991) Points out that Western culture imperialism is in a one-way traffic lane and is as far from being equal and is the opposite diversity of cultures.

But whatever your opinion might be. Optimistic view of globalization as a stretches out a hand of sharing a bring togetherness of intercourse of cultures from all nation around the world. The misunderstandings of other nation culture will wash away along any preconceived ideas and prejudices. This relatively low cost technology has brought about this “Global Village”. The remotest nations and communities on earth will be connected to a new world of new knowledge. Where by new cultures can be taken on or adapted. Optimist will draw our attention to p.28 figure 1.4 that shows woman cashiers wearing their traditional clothing that shows no compromising their culture or religion compared to the normal worn garb such as the baseball cap. Optimist say people are rational and are aware their own autonomy and will make their own agencies and the only way that outside cultures can take hold within nation if people allow to happen. The English can choose to eat at McDonalds, the Mexicans can choose to shop at Walmark, and the Ethiopia’s can choose to drink Coke Cola. And course they do in millions. The point is that no one form a western cultural imperil state will force them buy what they do want. If people want American products or any other countries, they will buy them. And if they decide not buy, the American corporations will not profit and will pull out.

But inter-nationalists will dispute that globalization is anything but a new phenomena although they do not deny something new global is happing as far as surged in technology is concerned. Nationalist here on (p.66. in Table 2.6) bring the idea of globalization in to more perspective view by showing television coverage’s in the UK.They show the percentages of audience viewing from MTV the Disney Channel as about attracting only2.0-3.0 % whereas the BBC attracts 44% of the viewing figures. The inter-nationals then argue that any probability of inculcation form culture imperialism from a Disney television channel would nothing more than a short live fantasy. National say most of what is happing is regional and far from being global

Table 2.6 Estimated audience share for national and global television channels in the UK, 1997

A. For year ending 31 December 1996 (ITC, 1997)

B. For year ending 29 June 1997 (Phillips, 1997, p30) Source Sparks, 1998 Table 6.1, p.116

The Inter-nationals also cautions about culture imperialist swamping and suppressing individual state cultures. The inter-nationals say this all talk of connections and culture flows is nothing new and can be trace back down through centuries and the of examples the silk Roads across Central Asia that connected china and Europe during the Middle Agers and likes of Marco Polo and his travels, the Romans in the UK.

The Transformationlists come out of their corner arguing that culture is a two way flow and not one way. Transformationlists deny the tag of thinking on culture imperialism by the US television coverage. (Sinclair et al 1996, p5) Points out that western TV are not the center of domination of the Third World culture. But the continent of Africa that has more undeveloped countries have many regional complexes cultures that has had contiguous out flows of culture from regions to region over the centuries. The Transformationlists say that any attempt by US TV programmers for audiences with so many internal regional dialects and readable purity would as nothing more culture imperialism. Transformationlists also make a point that westernization imports of TV viewing would only meet the needs for out of time viewing schedules.

Channel Percentage in all household (A) Percentages in satellite and cable homes (B)Total BBC 44 31.1Total Terrestrial commercial 45.5 32.1Total non-terrestrial 10.5 36.7Total BSkyB 4.9 16.8MTV 0.2 0.8Nickelodeon 0.5 1.8Country Music Television 0.1 0.1The Discovery Channel (Europe) 0.2 1.2The Disney Channel 0.3 0.8The Paramount Channel 0.1 0.3Fox kids - 0.3

What we need to understand is that culture is not an instinct it is something learnt and as Homo sapiens we came out of Africa. We had to learnt new ways in order survived take on new cultures yes we adapted them to our own used and this how has always been.

As example you live a cite all mode cons then one day you find yourself in the middle of jungle how long would you last not long unless of courses you to adapt to the natives way of life.And this is the way it is today you learn new culture the old ones become redundant and the only lose are the ones that do not adapt to the modern jungle.

Word count estimated 1290 refinance estimated 142