Entries
Saturday, 21 April 2007
CULTURAL POST TWO:
In 2,000 Years, Will the World Remember Disney or Plato?
By Mark Rice-Oxley
Christian Science Monitor
January 15, 2004
Down in the mall, between the fast-food joint and the bagel shop, a group of young people huddles in a flurry of baggy combat pants, skateboards, and slang. They size up a woman teetering past wearing DKNY, carrying Time magazine in one hand and a latte in the other. She brushes past a guy in a Yankees' baseball cap who is talking on his Motorola cell phone about the Martin Scorsese film he saw last night. It's a standard American scene - only this isn't America, its Britain. US culture is so pervasive; the scene could be played out in any one of dozens of cities. Budapest or Berlin, if not Bogotá or Bordeaux. Even Manila or Moscow.
As the unrivaled global superpower, America exports its culture on an unprecedented scale. From music to media, film to fast food, language to literature and sport, the American idea is spreading inexorably, not unlike the influence of empires that preceded it. The difference is that today's technology flings culture to every corner of the globe with blinding speed. If it took two millenniums for Plato's "Republic" to reach North America, the latest hit from Justin Timberlake can be found in Greek (and Japanese) stores within days. Sometimes, US ideals get transmitted - such as individual rights, freedom of speech, and respect for women - and local cultures are enriched. At other times, materialism or worse becomes the message and local traditions get crushed. "The US has become the most powerful, significant world force in terms of cultural imperialism [and] expansion," says Ian Ralston, American studies director at Liverpool John Moores University. "The areas that particularly spring to mind are Hollywood, popular music, and even literature." But what some call "McDomination" has created a backlash in certain cultures. And it's not clear whether fast food, Disney, or rock 'n' roll will change the world the way Homer or Shakespeare has.
Cricket or basketball?
Stick a pin in a map and there you'll find an example of US influence. Hollywood rules the global movie market, with up to 90 percent of audiences in some European countries. Even in Africa, 2 of 3 films shown are American. Few countries have yet to be touched by McDonald's and Coca-Cola. Starbucks recently opened up a new front in South America, and everyone's got a Hard Rock Café T-shirt from somewhere exotic. West Indian sports enthusiasts increasingly watch basketball, not cricket. Baseball has long since taken root in Asia and Cuba. And Chinese young people are becoming more captivated by American football and basketball, some even daubing the names of NBA stars on their school sweat suits. The NFL plans to roll out a Chinese version of its website this month. Rupert Murdoch's satellites, with their heavy traffic of US audiovisual content, saturate the Asian subcontinent. American English is the language of choice for would-be pop stars in Europe, software programmers in India, and Internet surfers everywhere.
America's preeminence is hardly surprising. Superpowers have throughout the ages sought to perpetuate their way of life: from the philosophy and mythology of the ancient Greeks to the law and language of the Romans; from the art and architecture of the Tang Dynasty and Renaissance Italy to the sports and systems of government of the British. "Most empires think their own point of view is the only correct point of view," says Robert Young, an expert in postcolonial cultural theory at Oxford University. "It's the certainty they get because of the power they have, and they expect to impose it on everyone else."
Detractors of cultural imperialism argue, however, that cultural domination poses a totalitarian threat to diversity. In the American case, "McDomination" poses several dangers.
First, local industries are truly at risk of extinction because of US oligopolies, such as Hollywood. For instance in 2000, the European Union handed out 1 billion euros to subsidize Europe's film industry. Even the relatively successful British movie industry has no control over distribution, which is almost entirely in the hands of the Hollywood majors.
Second, political cultures are being transformed by the personality-driven American model in countries as far-reaching as Japan and the Philippines.
Finally, US domination of technologies such as the Internet and satellite TV means that, increasingly, America monopolizes the view people get of the world. According to a recent report for the UN Conference on Trade and Development, 13 of the top 14 Internet firms are American. No. 14 is British. “You have to know English if you want to use the Internet” says Andre Kaspi, a professor at the Sorbonne in Paris.
A main problem is that cultures is no longer a protected species, but subject to the inexorable drive for free trade, says Joost Smiers, a political science professor at the Utrecht School of the Arts. This means that it is increasingly difficult for countries to protect their own industries. France tries to do so with subsidies, while South Korea has tried quotas. Such "protectionist" tactics meet with considerable US muscle, Dr. Smiers says. "America's aggressive cultural policy ... hinders national states from regulating their own cultural markets," he says. "We should take culture out of the WTO."
Another danger, detractors say, is the consolidation of the communications industry into a few conglomerates such as AOL-Time Warner, Disney, and News Corporation, which means that the "infotainment" generated for global consumption nearly always comes from an Anglophone perspective. "You can't go on with just three music companies organizing and distributing 85 percent of the music in the world," says Smiers. "It's against all principles of democracy. Every emotion, every feeling, every image can be copyrighted into the hands of a few owners."
American, with a twist
A backlash is being felt in certain places. In Japan, locals have taken US ideas like hip-hop and fast food, and given them a Japanese twist, says Dominic al-Badri, editor of Kansai Time Out. In Germany, there is still strong resistance to aspects of US pop culture, though there is an appetite for its intellectual culture, says Gary Smith, director of the American Academy in Berlin. In France, resistance is growing partly because of frustrations over the Iraq war - but partly because Americanization is already so advanced in the country, says Mr. Kaspi.
He notes one interesting anecdotal sign of US influence - and the futility of resistance. France has repeatedly tried to mandate the use of French language in official capacities to check the advance of English. "But most of the time, the law is impossible to apply, because if you want to be understood around the world you have to speak English," Kaspi says.
In the Philippines, even the best US ideals have caused complications. "The pervasive American influence has saddled us with two legacies," notes respected local commentator Antonio C. Abaya. "American-style elections, which require the commitment of massive financial resources, which have to be recouped and rolled over many times, which is the main source of corruption in government; and American-style free press in which media feel free to attack and criticize everything that the government does or says, which adds to disunity and loss of confidence in government."
Meanwhile, for all the strength of the US movie industry, sometimes a foreign film resonates more with a local audience than a Hollywood production - and outperforms it. For instance, Japan's "Spirited Away" (2001) remains the top-grossing film in that countries, surpassing global Hollywood hits like "Titanic." In addition, British TV has influenced and served up competition to US shows, spawning such hits as "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?", "The Weakest Link," and "American Idol."
1,000 years from now
So how much good does American cultures bring to the world? And how long will it last? Ian Ralston cautions against sweeping dismissals of US pop culture. British television may be saturated with American sitcoms and movies, but while some are poor, others are quite good, he says. "British culture has always been enriched by foreign influences. In some ways American culture and media have added to that enrichment." Others note that it is not all one-way traffic. America may feast largely on a diet of homegrown culture, but it imports modestly as well: soccer, international cuisine, Italian fashion, and, increasingly, British television.
As to the question of durability, some experts believe US domination of communication channels makes it inevitable that its messages will become far more entrenched than those of previous empires. "The main difference now in favor of American culture is the importance of technology - telephone, Internet, films, all that did not exist in ancient Greece or the Mongol empire," Kaspi says. "American influence is growing, it's so easy to get access to US culture; there are no barriers. “Disney is known worldwide now," he adds. "Plato is more and more unknown, even in Greece."
But not everyone thinks American culture will stand the test of time. "It remains to be seen whether the Monkees and Bee Gees are as durable as Plato," says Professor Young, with a dab of irony. "Let's have another look in 4,000 years' time."
MY OPINION:
"Globalisation = Americanisation"
Everyone's asking that question. Yes, I believe American culture may be everywhere, however, there are some other minor cultures that are being spread. Not that of a minute culture, but smaller than the spread of American culture.
For example, Japan. Mangas and Animes can be found all around the world, translated into various other languages, English, Chinese and I believe there are many others. Many countries like Thailand have events where people dress up as an anime character, going around parading on the streets. But where did all these originate from? Japan. Take the latest Taiwanese series, “Hanakimi”, for example. The story was adapted from a Japanese Manga, and then later on made into a bestseller Taiwanese series.
Globalisation does not always revolve around America and on other countries that are influenced by American cultures, but there are other cultures out there that are influencing other countries.
The same scene of which can be found everywhere, a scene of which first originated from America, people getting influenced by the American culture. The way they dress, the things they buy, the things they do, even the way they speak. Walking along the streets of various countries, we still get to see the same scenes, McDonalds, Starbucks and maybe advertisements of the newest Hollywood movie, the current bestseller song album. No doubt, American culture is spread EVERYWHERE, but how long will it last? What exactly are the advantages? What benefits do we get out of it?
As mentioned in the article, in the past, thousands of years ago, a particular culture only revolved around its own country. The Greeks believed in their own mythologies and philosophies, the Chinese were caught up in their own dynasties, and there were distinct lines dividing all cultures from their different countries, but now as the world is progressing rapidly, those lines are merely dotted lines, which are almost completely erased.
In my opinion, I think that these cultures will last, but however it would no longer be known as American culture, but of a world culture that belongs to everyone and anyone on Earth. This is how strong I think globalisation is. I believe that one day, all of us will be doing the same things, wearing the same things, eating the same things, and that the entire world would be 'one'. No China, no India, no America, no Singapore, just ONE Earth. These cultures may be improved or further developed throughout the years, but there would always be only ONE culture and nothing else. This is how powerful I think globalisation is.
As for whether Disney will be remembered? I doubt so. Personally, I think it would end up like Plato, once a 'hit' and then *poof* it disappears. Things come and go, when there's a new one, the old one would be almost unknown. English would then be the only language known to all, having all other languages and even cultures and traditions to disappear.There are advantages and disadvantages to what is happening to the world today, to what globalisation is doing to the world today. As mentioned in my previous post, it cannot be reversed and at this rate, I doubt it can be reduced of any sort. In other words, I believe the future will be determined by GLOBALISATION.
RIMIKO signing off
- because there's really no need to, anymore...
11:34:00 pm
Environmental Post: Global Warming
From http://www.climatehotmap.org/powerpoint/mapslide.ppt#256,1,Slide 1:
In this post, I will be talking about the issue of global warming and how it links us to globalization due to the different processes of this issue, the cause, effect and how we solve it.
Global warming is the “observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s near-surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation”, as quoted from Wikipedia.
Above, is a map from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2001, illustrating the early warning signs about the global nature of climate changes. In its 2001 assessment, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that, an increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system."
As we can see from the map, areas which exhibit the highest density of indicators are the North America and Europe, where science and technological advancement is the strongest in these areas.
This is a sign of globalization as the cause of this is due to the globalization of technological advancement in mankind, and the effects of global warming concerns the entire human population, even the ecosystems and biodiversity.
http://www.earthteam.net/youth_coalition/index.html
As we can see from the pictures above, human beings are so obsessed with the materialistic progression and commodity that they started to ignore and exploit Nature. (Although the comic above has political meaning within it, I feel that it applies to the every human.) Our concern for power and ambition for modernization has been causing enhanced greenhouse effect in the environment, which is the emission of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane and water vapors. This is thought to be the main cause of global warming as stated by the IPCC and many other environmental organizations and scientists.
As stated in http://epa.gov/climatechange/basicinfo.html,
For over the past 200 years, the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, and deforestation have caused the concentrations of heat-trapping "greenhouse gases" to increase significantly in our atmosphere. These gases prevent heat from escaping to space, somewhat like the glass panels of a greenhouse.
Greenhouse gases are necessary to life as we know it, because they keep the planet's surface warmer than it otherwise would be. But, as the concentrations of these gases continue to increase in the atmosphere, the Earth's temperature is climbing above past levels. According to NOAA and NASA data, the Earth's average surface temperature has increased by about 1.2 to 1.4ºF since 1900. The warmest global average temperatures on record have all occurred within the past 15 years, with the warmest two years being 1998 and 2005. Most of the warming in recent decades is likely the result of human activities. Other aspects of the climate are also changing such as rainfall patterns, snow and ice cover, and sea level.
This is supported by last week’s frequent newspaper articles and news reports on global warming that the annual temperature has been increasing and that with another temperature increase in 1.8 degree Celsius, it is stated by scientists that 20 to 30% of the global organisms might face extinction and an amount of millions and near billion of human being will suffer from death. This is due to the effects of global warming, such as rise in sea level, increase in temperature, glacier retreat, change in rainfall patterns, and increased intensity and frequency of extreme weather events internationally, as shown in the very first picture (map) of this post.
Unfortunately, it was until the occurrences of such effects that have finally raise the global awareness of how man has progressed at the expense of nature and abused as well as exploited nature for commercial profits due to materialism and industrialization. The efforts of several environmental organization and conferences of several countries to solve this huge catastrophe to mankind, does not seem to be of much used to salvage this situation. Still, we should still acknowledge the fact that man has been trying to come together as one to solve this problem.
Hence, in this post, we can see that there are certain advantages and disadvantages of globalization again, and this time, it is in the environmental aspect. In this issue, we are able to see all the different countries coming together, as if they belong to one body. We manage to advance and progress, yet we suffer together, but we still manage to come together and attempt to solve the environmental problem to mankind and biodiversity. This issue shows us the internationalization and standardization of everything related to different countries, which result in the world becoming more like a country as time changes, which is the definition of globalization.
In conclusion, the subject on global warming allows us to see the clear globalization issue in mankind, no matter if it is the cause of it, the effect of it, or the resolution part of global warming. Hence, globalization has once again showed us the different aspects of it in the issue on global warming.
* This comic is just for fun: On the effects of global warming
http://www.slowpokecomics.com/strips/repubglobal.gif
RONG QI Signing off :)
- because there's really no need to, anymore...
7:40:00 pm
Tuesday, 17 April 2007
ECONOMIC POST 2.This post will be based on
an article I found on the web. (Press on the link "trade" on the right of the page)
This article shows the irony about world trade. Ideally, the advent of globalisation should allow people to lead better lives since the rest of the world has been brought right to their doorsteps.
Globalisation opens the doors of the country to the world. It is no longer some kind of I exchange a cow for 10 chickens business any longer. What we are talking about here when globalisation comes into play is goods coming in in bulk- maybe thousands or more of goods are exported and imported each time. So I often wonder what the reason for the widening gap between rich and poor countries is due to.
Countless articles have revealed this phenomenon. However none of them are able to provide a satisfactory reason why this is so. In an ideal case which is somewhat like my first post, the poor countries by right should get richer as they are the agrarian countries where most countries get their products from. So it is almost impossible that the standard of living of the people has been lowered.
My personal take on this situation is that globalisation driven trade should lead to an "increase in human wellbeing" as mentioned in the article. The main problem is how to prevent the money from being laundered by the corrupt officials. Therefore, with globalisation, yes, trade will be made much easier since people can get from place to place and have a global business language. However, trade might not lead to the progress of every country.
Hence, globalisation and global trade might be beneficial for most countries. But this might not be so for the third world countries. Thus, globalisation, though has its pros also has its shortcomings which are rather difficult to deal with.
DEBORAH SIM signing off
- because there's really no need to, anymore...
9:13:00 pm
Sunday, 15 April 2007
The technology post by Qilong:The words in red below is the resource form the website: http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/apnuc.htm Nuclear Weapons and Globalization
The creation of a single global economy through globalization is undermining international peace and security. The loss of national sovereignty, increased financial instability, the rise of transnational corporations, and the increasing power imbalance in favour of the United States and its Western allies are promoting nuclear proliferation and derailing nuclear disarmament.
The global economy is limiting the influence of the nation-state, while transferring power to corporations, financial markets, and multilateral organizations such as the World Trade Organization and the IMF, all of which are incapable of promoting diplomacy and international peace and security.
Nations whose economy and sovereignty are weakened by globalization will make great efforts to maintain or regain security and economic development through military spending. Military build-ups could result in regional arms races, or as in the case of India, end in nations "going nuclear."
Meanwhile, industrialized countries maintain their technological advantage and high-tech industries through military spending. Domestic weapons corporations aggressively promote the maintenance of existing nuclear war-fighting capability and the development of new nuclear weapons systems to keep lucrative military contracts flowing, regardless of the effect of these weapons on international peace and security.
Weapons Corporations
The world's largest aerospace and defence corporations build weapons and weapons systems necessary to wage nuclear war. These corporations include Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, United Technologies, TRW, and others.
The latest round of corporate mergers has concentrated the entire industry into a handful of corporations which use their influence to lobby for the upgrading and development of new nuclear weapons systems. The top four corporations spent more than $34 million on political lobbying and an astonishing $6.9 million in campaign contributions in 1997 and 1998.
The United States continues to spend $34 billion annually to maintain and upgrade Cold War-era nuclear weapons and their delivery systems, providing billions of dollars in contracts to weapons corporations.
-Northrop Grumman has built 21 B-2 Stealth Bombers, which cost $2.2 billion each. The U.S. government is spending $145 million to keep the production line open for more planes.
-Lockheed Martin was recently awarded a $589 million contract for twelve more D5 nuclear missiles for Trident submarines. The government has already bought 372 D5s at a cost of nearly $60 million each.
-Congress approved $2.2 billion for 2001 in additional military spending to buy 100 interceptor missiles from Boeing and Raytheon for the National Missile Defense program.
National Missile Defense
The National Missile Defense program promises to defend countries from nuclear attacks, but instead could restart a nuclear arms race. This dubious program is being aggressively promoted by weapons corporations which stand to profit from $13 billion in contracts if even a modest system is built.
But the National Missile Defense program has already cost the world an opportunity for nuclear disarmament. In January 2000, Russia offered to reduce its nuclear stockpile by 1,500 deployed nuclear weapons if the United States dropped its NMD program. But the US refused, and demanded that Russia allow changes to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty to permit the United States to construct a national missile defense system.
NATO Expansion
The expansion of NATO in 1999 was a vital step in the West's economic integration of the former Warsaw Pact countries of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. With NATO in place, investors and corporations are confident that their investments in Eastern Europe are secure from invaders.
But the expansion of NATO has strengthened Russian hard-liners, resulting in faint hope of Russia signing START II, and now its armed forces have adopted a more aggressive nuclear posture to counter the threat from a nuclear-armed and expanding NATO. My comments about the passage above:
I think the nuclear missiles are the most harmful bombs in the world nowadays. From America dropped an atomic bomb to Japan, the nuclear bombs were banned to use in any wars by the United Nations, because it has a superpower that can destroy everything under it. Its radius of destructive circle is 1.7 miles. So it could destroy a whole town. And also, its impacts will last for many years. No one is able to close to the place after the explosion. So the nuclear missiles became the symbol of the national defense. It is not allowed to use it during the war duo to its superpower. Not only it will affect the country, it will affect the whole world as well.
Nowadays, as the world become more and more developed, and the technologies become more and more developed. The nuclear technology is no longer just used by the U.S. Many countries have the ability to build up the nuclear bombs. As the passage says that: The creation of a single global economy through globalization is undermining international peace and security. All the imbalances between the countries will give a big impact to the world, because this will undermine the international security. For example, the United States and its Western allies are promoting nuclear proliferation and derailing nuclear disarmament. To maintain the peace and security of the world, all the nations which were affected by the globalization tend to improve their military.
For example, the Korea had the tendency to make the nuclear missiles. This is the most typical example of the nuclear bomb. And also America, every year they spend a lot of money on their nuclear systems. The world largest corporations build the weapons to wage the nuclear war. To this stage, the nuclear bomb is not just a problem for any nation; it does threat the security of the world.
The globalization leads the world under the situation which linked to the nuclear war, the only thing that we can do is to promote the missile defence. However, for the powerful states like America, they sometimes will not follow the step. So the most important thing is that to maintain the security of the world, to make the globalization more positive, we should support the nuclear disarmament, because the nuclear war is the most concern of the whole world.
- because there's really no need to, anymore...
8:47:00 pm
