Globalization and Cultural Difference of Societies.


Two authoritative scenarios control the public conversation about the civilizing consequences of globalization. The one very general scenario symbolizes globalization as cultural homogenization. In this situation the culturally different societies of the planet are being swarming by globally obtainable goods, media, ideas and organizations. In a world where people from Vienna to Sidney eat Big Macs, wear Benetton clothes, watch MTV or CNN, speak over human rights and work on their IBM computers cultural features are in danger of extinction. As these products and ideas are typically of western origin, globalization is distinguished as westernization. The other circumstances is that of educational disintegration and intercultural conflict. (Casado, Dereshiwsky 2007)

We will write a
custom essay
specifically for you

for only $16.05 $11/page
308 certified writers online
Learn More

But can we really decrease the procedures of cultural globalization to these two typecasts? In order to get a more distinct image of current global cultural modifications, we have to research cultural performs worldwide. impartially measurable shapes relating the death rates, intercultural marriages and market-distributes have to be realized in their wider social background. They have to be associated with specific worldviews, gender contacts and the local denotation of death and wealth. (Lozano, 2006)


Globalization subsists at the middle of contemporary culture, and cultural practices present at the center of globalization. Globalization is not the only assignment that defines these cultural skills but it entails converter procedures. This process impact the essential structure of educational knowledge and the notion of culture. The educational aspect of globalization impacted by the modifications in community, technological benefits and quick changes in data technology. Architectural occupation is as general as it is particular, objective as it is slanted and general as it is personal. In all these disagreements the properties of architectural phenomenon influence architectural teaching. Particularly ‘the teaching of a person’ must be regarded as the most essential matter in education. (Lozano, 2003)

Actually there are lots of causes to think that globalization might weaken cultural assortment:

  • transnational corporations sponsor a certain kind of consumerist culture, in which normal commodities, endorsed by global marketing operations developing basic material wishes, create similar ways of life – “Coca-Colonization”
  • supported by the authority of certain states, Western models are incorrectly stated as worldwide, overriding local customs – “cultural imperialism”
  • modern organizations have an intrinsically rationalizing shove, making all human performs more competent, convenient, and unsurprising, as demonstrated by the spread of fast food networks.
  • the United States applies hegemonic impact in promoting its estimations and habits by the means popular culture and the news media – “Americanization”

But there are also positive causes to think that globalization will promote multiplicity:

  • communication across borders leads to the intermixing of cultures in exacting places and practice – pluralizing.
  • cultural flows happen in a different way in different fields and may create in lots of places – differentiation
  • incorporation and the spread of ideas provoke responses and confrontation – contestation
  • worldwide norms or practices are realized differently in accordance with local custom; the widespread must take particular shapes – globalization
  • assortment has itself turned to be a global value, endorsed by the means of international associations and associations, not to mention nation-states – institutionalization (Lewellen, 2002)

Societies do not inactively give in to overseas and global impacts. Instead anthropological investigate has stressed the capability of communities to include what might be anticipated to threaten them. Different tactics of dealing with foreign impacts have been classified. The most important of these are confrontation and appropriation.

Regarding confrontation: The state often attempts to forbid foreign impacts to enter its territory. The Iranian state, for instance does not permit its inhabitants to own satellite-antennas, France attempts to protect the French language from being anglicized and creates new French words fast food and the internet. But imported goods, organizations and thoughts also meet confrontation from social associations or certain sphere of community. (Legrain, 2003)

Get your
100% original paper
on any topic

done in as little as
3 hours
Learn More

But more often than contribution confrontation, people integrate and proper foreign influences into their survives. The anthropologist Marshall Sahlins has stated that people often use overseas goods and thoughts to turn to be more like themselves. We see in the existing anthropological writing a great diversity of case studies which reveal this process of misuse.

Let’s take McDonalds as an example. It is surely is a very globalized organization, popular in over 100 states, serving 30 million consumers a day. The sociologist George Ritzer has even stated a homogenization-notion after this fast food giant: The “McDonaldization” of the world. But if to look at ethnographic researches of McDonalds in East Asia or Russia, the image of a global homogenization slacks trustworthiness. Yes, some features of the balanced, fast and regulated McDonalds structure has been taken in most communities and the chain has impacted small but powerful changes in nutritional prototypes. But what comes out of the sphere research is that the connotation of McDonalds has been modified enormously by its different consumers. (Fine, 2006)

Businessmen in Beijing are capable to avoid a typical Chinese dilemma: Banquets in Chinese restaurants are rather competitive. People attempt to exceed one another by providing the most luxurious dishes and drinks. It is general for a host at a banquet to worry that consumers at neighboring tables might be benefitting fro better dishes, thus resulting him or her to loose face. Such opposition does not exist at McDonalds where the menu is restricted and the food regulated. For people without a lot of money McDonalds has turned to be the best substitute to host a snack.

Often the achievement of a global good has unforeseen causes. One reason which very many people offered for eating at McDonalds were the hygienic and spacious lavatories, which since have hoisted the general hygienic standards in East Asian eateries. (Arts, Hagenaars et al. 2003)

Western Fast food nets have pushed an amount of more customary snack salespersons out of commerce, but instead of leading to an Americanization of flavor, it has started a boom of local fast foods. The fraud of global goods and notions can be revealed in different spheres, from western notions like sustainable expansion and Human Rights to media expertise and media content. The same point applies to all these examples: the meanings of the creators (of goods or ideas) are changed by the people purchasing them. This doesn’t mean that citizens are not influenced in very deep ways by introduces. (Takanori, 2003)


It is necessary to emphasize, that the very notion of globalization itself means the refuse of some cultural distinctions due to the intermixing of cultures and standards.


Arts, W., Hagenaars, J., Halman, L., Donk, W. V., & Schaik, T. V. (Eds.). (2003). The Cultural Diversity of European Unity: Findings, Explanations and Reflections from the European Values Study. Boston: Brill.

We will write a custom
for you!
Get your first paper with
15% OFF
Learn More

Berger, P. L. & Huntington, S. P. (Eds.). (2003). Many Globalizations: Cultural Diversity in the Contemporary World. New York: Oxford University Press.

Casado, M. A., & Dereshiwsky, M. I. (2007). Cultural Diversity in Higher Education: Implications for Hospitality Programs. Education, 128(2), 294.

Fine, M. G. (2006). Cultural Diversity in the Workplace: The State of the Field. The Journal of Business Communication, 33(4), 485.

Legrain, P. (2003). In Defense of Globalization: Why Cultural Exchange Is Still an Overwhelming Force for Good. The International Economy, 17, 62.

Lewellen, T. C. (2002). The Anthropology of Globalization: Cultural Anthropology Enters the 21st Century. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Lozano, J. (2006). Public Policies and Research on Cultural Diversity and Television in Mexico. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(3), 467.

Takanori, S. (2003). Cultural Diversity and Folklore Studies in Japan: A Multiculturalist Approach. Asian Folklore Studies, 62(2), 195.

Print Сite this

Cite this paper

Select style


StudyCorgi. (2021, October 12). Globalization and Cultural Difference of Societies. Retrieved from

Work Cited

"Globalization and Cultural Difference of Societies." StudyCorgi, 12 Oct. 2021,

1. StudyCorgi. "Globalization and Cultural Difference of Societies." October 12, 2021.


StudyCorgi. "Globalization and Cultural Difference of Societies." October 12, 2021.


StudyCorgi. 2021. "Globalization and Cultural Difference of Societies." October 12, 2021.


StudyCorgi. (2021) 'Globalization and Cultural Difference of Societies'. 12 October.

This paper was written and submitted to our database by a student to assist your with your own studies. You are free to use it to write your own assignment, however you must reference it properly.

If you are the original creator of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal.