Introduction
Thesis Globalization affects cultural diversity and allows less developed nations to acquire and assess global cultural knowledge. From positive perspectives, globalization has a great and positive impact on cultural diversity as it brings new values and principles. On the global scale, people become conscious of growing manifestations of social interdependence and the huge acceleration of social interactions. These persistent experiences of global cultural interdependence gradually change individual and collective identities, and thus dramatically impact the way they act in the world (Bhagwati 2004). Globalization brings new social values, religious traditions and allows cultural exchange between nations. These transformations are reflected in TV industry, film industry, mass media and theater.
Main body
From a pessimist point of view, globalization distorts cultural identity of small nationality and states, and permits proliferation of American and European values into small communities. Media alliances and conglomerates produce low quality products sold on the global scale. In spite of benefits and opportunities proposed by integrated world, there are some weaknesses and threats of cultural globalization, as it leads to exploitation of cultural uniqueness in third world countries, it ruins national identity and promotes international (American) values and traditions. Globalization prevents weak nations from development opportunities and allows developed nations to exploit their natural resources. A group of globalization skeptics highlights the central role of politics in unleashing the forces of globalization, especially through the successful mobilization of political power. Such media companies as Viacom occupy the international market and establish a monopolistic position for their products (Held, 2004).
From internationalist perspective, the nations should preserve their national principles and cultural products but respond to new international innovations and cultural products. In their view, the rapid expansion of global cultural activity can be reduced neither to a natural law of the culture nor to the development of computer technology. Developed nations assure the public that the elimination or reduction of trade barriers among nations will enhance trade and economic integration, increase wealth of developing nations and secure peaceful international relations. Cultural globalization reduces inequalities proposing low developed nations and regions an opportunity to innovate and adopt new technologies and innovative processes in all spheres of life. The new market is highly dynamic but unstable which has stimulated early adopters to develop flexible employment strategies and certain traditional producers become their additional wage workers during peak periods. For instance, American culture including such phenomena as McDonaldization and westernization governs the world today (Bhagwati 2004).
Transformationalists suggest that cultural changes are inevitable and local communities and countries should perceive and understand these transformations and accept new ideas. Media networks control the global culture and provide less developed nations with cultural products and new vision of reality. They believe that cultural globalization facilitates the emergence of transnational social forces anchored in this thriving sphere of civil society (Bhagwati 2004). A number of less optimistic commentators have challenged the idea that optical globalization is moving in the direction of cosmopolitian democracy. Most criticism boil down to the charge that such a vision indulges in an abstract idealism that fails to engage current political developments on the level of public policy.
In sum, cultural globalization has both positive and negative outcomes for small and less developed nations unable to protect their media from international media and proliferation of low quality products. Positive globalists and internationalists support cultural globalization while pessimists and transformationalists deny its positive impact on the world. Skeptics have also expressed the suspicion that the proponents of cosmopolitanism do not consider in sufficient detail the cultural feasibility of global democracy. In other words, the worldwide intensification of cultural, political, and economic interaction makes the possibility of resistance and opposition just as real as the benign vision of mutual accommodation and tolerance of differences.
Bibliography
Bhagwati, J. 2004, In Defense of Globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Held, D., (ed.), 2004, A Globalizing World? Culture, Economics, Politics. Routledge – Open University.