0% found this document useful (0 votes)
26 views8 pagesGlobalization
1.-Defining-Globalization-metaphors-and-theories
Uploaded by
trishamaepalero08Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
26 views8 pagesGlobalization
1.-Defining-Globalization-metaphors-and-theories
Uploaded by
trishamaepalero08Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 8
(HAPTER 1 DEFINING GLOBALIZATION
Introduction
Much has changed since time immemorial. Human beings have encountered many
changes over the last century especially in their social relationships and social structures.
Of these changes, one can say that globalization is a very important change, if not, the
“most important” (Bauman, 2003). The reality and omnipresence of, globalization makes us
see ourselves as part of what we refer to as the “global age” (Albrow, 1996). The Internet,
for example, allows a person from the Philippines to know what is happening to the rest of
the world simply by browsing Google. The mass media also allows for connections among
people, communities, and countries all over the globe.
So what is globalization? This question is probably an easy one to answer. However,
many scholars gave and tried to formulate its definitions. This resulted in different,
sometimes contradicting views about the concept. It cannot be contained within a specific
time frame, all people, and all situations (A-Rhodan, 2006). Aside from this, globalization
encompasses a multitude of processes that involves the economy, political systems, and
culture, Social structures, therefore, are directly affected by globalization.
over the years, globalization has gained many connotations pertaining to progress,
development, and integration. On the one hand, some view globalization as a positive
phenomenon, For instance, Swedish journalist Thomas Larsson (2001) saw globalization
as “the process of world shrinkage, of distances getting shorter, things moving closer. It
pertains to the increasing ease with which somebody on one side of the world can interact,
to mutual benefit with somebody on the other side of the world” (p.9). On the other hand,
some see it as occurring through and with regression, colonialism, and destabilization.
in the mid-1990s, Martin Khor, the former president of Third World Network (TWN) in
Malaysia, once regarded globalization as colonization.
In this chapter, different definitions of globalization will be discussed. The task of
conceptualizing it reveals a variety of perspectives. To understand further the concept,
different metaphors will be used. These metaphors will also allow an appreciation of
earlier epochs before globalization and the present globalized world. The final lesson in
Globalization fi er will be devoted to a general discussion of globaizatioy
is chapte
this chap light the different views scholars
The following section will
globalization.
theories,
have towany
The Task of Defining Globalization
since its first appearance in the Webster’s Dictionary in 196%, 1
cpinions about globalization have flourished. The iterature onthe definitions
globalization revealed that definitions could be classified as ether (1) broag any
inclusive or (2) narrow and exclusive. The one offered by Ohmae in 992 state,
«.,, globalization means the onset of the borderless world...” (p. 14). Thi AE
example of abroad and inclusive type of definition. If one uses such, itcaninclude
a variety of issues that deal with overcoming traditional boundaries. However,
does not shed light on the implications of globalizat
Narrow and exclusive definitions are better justified but can be limiting,
in the sense that their application adhere to only particular definitions. Robert
ox’s definition suits best in this type: “the characteristics of the globalization
trend include the internationalizing of production, the new international division
of labor, new migratory movements from South to North, the new competitive
environment that accelerates these processes, and the internationalizing of the
state... making states into agencies of the globalizing world” (as cited in RAWOO
Netherlands Development Assistance Research Council, 2000, p. 14). Other
definitions of globalization are shown in chronological order in the Appendix.
Each could fall to either one of the two types of definitions.
No matter how one classifies @ definition of globalization, the concept is
complex and multifaceted as the definitions deal with either economic, political,
‘ social dimensions. In fact, in a comprehensive study of 114 definitions by the
Geneva Center for Security Policy (GCSP) in 2006, 67 of them refer to economic
dimension. These definitions include political and social dimensions as well.
The sheer number and complexity of definitions do not mean that there is a
remarkable improvement in every definition given by scholars. Kumar (2003)
took on a different argument about the issue. To him, the debate about what can
be done about globalization and what it is are similar. This is in relation to what
some academics have claimed about defining globalization—itis a useless task.
‘A more recent definition was given by Ritzer (2015), “globalization is 2
transplanetary process or a set of processes involving increasing liquidity and
the growing multidirectional flows of people, objects, places, and information as
well as the structures they encounter and create that are barriers to, or expedite,
1B Me Contemporary World those flows...” (p. 2). Generally, this definition assumes that globalization could
bring either or both integration andJor fragmentation. Although things flow
easily in a global world, hindrances or structural blocks are also present. These
blocks could slow down one’s activity in another country or could even limit the
places a person can visit.
If so, why are we going to spend time studying this concept? How can we
appreciate these definitions? How can these help us understand globalization?
First, the perspective of the person who defines globalization shapes its
definition. The overview of definitions implies that globalization is many things
tomany different people. In 1996, Arjun Appadurai said, “globalization is a ‘world
of things’ that have ‘different speeds, axes, points of origin and termination, and
varied relationships to institutional structures in different regions, nations, or
societies?” (as citedin Chowdhury, 2006, p.137).Inamorerecent study, A: Rhodan
(2006) wrote that definitions suggest the perspective of the author on the origins
and the geopolitical implications of globalization. It is a starting point that will
guide the rest of any discussions. n effect, one’s definition and perspective could
determine concrete steps in addressing the issues of globalization. For example,
if one sees globalization as positive, the person can say that itis @ unifying force.
‘nthe other hand, ifitis deemed as creating greater inequalities among nations,
globalization is negatively treated.
Second, to paraphrase the sociologist Cesare Poppi: Globalization is the
debate and the debate is globalization. One became part and parcel of the other.
‘As Poppi(1g97) wrote: “The literature stemming from the debate on globalization
has grown in the last decade beyond any individual's capability of extracting a
workable definition of the concept. Ina sense, the meaning of the concept is self
evident, in another, it is vague and obscure as its reaches are wide and constantly
shifting. Perhaps, more than any other concept, globalizationis the debate about
it” (as cited in Kumar, 2003, p. 95)-
Third, globalization isa reality. Its changing as human society develops. It
has happened before ands still happening today. We should expect it to continue
to happen in the future. The future of globalization is more difficult to predict.
What we could expect in the coming years is what has happened aver the past 50
years and that is the fluidity and complexity of globalization as a concept, which
made more debates, discussions, and definitions than agreements on it.
Overall, globalization is a concept that is not easy to define because in
reality, globalization has a shifting nature. It is complex, multifaceted, and can
be influenced by the people who define it. Moreover, the issues and concerns
Chapter 1: Defining Globalization { involving globalization have a wide range—from the individual to society, from
‘small communities to nations and states, and from the benefits we can gain from,
it to the costs it could carry. In his article, “The Globalization of Nothing,” Ritzer
(2003) said, “attitudes toward globalization depend, among other things, on
whether one gains or loses from it” (p. 190). Nevertheless, the task of defining
globalization should stimulate more discussions about it. More importantly, the
fact that we experience globalization should give one the interest of engaging in
the study of it.
Metaphors of Globalization
In order for us to better understand the concept of globalization, we will
utilize metaphors. Metaphors make use of one term to help us better understand
another term. In our case, the states of matter—solid and liquid—will be used,
In addition, other related concepts that are included in the definition such as
) structures and flows will be elaborated.
Solid and Liquid
The epochs that preceded today’s globalization paved way for people,
things, information, and places to harden over time. Consequently, they have
limited mobility (Ritzer, 2015). The social relationships and objects remained
where they were created. Solidity also refers to barriers that prevent or make
difficult the movement of things, Furthermore, solids can either be natural or man-
made. Examples of natural solids are landforms and bodies of water. Man-made
barriers include the Great Wall of China and the Berlin Wall. An imaginary line such
as the nine-dash line used by the People’s Republic of China in their claim to the
South China Sea is an example of modern man-made solid. This creates limited
access of Filipino fishers to the South China Sea. Obviously, these examples stil
exist. However, they have the tendency to melt. This should not be taken literally,
like an iceberg melting. instead, this process involves how we can describe what
is happening in today’s global world. It is becoming increasingly liquid.
Liquid, asa state of matter, takes the: ‘shape ofits container. Moreover, liquids
are not fixed. Liquidity, therefore, refers to the increasing ease of movement of
People, things, information, and places in the contemporary world. Zygmunt
Bauman’ ideas were the ones that have much to say about the characteristic
of liquidity. First, today's liquid phenomena change quickly and their aspects,
spatial and temporal, are in continuous fluctuation. This means that space
and time are crucial elements of globalization. In global finance, for instance,
he Contemporary World changes in the stock market are a matter of seconds. Another characteristic of
liquid phenomena is that their movement is difficult to stop. For example, videos
uploaded on YouTube or Facebook are unstoppable once they become viral. The
so-called Internet sensations become famous not only in their homeland but also
to the entire world. Finally the forces (the liquid ones) made political boundaries
more permeable to the flow of people and things (Cartier, 2001). This brings us to
what Ritzer (2015, p. 6) regarded as the most important characteristic of liquid:
it “tends to melt whatever stands in its path (especially solids).” The clearest
example is the decline, if not death, of the nation-state.
Liquidity and solidity are in constant interaction. However, liquidity is the
‘one increasing and proliferating today. Therefore, the metaphor that could best
describe globalization liquidity. Liquids do flow and this idea of flow (Appadural,
1996; Rey and Ritzer, 2010) willbe the focus of the next discussion. Also, it should
be expected that this concept will appear in the succeeding lessons. The literature
on globalization makes use of the concept of flows.
Flows
The previous section described the melting process of solid phenomena
followed by the increase in liquidity. Itis only logical to discuss the flows of liquid
phenomena. Flows are the movement of people, things, places, and information
brought by the growing “porosity” of global limitations (Ritzer, 2015). Think of
the different foreign cuisines being patronized and consumed by the Filipinos.
‘Aside from local dishes, many of us are fond of eating sushi, ramen, hamburger,
and French fries foods introduced to us by foreign cultures. Clearly, foods are
being globalized. Another example of flows is global financial crises. As Landler
(2008, p. C1) put it “In global financial system, national borders are porous.” This
means that a financial crisis in a given country can bring ramifications to other
regions of the world. An example of whichis the spread of the effects of American
financial crisis on Europe in 2008. The following are other kinds of flows that
can be observed today: poor illegal migrants flooding many parts of the world
(Moses, 2006), the virtual flow of legal and illegal information such as blogs and
child pornography, respectively, and immigrants recreating ethnic enclaves in
host countries. A concrete example is the Filipino communities abroad and the
Chinese communities in the Philippines.
‘Chapter 1: Defining Globaliz Globalization Theories
We have established the many definitions of and issues in defining
globalization and the metaphors that we can use to understand easily the
concept. We have also looked into its origins and history. This section will give you
a glimpse of the important theories on globalization. We will analyze globalization
culturally, economically, and politically in this book as reflected in the succeeding
chapters. In the meantime, it would be helpful to assert that the theories see
globalization as a process that increases either homogeneity or heterogeneity.
Homogeneity refers to the increasing sameness in the world as cultural
inputs, economic factors, and political orientations of societies expand to
create common practices, same economies, and similar forms of government.
Homogeneity in culture is often linked to cultural imperialism. This means, a
given culture influences other cultures. For example, the dominant religion in
our country is Christianity, which was brought to us by the Spaniards. Another
example is Americanization, which was defined by Kuisel (1993) as “the import
by non-Americans of products, images, technologies, practices, and behavior
that are closely associated with America/Americans” (p. 96). In terms of the
economy, there is recognition of the spread of neoliberalism, capitalism, and the
market economy in the world (Antonio, 2007). Global economic crises are also
products of homogeneity in economic globalization. Stiglitz (2002), for instance,
blamed the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for its “one-size-fits all” approach
which treats every country in the world as the same. In the end, rich countries
become advantageous in the world economy at the expense of poor countries,
which leads to increased inequality among nations. The political realm also
suffers homogenization if one takes into account the emerging similar models of
governance in the world. Barber (1995) said that “McWorld” is existing. It means
growing in today’s societ
only one political orientatior
The global flow of media is often characterized as media imperialism. TV,
music, books, and movies are perceived as imposed on developing countries
by the West (Cowen, 2002). Media imperialism undermines the existence of
alternative global media originating from developing countries, such as the Al
Jazeera (Bielsa, 2008) and the Bollywood (Larkin, 2003), as wellastheinfluenceof
the local and regional media. The Internet can be seen as an arena for alternative
‘media. Cultural imperialism denies the agency of viewers, but people around the
world often interpret the same medium (e.g., a movie) in significantly different
ways. Global media are dominated by a small number of large corporations.
‘As McChesney (1999) put it, this is being “extended from old media to new
‘Chapter 1: Defining Gl such as Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Apple's iTunes,
un, the Internet could end up being less diverse anq
Center, associated with the alter-globalization
rend. It disseminates information to facilitate
Ktivists extend activism to the Intemet by
particular cause (Juris, 2005),
media” (p.11),
As a result, in the long ri
competitive. Independent Media
movement, helps to counter this t
global participation of activists. Hac
hacking into computer programs to promote a
Ritzer(2008) claimed that, ingeneral, the contemporary’ worldis undergoing
the process of McDonaldization. It is the process by which Western societies are
dominated by he principlesof fast foodrestaurants. MeDonaldizationinvolvesthe
global spread of rational systems, such as ee cole Oy predictability,
and control. Ritzer (2008) pointed out that this process 1S extended to other
businesses, sectors, and geographic areas” (p. 169). Grobalization, in contrast to
glocalization, isa process wherein nations, corporations, etc. impose themselves
‘on geographic areas in order to, gain profits, power, and so on (Ryan, 2007). Ritzer
(2007) also espoused the idea that globalization can also be seen as a flow of
“nothing” as opposed to “something,” involving the spread of non-places, non-
things, nor-people, and nor-services.
nthe other hand, heterogeneity pertains to the creation of various cultural
practices, new economies, and political groups because of the interaction
of elements from different societies in the world. Heterogeneity refers to the
differences because of either lasting differences or of the hybrids or combinations
of cultures that can be produced through the different transplanetary processes.
Contrary to cultural imperialism, heterogeneity in culture is associated with
cultural hybridization. A more specific concept is “glocalization” coined by
Roland Robertson in 1992. To him, as global forces interact with local factors or
a specific geographic area, the “glocal” is being produced. Economic issues are
not exempted from heterogeneity. The commodification of cultures and “glocal”
markets are examples of differentiation happening in many economies around
a ued ks a Arabic oe es Barber (1995) also provided
Tha tical grag ee je “Jihar : Be nies (ag08) mhentianed, : refers
hat ebeS to pent nat are engaged a an “intensification of nationalism and
political heterogeneity throughout the world” (p. 576).
Alt it
aoe homogeneity and heterogeneity give us idea about the effects of
soe ae hg Picture is not yet complete. The theories about globalization
med 2S we look closer at each of them in the succeeding chapters. Dynamics of Local and Global Culture
Global flows of culture tend to move more easily around the globe than
ever before, especially through non-material digital forms. There are three
perspectives on global cultural flows. These are differentialism, hybridization,
and convergence.
Cultural differentialism emphasizes the fact that cultures are essentially
different and are only superficially affected by global flows. The interaction of
cultures is deemed to contain the potential for “catastrophic collision.” Samuel
Huntington's theory on the clash of the civilizations proposed in 1996 best
‘exemplifies this approach. According to Huntington, after the Cold War, political-
economic differences were overshadowed by new fault lines, which were
primarily cultural in nature. Increasing interaction among different “
(such as the Sinic, Islamic, Orthodox, and Western) would lead to intense clashes,
especially the economic conflict between the Western and Sinic civilizations
and bloody political conflict between the Western and Islamic civilizations
(Huntington, 2004). This theory has been critiqued for a number of reasons,
especially on its portrayal of Muslims as being “prone to violence” (Huntington,
1996).
The cultural hybridization approach emphasizes the integration of local and
global cultures (Cvetkovich and Kellner, 1997). Globalization is considered to bea
creative process which gives rise to hy s that are not reducible to either
the global or the local. A key concept is “glocalization” or the interpenetration
of the global and local resulting in unique outcomes in different geographic
areas (
