“Culturally, we are becoming more similar across the globe” Introduction Apart from complicated definitions of the term “globalization”, the matter requires focusing on a simple explanation of this concept. Indeed, globalization is recognized as an ongoing process that accompanies with it, noticeably, certain challenges, such as a wide range of integrated communities, regional economics, and cultures, through a wide range of communication and trading. However, still the argument by all experts is corresponding to the theme whereas globalization provides similarity for individuals or not, at the cultural space.
This paper articulates an in-depth discussion of this theme. 1- Globalization Even though, globalization may be defined economically as a new integration of the entire global economies through the capital flows, migration, trading, technical spread, and basically foreign direct investment. 2- Culture and Globalization Despite the fact that there are recently ongoing political, economic and even cultural uniformitarian of the world, relativism has been raised to the very urgent issues of a philosophical agenda, along with many other various disciplines.
There is still the question, which is puzzling that all thoughts related to the concept of whether there is an extension of cultural diversity influence the products and activities of social and philosophizing science or not (Steger, 2009). The opponents of global similarity built their vision on the importance of citizenship, even though the entire world became such a small village. To maintain citizenship reflects the fact of regular movements in many countries, simply to gain rights, and those different rights from other nations.
National citizenship has its power and calls for the rights of citizens (Aronowitz, 2003). Lechner (2004), states that one can consider the year 1989 as a representation of citizenship. Even recently, many national movements call for acquiring the full citizenship, which reflects more rights, responsibilities, and dignities. An example of the global movements is the Arab Spring Revolutions. Globalization, it has took off in 1989 when the exponential growth in the analyses of the global universe began to call for a putative global reconstitution of political, economic, and cultural relationships as well.
It has reflected the fact that people were living in a global village, as the struggles for citizenship have brought instantaneously and was living into their various homes (Krishna, 2008). Indeed, the struggles for the citizenship has been seen in the fall of the Berlin Wall along with the crushing of the Pro-Democracy movement in China, were transmitted through the communication systems of global media. 3- Role of Media Indeed, this term, “New Media” has been defined according to many theories and opinions.
Notwithstanding, there are regular debate over its impact and the convergence. To sum up, both “New Media” and “Digital Revolution” have been employed interchangeably. Looking at the first term, new media, simply, indicates to profound changes, especially in the electronic communications, which back to 1980s, whereas digital revolution indicates to the influence of this rapid drop in the involved cost and as well this rapid expansion of digital devices’ power, such as telecommunications and computer.
Additionally, this change brought with it certain increasing globalization, social and technological transformations, and mainly, these changes in the way by which persons can see themselves and the surrounded world. Most importantly, this rapid change of technological revolution brings with it many challenges, especially which are corresponding with generating social changes focusing on these implicit virtues, values, and vices that are possessed by this rapid changed technology. With the highest change of technological revolution, U.
S. A. could evolve with cultural relativism along with being included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One more critical point here needed to be clarified. This challenge indicated to the transformation of the elements of cultural relativism. From this theme, U. S. A could expand its power to justify its universalistic ideology. This in turn, involved enhancing, civilizing, and as well liberating the indigenous human in an imperious extension. This is seen obviously in the economical policy of United States in Middle East.
Despite all of the dark events and contradicts faced by cultural relativism, it must be put into consideration and again, with in-depth awareness that unlike any of the old generals, the arguments of cultural relativism neither fade away nor die (Dascal, 1991). Again, according to Dascal (1991), there is a necessity of deriving the new future of the theory from the frequently committed fallacy of confusion of cultural relativism with any other cultural diversity or variability.
The second can be derived from the clear fact that recently there is not just one type of cultural relativism, but instead there are three types. These types must be considered widely when we are interested in adding to the future of cultural relativism. Those types of descriptive, epistemological and normal must be re-designated under the same term to avoid any further confusion. Those three types are not mere analytical acts that are separated, but they are considered historically distinct.
The latter element must explicate any adverted results of epistemological relativism to assist this contemporary type of the theory, cultural relativism for more acts anthropologically and full of researches as well (Dascal, 1991). Again, apart from hard criticism of the wrong attitude of this ad, there is still hopefully, a positive evidence that old prejudices are fading with the introduction of each new generation to the rightful thinking, slowly eliminating old habits, thoughts, and actions that have been accepted for far too long.
Back to the human rights’ principles, still media needs to play strongly, its role in clarifying those principles obviously. Even though, cultural relativism included certain methodological and epistemological claims, which could be found easily in the aforesaid ad; the principle of cultural relativism should not be confused with the ideas of moral relativism, which advocated the theme of claiming relatively to historical, cultural, social, or personal circumstances.
Internet, the global money markets, the world travel, the globally recognized brands, the globally organized corporations, and the global celebrities’ living, etc…all have spoken of new modes of the social experience, which transcend each nation-state plus to its constitution of the national citizen (Mittelman, 2004). When everyone is seeking to be an actual citizen of the existing national society or to establish his own national society, the term globalization has appeared to be changing what it is supposed to be a citizen (Ritzer & Atalay, 2010).
Globalization appears to involve certain weakening of the social power and such a corresponding development of what is called ‘post-national’ citizenship. Most of the national citizenships are nowadays losing their required grounds to the model of membership, which should be universal and unique. Such a model should include membership, which is located within the increasing of territorialized nations of the extra universal rights of individuals. This post-national citizenship is, particularly, connected with the uest working’s growth across various societies, greater global interdependence, which can overlap the memberships of different categories of citizenship. The emergence of universalistic conceptions and rules regarding all human rights have been formalized by all international laws and codes (Smith, 2002). Even though, according to Aronowitz (2003), the contemporary citizenship is known as loosely ‘post-modern’. In fact, there is no modern rational-legal state at all, particularly with any clear monopoly of power, which can be able to deliver unambiguous duties and rights to its citizens who may appear such a nation of strangers.
Most importantly, and as mentioned by Krishna (2008), the global processes restructure certain social inequalities, while they are transforming many states into those ‘regulators’ of flows. In addition, brands, corporations, NGOs and many of multi-national ‘states’ have emerged more powerful than mere nation-states. Communities, such as Chinese, have developed no coterminous with the nation states’ boundaries. This huge growth of post-national citizenship stem from a wide processes and many institutional arrangements, which are stretching within completely different communities.
The result is there is huge variety of citizenships that are emerging in the present world (Lechner, 2004). Many examples of developing of that putative global citizenship, which can be articulated from the global media attitudes. Looking at the global mass media, one can figure out its consideration of citizenship as having necessitated certain symbolic resources, which have been distributed through different means of communication. There is an obvious theme of cultural citizenship, which is corresponding to the rights of all social groups, such as age, ethnic, gender, and sexual to full cultural participation within their communities.
As to responsibilities and duties of global world, there is a theme, which demonstrates a stance of cosmopolitanism towards many other cultures, environments, and other citizens (Ritzer, 2010). Such cosmopolitanism involves either consuming such environments across the globe completely or even refusing to so consume those environments. Media plays its role professionally in this regard, while it is producing certain images as well as information, which provide solid means by which nature has come to be recognized as seriously threatened has become such a widely shared belief recently.
Dramatically, the existence of the global networks and the huge flows can involve curious hybrids of the once-separate private and public spheres. The result will be an increase overlap between the private and public spheres, therefore on the other hand, between great issues of citizenship along with the nature of the contemporary consumerism (Macionis & Plummer, 2012). Most preciously, culture and cultural policies that crisscross the private and public spheres are however, representing challenges of citizenship. Conclusion
Globalization accompanies new themes, which may be contradicted with original culture and principles of citizens. Many appeals within the recent global media are interested strongly with the development of a sense of planetary responsibility, instead of that responsibility for certain locales. This is considered, relatively a new notion and, particularly one, which appears to distinguish all humans from other known species. The previous citizenships have been focused on antagonism between humans who are inside and those others who are outside, upon defining those non-citizens, the other, or those enemies.
This reflects, simply, the fact that no similarity through the globe at all. References Aronowitz, S. (2003) Implicating empire: globalization and resistance in the 21st century world order, Basic Books. Dascal, M. (1991) Cultural Relativism and Philosophy: North and Latin American Perspectives, Leiden: BRILL. Krishna, S. (2008) Globalization and postcolonialism: hegemony and resistance in the twenty-first century, Rowman & Littlefield. Lechner, F. (2004) The globalization reader, Wiley-Blackwell. Macionis, J. & Plummer, K. , 2012, Sociology: A Global Introduction. th Edition, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, pp 165-169. Mittelman, J. (2004) Whither globalization? : the vortex of knowledge and ideology, Routledge. Ritzer, G. 2010, Globalization: A Basic Text, Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, pp243-276. Ritzer, G. & Atalay, 2010, Readings in Globalization: Key concepts and Debates, Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, pp307-424. Smith, J. (2002) Globalization and resistance: transnational dimensions of social movements, Rowman & Littlefield. Steger, M. 2009: Globalization: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp71-83.