In my post America vs. Europe: A False Debate I said the following:
It’s very hard to attribute cultural exports to a single country or region and thus generalize about its aesthetic vibrancy. The character of cultures is increasingly cosmopolitan. Indeed, the spread of markets and commericalism has not diluted the best of culture, it has instead provided more and diverse choices for citizens. So, I think it’s unproductive to argue America vs. Europe and then especially derive predictions about innovation, a process that will be more and more de-nationalized.
Steve Silberman left a thoughtful, lengthy comment summing up the counter-argument which is probably more widely held: globalization, internationalization, Americanization, etc. haven’t made cultures richer, instead they’ve become more standardized, more plain, less interesting, less unique, and so on.
Steve is right that small U.S. towns probably look more similar now than they did 40 years ago. As I said in my post: "For example, 50 years ago kids growing up in New Jersey and Louisiana would be slightly different (though still very similar) due to being in different parts of the country. Now, the kids would be VERY similar, though their hobbies and career paths could be much different than before due to increased opportunities to learn about other cultures, jobs, etc."
In terms of world cultures, I would argue that citizens anywhere now have more and better cultural choices. It’s easier than ever to listen to Japanese jazz in San Francisco. There are more and better genres of literature, dances, music than ever before. It’s just as easy to get good sushi in San Francisco as it is London or Frankfurt or Tokyo. Yes, those four cities are now more the same because of this common offering, but as people we become different through this greater choice; we can buy high quality sushi OR authentic Indian food, and so forth. Diversity decreases across cities, but increases within cities. A San Francisco citizen now has a richer cultural menu to choose from, even if it looks pretty similar to Tokyo’s.
Chris Yeh opines that we can achieve *both* financial and social/cultural gains — a country should be able to engage in free trade and globalization without losing its culture. He says:
What would you rather do? Live in a quaint European village full of charming shops and restaurants but have no access or communications with the outside world? Or live in Orange County with broadband access to the Internet, Skype calls to anywhere on the globe, and the ability to order the world’s treasures delivered to your doorstep by Amazon and UPS?
I want BOTH — I want the authentic élan of a Swiss village combined with the connectedness of Silicon Valley. And so I think the main question should be: Is globalization doing its best to give us the best of both, or is it unduly promoting the hyper connectedness while depriving cultures of any unique authenticity and flavor? At the moment, I think it’s doing a pretty good job at offering both. But it’s easy to think it’s entirely one-sided.
As Tyler Cowen points, the junk food — the McDonald’s– is all around us. Yet this is a symptom of the riches we now enjoy. You don’t have to buy the junk if you don’t want to. He points out that high and low culture are complements: "Paris and Hong Kong, both centers of haute cuisine, have the
world’s two busiest Pizza Hut outlets."
30 comments on “Can Globalization Provide Both the Quaintness of a European Village and Hyperconnectedness of Silicon Valley?”
The current examinations of the effects of globalization or americanization on world cultures seems to come from the perspective of cultural consumption.
Culture is a living and breathing condition. Yes, if we boil culture down to the edible or in other ways consumable it might seem as though we have more options than ever before. However, eating Sushi doesn’t allow one to experience the essence of being Japanese any more than eating a Hamburger allows one to truly experience being an American.
Excellent point Justyna.
I am inclined to agree with you. But I’m not sure local customs or any non-physical aspect of culture are eroding. It seems most of the uproar has to do with stores and goods. The non-physical parts culture seem less effected by globalization’s effects.
It is always easiest to think of culture in terms of consumption, but you’re right that there’s more to it. Culture is about an entire environment that affects you, and that you affect.
On the other hand, all the critics of globalization seem to view culture from the consumption perspective–if we can just keep out Baywatch, we’ll be able to preserve our precious culture.
Now I hate Baywatch as much as the next guy, but if David Hasslehoff is capable of toppling your civilization, maybe it deserves to be toppled.
Useful info. Lucky me I discovered your web site unintentionally, and I’m surprised why this coincidence didn’t came about earlier! I bookmarked it. Age of Warring Empire Hack
Yes indeed. I don’t have a logical argument to support but i have a place here in my country where we have hyperconnected rural areas. Lookout for suburbs of ahmedabad or the more modern gurgaon in india and you will be surprised.
Get facebook account password hack
It’s an amazing post. Thank you !
nice article, i’m interesting to share it chatroulette
it was exactly what i was looking for thanks for writing
nice topic chatroulette
Good information provided here, thanks
it s a great work!
it s a great work!
it s a great work!sdd!
15 thank! !!! ! !
Great post !
Useful info. Lucky me I discovered your web site unintentionally …
Useful info. Lucky me I discovered thx
Useful info thanks !
Thanks for sharing.I hope it will be helpful for too many people that are searching for this topic.I must appreciate the way you have expressed your feelings through your blog!. Click here to play
Thanks for sharinf