Maxim Possek 214903645 February 4, 2019 Cultural Imperialism: A Fast-Food Perspective The basic function behind food is to give people vitality and fuel them through their daily life. Yet in all actuality, food has turned into a method for communication, bonding, articulation of feelings, and expression of identity. A culture's food can be as vital to their way of life as their dialect or even their physical attributes. With the fast speed at which globalization is moving forward, it is unavoidable that new societies meet, start to change, and, in a sense, modernize. The new age allows for more interactions with different communities outside their very own, thus expanding people’s interest to attempt new things and experience these societies that are so different from their own. Most notably, the experience is practiced through indulgence in cuisine and foods of other global cultures. Multinational organizations in the food industry have taken advantage of this opportunity to grow their business globally and connect with various kinds of individuals throughout the world. Be that as it may, the globalization of fast food has caused some discussion among people. Considering the way that the majority of these major corporations are expanding all over the world and proceeding to grow are American. A large number of the people who oppose globalization consider this to be a risk to their home culture and identity, or in this particular case, their cuisine. There is a great deal of variables that go into a fast food brand growing itself in a foreign nation, around its distinct culture. This calls for localization with accord to the culture they are near while still keeping the taste in its original form. Culture is continually changing and with globalization and the outreach of major corporations into foreign cultures, instead of cultural homogenization, it is unquestionably bound to result in individuals' feeling of cultural identity become stronger or potentially resulting in cultures blending to result in hybridization, the two of which are extraordinary things and ought to be grasped. Globalization and Culture: Ideologies of Globalism By: Manfred B. Steger and Paul James To define imperialism, Steger and James refer to late 19th century imperialism as a “way of life”, encompassed with “a deeply racialized civilizing mission and a beneficent colonizing spirit.” (p. ix) In today’s world- the 21st century, the definition is quite different because “competing ideologies of globalization articulate a tangled, but generalizing, global imaginary that, more readily than ever before, cuts across class, gender, race, and state-based, geopolitical and cultural differences, postcolonial divides and other social boundaries.” (p. ix) The global imaginary includes and translates into differing political agendas by competing globalisms. Deriving from market globalism, imperial globalism, according to the authors, essentially claims that “global peace depends upon the global economic reach and military authority of an (informal) ‘American Empire’ and its allies” (p. xiv) The Construction of Consent By: David Harvey In chapter two of his book, Harvey argues that the only way for people to accept neoliberalism, the theory has to appeal to common sense. Harvey explains starting in the 1970s people began to see how neoliberalism “penetrated ‘common-sense’ understandings” (p. 41). Ultimately, many parts of the world started to see neoliberalism as a “necessary, even wholly ‘natural’, way for the social order to be regulated.” (p. 47) He goes on to further contend that neoliberalism was centered around the theme of individual freedom and autonomy. Harvey also proposes an alternative by which neoliberalism can supplant liberalism and that is with the use of power. He an example of the utilization of military power in Chile and the utilization of monetary power by the IMF in Mozambique. Between McWorld and Jihad By: Naomi Klein Naomi Klein, a renown anti-neoliberalist, argues in this paper the symbolic importance of the 9/11 attacks. The twin towers were not just some buildings, instead they were “symbols of American capitalism”. The battle of activist groups against capitalism such as Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP) is not against a certain economic or political entity, but against a whole economic system. So what does the modern activist do to counter such a vast ideology, that is both nowhere and everywhere? The answer, according to Klein, is that the only way to do so is to “grab anything you can get your hands on: the brand image of a famous multinational, a stock exchange, a meeting of world leaders, a single trade agreement or, in the case of the Toronto group, the banks and corporate headquarters that are the engines that power this agenda. Anything that, even fleetingly, makes the intangible actual, the vastness somehow human-scale.” Simply put, you must find a symbol and cling to it in the hopes it becomes a metaphor for change in the future. Cultural Imperialism: An American Tradition By: Julia Galeota In her paper, Galeota asserts that globalization and cultural imperialism has become directly identified and associated with American culture, to the point where the term “American tradition” has been coined. Galeota further argues that Americans have convinced themselves that their culture is superior and other cultures would benefit by being Americanized to some extent. Furthermore, American corporations have been successful in persuading people to idolize American culture through marketing, “whether attempting to sell an item, a brand, or an entire culture, marketers have always been able to successfully associate American products with modernity in the minds of consumers worldwide” (p. 22). These corporations advertise the image that America is “the land of the ‘cool’” (p. 22) which makes people from different cultures want to associate with this image, thus purchasing their products and immersing themselves in their culture, all potentially leading to abandoning at least some parts of their own cultural identity. The Power of Identity By: Manuel Castells In this book, Castells uses the term “individuation” to define identities. He claims that they influence people’s behavior which depends on interactions between individuals and the institutions and organizations within the culture. He further argues that "Identities can also be originated from dominant institutions, they become identities only when and if social actors internalize them, and construct their meaning around this internalization." (p. 7). He then goes on to identify three components of constructing identity, one of which he refers to as “resistance identity.” It is the component of identity which, when faced with subjection by another culture, forces people to acknowledge their own identity further and maintain a stronger grip on it. People will then find comfort in their own culture and immerse themselves into it rather than deviating to the imperialist culture that is threatening their own. This leads to the formation of groups and communities built on a similar culture identity. Castells contends that this is the most crucial type of identity formation because it is the most effective way to resist otherwise threatening oppression. Globalization as Hybridization By: Jan Nederveen Pieterse With regards to globalization as structural hybridization, Pieterse argues that “what globalization means in structural terms, then, is the increase in the available modes of organization: transnational, international, macro-regional, national, micro-regional, municipal, local. This ladder of administrative levels is being crisscrossed by functional networks of corporations, international organizations and non - governmental organizations, as well as by professionals and computer uses. Part of this is what has been termed the ‘internationalization of the state’ as states are ‘increasingly engaged in multilateral forms of international governance’” (p. 50), which is tied to the concept of “post-international politics” that is the product of two interactive and overlapping worlds: the state-centric world which includes the prominent actors are national, and a multi-centric world which includes actors such as corporations, international groups and religious organizations. Glocommodification: How the Global Consumes the Local – McDonald’s in Israel By: Uri Ram Ram uses the term “McDonalidization” to argue how globalization can enhance a culture even more, and this process of “Mcdonalidization” of certain cuisine played a role in keeping traditional food alive, although it is not in the same “authentic” way as before. Ram provides an example of Falafel, which is a standout amongst the most prevalent Israeli dishes known around the world. It was prominent all through the greater part of the 1900s, then around the 1970s it tumbled from its greatness. Around 2000 it made its rebound, around a similar time when McDonald's added it to their Israeli menu. Although, they standardized the dish and included to some degree an American curve to it be that as it, nonetheless, it was still customized to the culture surrounding it. “Indeed, the global (McDonald’s) contributed somewhat to the revival of the local (the falafel). In the process, however, the global also transformed the nature and meaning of the local. The local, in turn, caused a slight modification in the taste and size of the global, while leaving its basic institutional patterns and organizational practices intact. “(p. 13) Globalization and Cultural Identity By: John Tomlinson Before the era of globalization, identity was something other than just a sense of cultural belonging, it was viewed as a precious aspect of local communities. Individuals considered identity to be something that was delicate and should have been secured no matter what. “Globalization, so the story goes, has swept like a flood tide through the world’s diverse cultures, destroying stable localities, displacing peoples, bringing a market-driven, ‘branded’ homogenization of cultural experience, thus obliterating the differences between locality-defined cultures which had constituted our identities.” (p. 269) To the individuals who consider American chains that set up shops internationally a danger to local cuisine and their way of life need to recognize that the way that they have to localize themselves to succeed demonstrates that individuals are not willing to surrender their customs and what they are utilized to do so effectively.
