KUMARAVADIVELU, B. (2008).

Cultural Globalization and

Q u l t u r a l G t o b a l i za ti o n a n d tts p r o ce sce s
Language Education. New Haven/London:Yale University
C H AP T ER 3 mark of big business.As BusinessWeek
(December8, 2003,pp. 69-
70) points out,
few aspectsof u.S. businessremain untouched. The hidden hands
C u l t u r al Globalization and of skilled Indians are present in the interactive web sites of com-
panies such as Lehman Brothers and Boeing, display ads in your
I t s P r o cesses Yellow Pages, and the electronic circuitry powering your Apple
' Computer iPod. While Wall Street sleeps,Indian analysts digesi the
latest financial disclosures of u.S. companies and file reports in
time for the next trading day. Indian staff troll the private medical
* and financial records of u.S. consumers to help determine if they
I are good risks for insurance policies, mortgages, or credit cards
from American Express Co. and J. P. Morgan Chase & Co.
"Hi, this is Sandy. How may I help you? It is notjust the businessand financial sectorsthat outsourcees-
When hundreds of thousands of North Americans and western Itlal operations, it is also done by governmental agencies (such
Europeans dial a toll-free number to book airline tickets, check the U.S. postal service, and the food stamp programs) as well as
their bank account, solve a computer glitch, or seek investment ad- establishments (such as Massachusetts General Hospital in
vice, they may not be aware that they frequently are talking to cus- , which sends magnetic resonance images to be analyzedby
tomer representatives who are some six to eight thousand miles ists in India). Even religious centers have not lagged be-
away, in India, working in the dead of night in quiet offices with , [n an interesting article titled "Jesus! BpO has even come to
clocks showing time in places like New York, Los Angeles, Frank- ," the popular English language daily Indian Express (dated
furt, and London. Nor are they likely to know that the helpful per- 3, 2004)reportsthat churchesin the United Statesand Eu-
i
son who answers and identifies herself as "Sandy" is in reality Lak- ere outsourcing Holy Mass Intentions-requests for services I

shmi, a twenty-one-year-old who, after undergoing rigorous training !a thanksgiving, and memorial masses for the dead-to be I

to "neutralize" her Indian accent, has taken on a new workplacc at the parishesin India.
persona, including a pretend Western name and a pretend Ameri- he primary motivation for outsourcing is, of course, cheap for-
can or British accent. lebor: Without denying that outsourcing is a cost-cutting mea-
Lakshmi (or Sandy), and thousands of others like her; are par'l American corporations stress its other advantages. They say l

of a new global business enterprise called call centers, which havc
grown in ever increasing numbers not only in India but also irr
countries such as China, Ireland, the Philippines, and Russia. Thcst'
centers constitute just one aspect of BPO, or Business Proccss
Outsourcing. It refers to the business practice followed by corporlr
tions and industries around the world that farm out a part of thcir
operations to a third party inside the country or outside (callcrl
"offshoring"). These operations cover myriad business transactiotts
such as maintaining accounts and audits, managing human tt'
sources databases, offering technical support, and handling ('lts
tomer complaints.
More than eve4,offshore outsourcing has now become tht' lr;rll
up innovation and economic growth. For instance, as ,I
Weefr(Dcccmber8, 2003,p. 66) points out, GeneralElec- .f
'Whlc'hopenedits John F. Welch TechnologyCenterin Banga-
I Indla, in the:year 2000"employs1,800engineers-a quarter of
tave Ph.Il.s*who are engagedin fundamentalreslarch for
6f GR'Bl3 clivisions,In one lab, they tweak the aerodrmamic
rd
of'tttt'blne-e.ngincbladcs. In another they're scrutinizine the
:ttltcture ol malcrials to be used in DVDs for short-term
whL:h lhe rrtovleis nutomzrtically erasedafter a few days.In
tf, ter:ltnlclanslritveriggeclup a working model of a GE plas-
t f n flpalrt nltelclevlserlu way to boost output there by 2Oo/o.,,
v Oruclelndln, the lrrrlilrrsubsiclierr-y
of the SiliconValley-
30 Cult ur al G l o b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e s s e s
based high-tech col"np:.uryOratcle,has been the parent company's
strategic core sincc 1996, wlrcn workers in India developed from
scratch, and in record tirnc, et new software product to access in-
formation stored on sel'vers.Citing examples such as these, Ameri-
can corporations argue that oll'shoring will free up their resources
to design and develop new products and ventures, which in turn
will stimulate the American economy and ultimately benefit the
American consumer.
A 2OO4report titled "Choose to Compete," issued by the Com-
puter Systems Policy Project, an arm of the top eight U.S. informa-
tion technology companies, such as Intel and Hewlett-Packard, ar-
gued that U.S. companies must hire qualified workers around the
world to meet customer demands and expand their capabilities. It
also advised the U.S. government that it should, instead of banning
outsourcing, improve the crumbling American school system in
order to make American workers competitive. The report echoed an
earlier editorial in BusinessWeek(December 8,2003, p. 124): "Just
as America reacted to the Soviet Union's sputnik in the 1960s and
Japan's manufacturing prowess in the 1980s,so, too, the U.S. must
today put into place new education, research, and innovation poli-
cies that move it to a higher competitive plane." During a hearing
held in January 2004, the U.S. House of Representatives was sternlv
told by Carly Fiorina, then chief executive officer of Hewlett-Packard,
that "there is no job that is America's God-given right anymore. Wc
have to compete for jobs" (San Jose Mercury News, dated January B,
2004,p.2C).
While outsourcing has certainly boosted the national economy
of receiving countries, it has come with mixed blessings for indi-
vidual workers. It is apparent that outsourcing causes loss of jobs,
thus hurting the ordinary worke4 even if temporarily. Viewing oll-
shore outsourcing as the root cause for unemployment, workcl s
have started demonstrating against it, dpawing comparisons bc-
tween the loss of blue-collar manufacturing jobs to China, Japettt,
and South Korea during the second half of the twentieth centttt'v,
and the loss of white-collar service sector jobs to China, India, itrrtl
Ireland at the present. While acknowledging the individual sr-rl'li'r'
ings, President Bush pointed out (San Jose Mercury News, clalr"tl
February 23,2006, pp. 1A & 5A) that "India's middle class is btrvirrp,
air-conditioners, kitchen appliances and washing machines, ittttl ir
lot of them from American companics like GE and Whirlpool rtttrl
A u l t u r a l G l o b a l i za ti o n a n d tts Pr o ce sse s 31
Westinghouse. And that means their job base is growing here in the
United States."
The sufferings, it seems, are not confined to those who lose their
Jobs. According to a report in the monthly magazine India Currents
(September 2003), a large number of call center workers in India,
cll of whom are between nineteen and twenty-one years old, suffer
ffom severe psychological, social, and other health problems. Be-
gtuse most of them work at night (when it is daytime in the United
itetes and Europe) and eat at odd hours, they exhibit health prob-
bms usually associated with people twice their age-indigestion,
htomnia, fatigue, and stress. Some of them even exhibit signs of a
lpllt personality, as their jobs require them to pretend to be some-
bedy else and speak in a false American or British accent for eight
a day. They also lack a social life, since their work schedule
tates that they sleep during the day and work at night. They
not get time off during important Indian festivals, so they hardly
time with their families on days of cultural and religious im-
. Instead, they are free on American holidays such as Fourth
JUly and Thanksgiving,when everybodyelsein India is working.
Clearlv,the phenomenon described above has multiple dimen-
creating multiple tensions: political, economic, social, and
lt, howeve6,springs from one single source: globalization. In
chapter I provide a brief overview of globalization. I first ex-
the concept of globalization and sketch its historical develop-
, Then I focus specifically on cultural globalization and its
on contemporary life. Finally, I discuss the relevance of
I gkrbalization to the principles and practices of language
, The Conceptof Globalization
lkrn is a hotly debated multidimensional concept that
l€Fosn sevclal ma.ior academic disciplines such as economics,
ctrllurnl studics, political science,and history. The sub-
.b eei vast nnd $io var"iedthat no single theoretical framework
fi'onr +rsingleclisc:iplinecan explicateit fully. As the preemi-
gUlturelcrilic, lrreclricJanrcson( 1998,p. xi), pointedout, glob-
heg lrecorrre"tller rrrurlernrot. 1'lostmodernversion of the
I elepltnrrl,clcsu'ihctllrv its blirrrlobservcrsin so many di-
lfeye," Slrrtplvstaletl,globallzetlorrrelirs lo u clominantand
32 Cult ur al G lo b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e s s e r
driving force that is shaping a new form of interconnections antl
flows among nations, economies, and peoples. It results in tlrt'
transformation of contemporary social life in ail its economic, po
litical, cultural, technological, ecological, and individual dimensions.
The term globalization is commonly used to refer to the proccs\
as well as the result of global interconnections, thereby creating u tr
necessaryconceptual confusion. To address this ambiguity, sociolo
gists such as Roland Robertson (1992) have suggested that we trst'
the term globalization to refer to the process, and globalify to reli'r
to its result. In other words, the terms globalization and globalitv
refer to the cause and effect of the same phenomenon. A consoli
dated definition that captures the essence of globalization stetlt'r
that it is "a multidimensional set of social processes that creitlc,
multiply, stretch, and intensify worldwide social interdependenc it'r
and exchangeswhile at the same time fostering in people a growirtg
awareness of deepening connections between the local and the tlis
tant" (Steger,2003, p. 13). In order to make sense of the concept ol
globalization, it is essential to understand its historical developnrcttl.
3.1.1. A Historical Sketch of Globalization
The concept of globalization is so old and yet so new. The cut'tt'ttl
phase of globalization, with its own distinctive features, is drantitll
cally different from its earlier phases, as will become clear litlell
From a historical perspective, scholars talk about various periotls ol'
globalization with various points of departure. For our limitecl gltt.
pose, I shall highlight how a political scientist and a historian ltirve
treated the history of globalization in their fascinating books, lrolh
published in 2003. I am referring to Globalization: AVery Short ltt'
troduction, by American political scientist Manfred Steger;atttl /he
Three Wavesof Globalization: A History of a Developing Gkhul (\ut-
sciousness,by Australian historian Robbie Robertson. I prcsr.'ttl llt
this section a bird's-eye view of the history of globalization tttorllv
from their perspective.
Steger (2003, p. 19) believed that globalization "is as olcl its lttl=
manity itself." Accordingly, he identified five distinct histolit'irl pe=
riods starting with what he called "the prehistoric pet'iotl" '"vltett
small bands of hunters and gatherers reached the sotttlrt'r'tt tip nt
South America. For him, this period lasted from 10,000 lt.('.lr lrr
3500 B.C.E. The second, "the plcnrodern period," covr.'tirrp, l\tl0
Q l o h a l iza ti o n a n d l ts Pr o ce sse s 33
to 1500 C.E., was characterized by the invention of writine
ia, Egypt, and central China and roughly coincided
the invention of the wheel in southwest Asia. Steser felt that
monumental inventions" moved globalization to a new level,
uhaving contributed little
to technology and other civilizational
before about 1000 C.E., Europeans northwest of the
g€atlv benefited from the diffusion of technological innova-
Brlginating in Islamic and Chinese cultural spheres" (p. 28).
European contribution to globalization started during
rly modern period" (1500-1750),when Spain,Portugal,the
France, and England "all put significant resources
&e expkrration of new worlds and the construction of new in-
markets that benefited them much more than their ex-
f ng partners"' (p. 29).It is during this period that the seeds
colonialism were planted. The next period, "the mod-
," cr)vering 1750-1970, witnessed a spread of free market
when Western capitalist enterprises gained power and
"l'ed by a steady stream of materials and resources that
mostly in other regions of the world" (p. 31). Finally, "the
pcriod," from 1970 onward, marked "another quan-
In thc history of globalization"(p. 35) with "the dramatic
€ttpnnsion,and accelerationof worldwide interdependen-
5lobnlcxchanges" (p. 35).
Steger, who went back about 12,000 years and provided
plltlenl history of globalization,RobbieRobertsontraveled
t 500 years back and presented a more social history of
tlon foctrsing,as the subtitle of his book promises,on the
I of global consciousness. He identified three "waves"
l
tlon, 'l'he l'irst wave centered on regional trade explo- F
tty $puin ancl Portugal; the second gained impetus from
F,et|rrttletl by Britain; and the third is derived from the
fVsrld ot'det'lcclby thc United States.Interestingly,taking
rtudles pr.r'slrcctivc,postcolonial critic Walter Mignolo
rd
36) alro tnlke.rlabotrt "three previous stagesof globaliza-
the batrrrersol' (llrlistiarnization(Spanish Empire), Civi-
n (tlt'itlslr F,)trrprirc
and Frcnch Colonization), and De-
iorr( [ l.S,I nrpcrialism)."
tlMoelerrrIznI
H||t wavn ol ghrlrnlieittiotr,aceorclingto Robbie Robertson,
flftef|5(ltl,wlrerrIwo IrrnliIirrrr.powcls, Sparinand Portugal,
tf€de t'urtte,:lo Asla lu lup llrt lr.sorrlr.cs
ol'Chinarand India,
34 Cult ur al G lo b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e s s e s a l G l o b a l i za ti o n a n d l ts p r o ce sse s
35
which were "already the world's largest and cheapest producers and secure political and economic advantages.Theyvied
with
of a range of highly sought-after commodities" (Robertson, 2003, other to court several newry independent Asian and African
p. 106). ln 1,492,an explorer from Genoa, Christopher Columbus, €ountriesthat, through their intensefreedom struggle,renderedthe
with Spanish military and financial support, landed in the Ameri- Florries more of a burden, economicaily and riiiti..irv, than a
cas, although he set out to find a way across the Atlantic to reach ing
for the imperial powers. Howeve4 despiie decolonization,
India. Six years late4 driven by the fear of Spanish trade advantage, 'civilizing' zeal of former imperialism *ui fu,
from dead. rn
the Portuguese successfully explored their own route to the Easl tain and the united States a new mantra emerged. western val-
when Vasco da Gama rounded Africa and opened up the sea routc , western institutions,_western capitar, and weitern technology.
to India. According to Robertson, this first wave laid the foundatiorr r bv westernizing could former colonieshope to achieve
u
for European empires for modern global trade and finance and for' future" (Robertson, 2003,p. 1s2). of course,westernization
-#-
the new global systems of production, all of which immensely benc- presented largely as modernization.
fited people across the European continent. Ia to help modernize developing countries and rebuild
'rder
The second wave, beginning after 1800, is marked by the fruits Ftorn European nations, the United States assumed leadership
of industrial revolution that Robertson dubbed the "child" of th.' Srtcblishing three new international economic organizations: the
first wave. He argued that competition from China and India "clr' Ftrational Monetary Fund (IMF), in charge of adlinistering the
ated the demand for mechanization" (p. 107), and Britain rose lo tional monetary system;the International Bank for Re"con-
the occasion with James Watt's steam engine, and his rotative ctt rn..arndDevelopment (later known as the World Bank),
in
gine that drove machinery. Mechanization promoted productivilv, loans for industrial projects; and the Generar
'l'providing
decreased cost, and increased profit. "There is no doubt," observt'tl t on Thriffs and Trade (GATT which in 1995 was trans_
Robertson, "that industrialization broke China's and India's relativc I Into the WTO, World Trade Organization), in charge of for-
advantage" and "made Britain a powerful trading nation" (p' I l6) 3q
und enforcing multilateral trade agreements. These fi_
Countries such as Germany, Japan, and the United States emulitlt'rl Institutions also helped create a stable money exchange
Britain and benefited from the process of globalization that arrnc ln which most nations' currency was pegged to ihe ,ralue
if
out of industrialization. But, "for the majority of the world's peoplcr, dollar:All thesemeasureswere takento rlti-ut"lypromote
howeve4 globalization meant only one thing: colonialism" (p. l.l I I n-ntvlcfree-marketeconomyaround the world. ihis effort
Colonialism was extolled as a virtue by the imperial powers, wlrit lt It accc,lc'atcdwith the collapseof the Soviet Union in the
treated it as a civilizing mission they were destined to per'li)| ttt, tnd with the cconomic liberalization in communist china
"Schools, churches and mass circulation newspapers and magazittr'r !f ln c.cialist India. such a "triumph of markets over gov-
spread the word far and wide. So too music, theatre, Iiteratur"c, llre ta" (ljrr.sirres.sWeek,
December 13,iggg) marks one oflhe
visual arts, even postcards. Imperialism became part of the p<lprrlat Vefeuturesol' thc currentphaseof globalization.
culture" (p. la1). Eventually, hegemonic rivalries and econontit' ittt=
peratives led the imperial powers into two world wars, the: t'tttl rtf eurrettt t l ruseol' Gbbalization
which also marked the end of the second wave of globalizzrtirtrr.
The third wave of globalization, after 1945, marked a ncw t't tt rtf flt.tlre ,l'gkrbalization is nothing new, the cur_
international cooperation as well as international rivalry. 'l'ltt' trvtt ttl'll.ls 'r,r.c;t[
th'unrlticallv difl'crent from its phases,in
major victors of the Second World Waf, the United States lrrtl lllF €nt gntl lnrr'nsirv, Acc'r'cling "uili".
t'a 1999United
NationsRe-
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, sought to divide the wot'ltl ittls HtlRlgnDevehrprrrerrr
(11,29),gbbalizationis changingthe
,epe!ltt llu'eerlislirrr.lwlys:
two ideological camps-capitalist and communist-trig11t't i t rp rtlt
unprecedented arms race and untold misery to milli6ns ol pc,'plF ItthltrgillH{.e,lt',plcir llvrs -llrcir',j.bs,i.c'rrcs and health-
around the worlcl. Iloth the superpowerswere imbuecl willt it st'l6c Efferterllrv cvt,rrlnurr llte ollrrr sirle ol tlre gklbcr,often by
ittl'lttttnc:crd
of globalisntclct'grlv to st'izt'lltr tttrr
lly tlrcir'own clcrsit't: l l tt l l ul llt ev t Lr t t nl r , vr , 1lilr lw r ilnr gl.
36 Cult ur al G lo b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e s s e s r a l G l o b a l i za ti o n a n d ,fs p r o ce sse s
37
. Shrinking time. Markets and technologies now change with un- red forty-two of the top two hundred TNCs
were based in only
precedented speed, with action at a distance in real time, with countries: the United_ States, Japan, and
Germa"V (St"g"f
impacts on people'slives far away. . . . p'48).The economicclout of thesecorporation.
' r, i"..""r?"g
. Disappearing borders. National borders are breaking down, not o{ the. availability of cheap labol foreign re_
only for trade, capital and information but also for ideas, norrns, .T":_ feca,use
cs, and a deregulatedglobal market. elthough *fr",
it?V a"
cultures and values. s peoplein-faraway places-as the state of o#shore
o,rtrorr*-
What this means is that the economic as well as cultural lives of
the beginningof this chapterreveals_theirprimu.y
l,T:1i1t-l
rncrease.Tpp:?,"_profit. Consideringtheir stranglehold
people all over the world are more intensely and more instantly :,i:,_r^",
gfobal economy, Robbie Robertson (2003, p. l1) declared that
linked than ever before. Whether we are aware of it or not, we all
the close of the twentieth century the corporate
are a microscopic mesh in a global web. vision vr glob_
of srvu-
Fa held center stage."
The most distinctive feature of the current phase of globaliza-
tion is the global electronic communication force, the Internet. It
-l
power of transnational corporations signals
lT tp :i::f lt^r,"
decline in_tl,,h.
the power
has become the major engine that is driving both economic and cul- of nation-states, a decline that cJnsti-
the third crucial feature of the current
tural globalization. In fact, without global communication, eco- ihase of grouurirutio.r.
t:e of globalization, the world is fast blcoming
nomic growth and cultural change would not have taken place witlr a "borderless
" In which political and economic power has bJen
"breakneck speedand with amazing reach" (U.N. Reporr, 1999,p. 30).
lnstitutions operating through gtoUut networks,".";;;y
That is why Jameson (1998, p. 55) called globalization "a commtr- ..rri.rirg
il.sovereigntyweak (seeChaiter"S).Co;sequently,
nicational concept, which alternately masks and transmits cultural not only
netion-states lost their dominance, but, ironically,
or economic meanings." The communicational revolution began irr as the Ger_
1990 when Netscape opened up the Internet's World Wide Web antl
zygmuntBlu.qan(tesl, p. oq)co..ectty ]
:3:11l,lgT.
there f.i"t"a
werenowstateswhich-fir r."- t.i"e fl;"#i.;;;'"o i
email technology-hitherto available only to governmental agctt' tlovercign
a user-friendly communicrr rights-actively and keenry sought to surlender :;
cies and scientific communities-into
rnd beggedfor their sovereigntyto be takJn u*uy
tion medium for people all over the world. In a development that is urrJJir_ 'l
ln the supra-stateformations.,,A casein point is the long
unprecedented in human history the Internet has become a uniqttr' and
lid evcntuallysuccessful)campaignmountedby Commirnist {
source that instantly connects millions of individuals with other irr I
to beconrca member of the W;rld TradeOrganization,
dividuals, private associations, educational institutions, and gov sub-
It:ell' t' t hc enforcingauthority of wro on matters
ernment agencies, making possible interaction at a distance ancl itt of trade.

J
the [r'icl' hisl.rical narration demonstrates,the impact
real time. In addition, the Internet-based technologies have also itt' of
lorr on nartional economies is astounding.
celerated financial transactions. According to one estimate, in tlrt' Equally as_
la lts inr'^ct ,n the sociocultural rives of people
year 2000 dot-com and e-business firms traded about four huncltlrl
billion dollars over the Web in the United States alone, and tltt'
d, Rswc will see.I shall briefly outline theimpera,i"",
gl'ballz*ri.rr lrc'e. Howeve4,iince the
ull"ou"1
oi 5
amount reached about six trillion dollars by the end of 2003 (Slc thematic focus of
::€
ls t'trltrr'al gkrbalization and its relevance
ger; 2003, pp. aa-45). for lu.rg,rug"
, I slr'll r*kc rr1'rs'rrc o{'the issuesraised here fo.Loie
Yet another aspect of the current phase of globalization is llrc
llEalrut.rrlirr ollrer.chaplcrs.
rise of transnational corporations (TNCs) such as General Molol n,
Hitachi,IBM, Mitsubishi, and Siemens, which control much ol llrc
world's investment capital, technology, and access to intertlitliottul Globallzation
markets. Some of the TNCs are so huge that they are econ1;tltit';tlll
more viable and more powerful than several countrics. Att t'sll gluhallrath'rrt'lersrr rrrr, .r'crrrtrrrar
r)l\)('(,ss frowsacross
mated fifty-one of thc world'.sone hundred largest econotltit'r itte rl l l t' t'lt , t 'r .l. l11y, u"r . , t t llr t , ls llr . lr wr . r . r r a'd t heir
ilt l()()()ltlF
atrecottntries;n1()l't'ovcr,
corporati6ns,while [irr'lV-ttitte tlr eltt r l t,artl, r t.i rr ,,.r ,,,.r ," ,t,,.;;,
r ;,;;',,,f
i "; r.1"
'c, le ''" 'i ;:,r ::;
38 Cult ur al G l o b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e s s e s
growing and deepening in unprecedented ways" (U.N. Report,
1999,p.33). Cultural images from far-offlands flashed across small
screens in our living rooms and big screens in multiplex cinemas
have made the world "a global neighborhood." Foreign cultures are
no longer as foreign as they used to be. Local communities are no
longer cultural islands unto themselves. Consequently, people all
over the world are faced with unparalleled opportunities for their
cultural growth, and with equally unparalleled threats to their cul-
tural identity.
The impact of globalization on culture has become the topic ol
intense debate among scholars in different disciplines. A close ancl
critical analysis of the relevant literature reveals the emergence ol
three schools of thought. One group, represented by political scien-
tist Benjamin Barbel historian Francis Fukuyama, and sociologisl
George Ritzel believes that some kind of cultural homogenizatiort
is taking place in which the American culture of consumerism con-
stitutes the dominant center. Another group, represented by politi-
cal scientist Samuel Huntington, sociologist Anthony Giddens, ancl
cultural critic John Tomlinson, believes that some kind of cultural
heterogenization is taking place in which local cultural and reli-
gious identities are being strengthened mainly as a response to the
threat posed by globalization. A third group, represented by cul-
tural critic Arjun Appadurai, historian Robbie Robertson, and soci'
ologist Roland Robertson, believes that both homogenization ancl
heterogenization are taking place at the same time, plunging tlre
world in a creative as well as chaotic tension that results in "glocitl'
ization" where the global is localized and the local is globalized.
By encapsulating multifarious, and often cacophonous, vicwr
on cultural globalization into three schools of thought,I am not strp'
gesting that they all neatly fall into these three categories; in l'itt'|,
ih"y.i" all linked together in an overlapping texture of dialecti$rl
discourse. Nor am I implying that the scholars I have associitlt'rl
with each school hold identical views without any differenccs ttl
opinion among them. They all, howeve4 tend to agree that "glg[rrl
ization lies at the heart of modern culture; cultural practices lie lll
the heart of globalization" and that globalization "cannot be ptrrlr
erly understood until they are grasped through the conceptttitl vu
cabulary of culture" (Tomlinson,1999a, p. 1). The classificaliorrlr,
therefore, made in order to facilitate a quick understanding ol tlre
ongoing process of cultural globalization. Let us briefly c(,rrsitlt't
the main arguments of these three schools of thought.
u r a l G l o b a l i za ti o n a n d l ts Pr o ce sse s 39
2,1. Cultural Homogenization
first group of scholars, whom Steger (2003) called "h;per-
zets," presents a rosy picture of an emerging "global culture"
is rapidly changing the cultural profile of the world. Some of
are carnivalesque in their attitude and triumphalistic in their
as they see in cultural globalization the supremacy of their
Western values and lifestyles. They tend to make a simple and
equation: Globalization : Westernization : Americanizaiion
McDonaldization. That is to say, they consider globalization pre-
y as a process of Westernization, which, in their view is
:ubstantially different from Americanization, which can, in turn,
characteized as McDonaldization. The term McDonaldiza-
was coined by American sociologist George Ritzer (1993) to de-
the contemporary sociocultural processesby which the basic
of the fast-food industry-creation of homosenized con-
goods and imposition of uniform standards-shape the cul-
lendscape in America and elsewhere.
fupport of their worldview the hyperglobalizers pointed out
ldeas about American individualism and consumerism are
more freely and accepted more widely as evidenced in
people in various parts of the world wearing Levi jeans and
athletic shoes,sporting Texacobaseball caps and Chicago
:weatshirts,watching music videoson MTV and blockbusters
llollywood, and eating at McDonald's and Pizza Hut. They
ttrcrsed that such a cultural homogenization is facilitated bv a
communications industry controlled mostlv bv American in-
It has been reported that, in the year 2000, "only ten media
AT&T, Sony,AOL/Time Warne4,Bertelsmann,Lib-
Medla, Vivcndi Universal,Viacom, General Electric, Disney,
Corpolation-accounted for more than two-thirds of the
?5 blllion in annual worldwide revenuesgeneratedby the
lcatfons industrv"(Stege42003,p.76).
hyperglotralieersespeciallyemphasizedthe role played by
can entertainmcntindustry in spreadingthe gospelof
n pop r.'rrllure.As the 1999U.N. Report stated,the single
€*polt Indrrstl'y lol the Unitcd States is not aircraft, auto-
.tr eonlputer'n;
lt is etrto'lnirrnrcnt.
AlthoughIndia'sfilm
flollywr,rorl,
lrrukertlrellrgcsl rrrrnrbe
r ol'movieseachvear,
Hellvwoud thul leaclrr,Ecve!'vsltrgle nralket in thc world, get-
Flttt'elltatr lll prr'rre'ltl
ol llq lnlal Ir.venursllrlttt over.scas.
By
]
40 Cult ur al G l o b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e o r a q
the end of the 1990s,Hollywood claimed 83 percent of the film trt;rt
I ket in Latin America,T2 percent in Europe, and 50 percent in Jztp;ut
American cinema houses, on the other hand, are seldom open to lot
eign films, which take less than 3 percent of the U.S. market. llis
hyperglobalizers stressed that the spread of American populal t rtl
ture is unstoppable and uncontestable because there is what lirt',1'
ric Jameson (1998, p. 63) called "a fundamental dissymmetry" lre.'
tween the United States and others in terms of their abilitv trr
disseminate cultural values. He argued confidently that thert' t;rtt
"never be parity'' in this area bebause"other local entertainmcltl ttt
dustries are most unlikely to supplant Hollywood in any globrrl rrt
universally successful form" (p. 63).
Jameson would like us to remember that "Hollyr,vood is trul
merely a name for a business that makes money but also for a ltttt
damental late-capitalist cultural revolution, in which 6ld v"1vr uf
life are broken up and new ones set in place" (Jameson, 1998, p. rrl;
In other words, what Hollywood is exporting is more than t'ttle'l-
tainment; it is exporting cultural values as conceived ancl t rrtt=
structed by American cultural workers. It can potentially p()5('e
threat to local cultural identities. That is why even \Nestern t ottll=
tries like Canada and France have taken legislative measttrts ttl
protect their artistic diversity and national identity by limitirrll llrl
entry of American cultural goods into their societies. Peoplc lrirrrlh
notice that there is an ongoing "struggle between immense IJS r tll:
tural interests, who want to open up foreign borders to Antt't iutfl
film, television, music and the like, and foreign nation-stal('s \vllll
still place a premium on the preservation and development ol tlrelf
national languages and cultures and attempt to limit the dantrtllr: -
both material and social-caused by the leveling power ol Atttt'tl=
can mass culture" (Jameson, 1998,p. 59).
A clear reflection of this ongoing struggle is illustratccl hv ;t tc=
cent decision made by the General Conference of the Urtitt'tl Ne-
tions Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (LJNlrS( ( ll.
It adopted a new convention "to preserve and protect thc' tlivt'r',1[Y
of cultural expressions" (see UNESCO Press ReleaseNo. 2(X)5 I JH,
dated 20 October 2005). The convention enables countt'ic'slo litkF
measures to protect their distinctive nature of culturatl gootlr *tttd
services.It was approved by a vote of 148 to 2, with 4 itbslt'ttltotta,
The United States was one of the two countries that volt'tl itt';rittcf
the convention, fearing that it could be used to block lltt't'rgr.1 | rrl
Q l o b a l i za ti o n a n d l ts Pr o ce sse s 41
l'ilms and other cultural exports. According to an on-line
SFpnt't,Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, the French culture min-
Afguecl that "nations had a right to set artistic quotas because
tll ol'the world's spending on cinema tickets went to Holly-
(BFICNews, dated Oct. 20, 2005).
trerrignform of cultural clashes between nations also finds
irr "cultural clauses" that are included in bilateral and re-
tlacle agreements like the North American Free Tiade Agree-
tNAl/lA). A not-so-benign form produces unpalatable, and
rrnthinkable, results. \\e 9lI1 terrorist attack that de-
the World Tiade Center in New York and shook the world is
dcspicable manifestation of such a cultural clash. In fact,
lertl Georee W. Bush declared that the attack was an at-
Weslern civilization. Even before glll,the hyperglobalizers
tly tlividcd the world into two camps: a silent majority that
llrc homogenized "global culture," and a strident minor-
It opposcd to it. Their worldview was succinctly captured by
He'n.jarmin Barber (1996), who presented a dichotomized
etl lftt w<rrldin his booklihadvs. McWorld.
ffarbcr (L996) claimed that he used "Jihad" onlv "as a
telnr tpritc independently from its Islamic theological ori-
1991,11.'ncvertheless explained it this way: "In its mildest
b€tokerrrrcligious struggleon behalf of faith, a kind of Is-
Irr ils strrrngest political manifestation, it means bloody
tun hclrall'ol' partisan identity that is metaphysically de-
lllurttci:rllyclcl'ended"(p. 9). Despite his invocation of the
€t'ttr uncl lslanric zcal, he hastened to add that he uses the
llr nrilitlrrt corrstruction to suggestdogmatic and violent
nt ol n kincl l<nown to Christians no less than Muslims. '
r nr r r ll l i r r c l i sl . s i c l a sw e l l a s t o A r a b s "( p . 9 ) . B a r b e r ' s
!
tut lltc ollrcr' lrancl,is very similar to Ritzer'sMcDon-
.J
In tlrat il rr.lrlcst:nlsthe "luture in shimmering pastels,a
Htt'pl t u| rrrrrr rsIri rrg t'cononri c, technological, and ecological
*:t elr,rttr,rrrl irrlt'gration and uniformity and that mesmer-
crvt'l'vrvl!t'r'e' witlr lirst nrusic, fast computers, and fast
I Mtrr'lttloslr, lrrrtl Mcl)orrald'.s-pressingnations into
rrrr glolrrl pirrk, onc McWorld tied togetherby
llrt.rrrc.
.ulluttr, l nl orrrrirl iorr, r'rrl crl tri rrlrrcrrl,erndcommerce" (Bar-
gr,41,I.ikr nllrn lrvpt'r'p.lolrirlizt'r's,
tl'! trr'r'' lllrlxrr arrguedthat the
H f the r vut lr l at e pr er t 'r r ler l r villr lr slir lk clr oicr , rl- r r r lween"t he
42 Cult ur al Gl o b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e s s e s A u l t u r a t G l ob a ti za ti o n a n d l ts p r o ce sse s
43
secular universalism of the cosmopolitan market and the everyday a dizzyinga'ray of programmes,
transmitted around the crock
:lce
particularism of the fractious tribe" (p. 7). He, howeve4 asserted b.ypowerful sate'ites put into orbit
by European rockets and Ameri-
that the forces of globalism and those of tribalism both undermine c&n space shuttles." It has grown so
much i":"r,itr"";;
broadcasts can be wat.heJ around the that its
civil liberties and democratic values. crock on all five continents.
In addition, its website attracts an international
audience, with daily
hlts exceeding seven milrion. al-rur""ruhas
3.2. 2. Cultural Heterogenization definitely made a dent
ln the American dominance of grobal airr"-i.rution
of current events.
If the first school of thought led by hyperglobalizers foregrounds In a sign of expanding influen-ce, it siarted
an English-language in-
the global aspect of cultural globalization, the second, led by what tsrnational satellite television urrr"il'
November 2006.
I call "localizers," foregrounds its local characteristics. For localiz- "t
foraysinto therr"*, *"aiu, tfr".ir" of
L,*f.:-t-Jazeera'ssuccessful
ers, the most salient feature of cultural globalization is not homog- lel,vwood hascaused atiny..u.r.i,,
n"iffJ:#ii:Tiltr l',ilj
enization but heterogenization, in which a multitude of local cul- tn.Boily*ota,rimemasazine
lfntg
, 2003)T:.::].":story
(october
tural identities are being revived and revitalized owing to real or observed that,.iheshee*ir. i";;;";#;ffi:r_
perceived threats from the process of globalization. They reject thc "i,rr"
compared
;::::j*ji:^1::it:t,!oo $ms ?!.u,: to Holrywood,s
proposition about the cultural dominance of the West over the rest, li erd attracting an annual world auji"";;;;; ;;;i;;",
and about the preeminence of the American cultural field. They sec of 3.6 biuion. with Holywood,s2.6
the emergence of several vibrant cultural hubs rather than a singlc ,9:1. J:yl-
tn-made it seemas though :"-;;;;;
the West*u, tt l"r, L';;;.h .; "
vital cultural center. Their world is best described in the words ol out "
rollowing20th
,'1]!iiil,:.if: ::*o centuryrox,s
the celebrated Irish poet William Butler Yeats, who, writing at a di l: n,to distribute Bollywood.that
films world#ide, other a.*.i"u"
ferent time and in a different context, stated that "the center will not lics such as WarnerBros. and C"f"_fiu
TriStar Films, have
hold, mere anarchy is loosed upon the world," or in the words ol Jolneclin the frav.In a critical anarysis;-.ffi;r#;;#",
leading British sociologist Anthony Giddens (2000, p.20), who savs iher"tl'r"elJarguedthat "havingr.rg"tf"iled to
exportwestern
that our world "seems out of our control-a runaway world." to India, Hollywood is now l"""rtirrg
in Indian studios_
By "runaway world," Giddens denotes that globalization is lrt' Bolllwood,not attemptin!to replace
:ll:lT;,nl:,. it with its
coming increasingly decentered. He even suggested,rather polerrri pflrelucl" (TVrrell, 1999,p. zsq. chi;acrerizing
"Bollywood,s
cally, that "reverse colonization" is taking place. For him, "revct'sr c.okrnisation b-yHollywood,, as .,aesthetlc
ll,a:: urra
colonisation means that non-Western countries influence devckrlr ea llpof iticirl" (p. 263), she viewed such ",rtirr.f
resistance as proof
ments in the West. Examples abound-such as the latinising ol' |,rrr a qlob{ force,andasa ^rvbv'rv'rv
L,li::]j:.,11u':,:* hegemoni. i;,
rurLs'
Angeles, the emergence of a globally oriented high-tech secto| ill €atrf irrt,tf r' llrc Wcst alone,, (p.273).
I
India, orthe selling of Brazilian television programmes to Portttllitl" tlrc inrpacr of' cultural giobalization 1'
on common rl
(Giddens, 2000, pp. 34-35). If he were to rewrite this statctttt'ttl lrPlIt,to
the l,rt'rrIizt'r's
,'i''hariz" thaiihJr.-*il.a global l/i ; .:.!
neighborl
today, he might cite the recent rise of Al-Jazeera and Bollywootl ul ..Julity butonrywhat
*i,,:::li.
ffilllttr,rri::lll,1,"i,,11..-.""yi:.J
( l99e', ,.."fo...a ltt
casesin point. t05)called f.J*ffir:t'i #':;
N-Jazeera is a Qatar-based Arabic language television nclwor h. '. rrrributei ;"1,,;il;ontraction
c,r,
During the 2002 Afghan military operation and the 2003 lrat;i rvut, #hlll I::llurrtl
b't'rlt l'e l';,:rrrt t' thc ofspace,
it proved to be a noteworthy rival to the American-owpctl ('NN "*po"rio'oi.;;;;;;il;;;ffi;
or',n.
*.'ralinract,
news service in providing an alternative view of the wars. In I lrt l, llr Ij1'f::l:::l:ll
heneel :l::lll".inrcs
tlrr.lirrr.es,l it has
onry
frrrrrl.rrrc,,rr,tir,r,'
*liil &i.;i;il1i
mission was so effective that there were attempts to pclsttittle llie L gr,,Ln,'r ir,,,'i,;:,,
Fundermentalism,
Qatari government to rein in Al-Jazeera.According to Stt'gt'r (,)(l(f1, *:::,*.1,::,,
ll lr r r l [ l r r r l rI,.
l l r i r it:t,,r
(t ,' l r r i s r i u r r ,
r r i r r r r r r ,s r u r r r i c( ),r . u l v o t h e r
p. 4), the Arabic network is now "offering its Middle Eitslt't'ttitttrll. ll1 ,le p . e r ' t r r r ' lrrl p , r r n r r r . r ' rpr r . r r r r , r ' I t ' ' r r . r . r
i t t r t rp r . c s c . r . v e
44 Cult ur al G lo b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e s s e s
local traditional beliefs and practices that are perceived to be threat-
ened by global cultural flows.
No doubt global cultural flows have resulted in an extraordinary
spread of Western consumption patterns, particularly among the
growing middle class population in various regions of the world'
Acceptance of Western consumer goods, however, does not neces-
sarily mean acceptance of Western cultural beliefs. From a histori-
cal perspective Huntington(1996, p. 58) pointed out that "during the
1970sand 1980sAmericans consumed millions of Japanesecars, TV
sets, cameras, and electronic gadgets without being'Japanized' and
indeed while becoming considerably antagonistic towards Japan"'
He rhetorically and rightly asked: "what does it tell the world aboul
the West when Westerners identify their civilization with llzzy liq-
uids, faded pants, and fatty foods?" (p. 58).
Thus, the localizers vehemently dismiss the idea that a single,
unified global culture is emerging. They insist that a diffusion ol
cultural fads from the West does not denote cultural domination on
the part of the West. On the contrary, they see the grip of the West
declining, and the grasp of the rest rising, although in a mannct'
that is unequal and unbalanced. The reasoning of the localizers, zts
Tomlinson (1999b, p.24) wisely cautioned, may "quickly take some
of the wind out of the sails of the Westernisation argument, at leasl
in its most dramatic, polemical formulations. Howeve4 they do nol
entirely resolve the issue of the contemporary cultural power of thc
West. For it could very reasonably be argued that, when all is saitl
and done and all these criticisms met, Western cultural practiccr
and institutions still remain firmly in the driving seat of global ctrl
tural developmenl"-a point well taken by the proponents of crrl
tural glocalization.
3.2.3. Cultural Glocalization
The third school of thought, represented by what I call "glocllie
ers," believes that cultural transmission is a two-way process llt
which cultures in contact shape and reshape each other directlV ol
indirectly. They, therefore, assett that the forces of globarliz.rrlinrr
and those of localization are so complex and overlapping that tlrt'V
cannot be understood from the narrow perspective ol' it cettlt'l'
peripherydichotomy. The two forces are, in fact, two siclcs ol tlte
same processin which the global is brought in conjunctiorl witlr llrc
Q u l t u r a l G l o b ati za ti o n a n d tts p r o ce sse s 45
local, and the local is modified to accommodatethe global. In order
to capturethe essenceof such an inextricablylinked process,soci-
ologist Roland Robertson (1992) coined a new terrir, "gloc aliza-
tlon." The term is based on dochakuka, a Japanr" *o.J roughly
tneaning "global localization," which the Japanesebusiness com-
munity often usesto refer to marketing issues,as in the popular slo-
3an "think globally, act locally."
cultural critic Arjun Appadurai'soft-quoted statement "the cen-
tsal problem of today'sglobal interaction is the tension betweencul-
homogenization and cultural heterogenizatiorf, (1990, p. 5)
ly summarizes the stand taken by glocalists. How this tension
resolved may depend on whether a particular cultural transmis-
takes place in the appropriate context, and whether it is a
" or a "soft" cultural form. Hard cultural forms are defined
as
that come with a set of links between value, meaning, and
ied practice that are difficult to break and hard to transform.
cultural forms, by contrast, are those that permit relatively
separation of embodied performance from meaning and value,
relatively successful transformation at each level" (Appadurai,
, P, 90).
Any tension concerning a soft cultural form can be easily re-
[ed through a simple accommodation that meets the needsand
r ol'the receivingculture. successfulglobal marketing of con-
lf goodsnecessarilyinvolveswhat is called micromarketing, in
h prclducts are tailored to suit religious, cultural, and etilnic
tnds. The American fast-food chain McDonald,s, for instance,
ts be sensitive to local food habits conditioned by cultural and
bclicf.sand practices.It servesKosher food in Israel.con-
t, thc: lerwsof the Jewish religion; or Halal food in Islamic
, lirllowing lslamic religious traditions; or vegetarian food
wher c rnost people do not eat meat. At a deepel harder
{en sc:ecptancc
rl'the technologicalculture of the west and of
Etr ol'lls c'nsumq'ism may well co-exist with a vigorous rejec-
€f lts nexrul pc'nrissive.esi and its generally r".rL. outloot-
€fflrnon in rrruuylslanric societies"(Tomlinson, lgggb, p. 23).
€mphasizirrg the "the tw.lbld process of the particulari)ation
Hnlvet';alu'd tlre urrivcr.salizationof the particular,,(Roland
lftrltn, f 992, p;t, 177 7tl), thc glocalizersactually draw atten-
t€the hrltv klenlol'lrrrrrrrrn r.rniver.sarlirv.
Theybeiievethat the
:lratlrurrrl llre rrrrivel'sll"l'acilitatestlre risc of nrovements
t|I
rl 46 Cult ur al Gl o b a l i z a t i o n a n d l t s P r o c e s s e s G l o b a li za ti o n a n d l ts Pr o ce sse s 47

concerred with the'real nreaning'of the world, movements (and in- flfunStandards and the European Framework (see Chapter 2) that
tJividuals)searching lirr llre mcaning of the world as a whole," just lhow an acute awareness of the connection between communica-
as the universalization ol' thc particular facilitates "the search for tlve competence and cultural competence present only a limiting
the particular, for incrcasingly f ine-grained modes of identity pre- Ind limited vision of teaching culture. How best to address the prin-
sentation" (Roland Robertson, 1992,p. I 78). Such a search for global elples and practices of teaching culture in the globalized world will
and local identities, historian Robbie Robertson (2003,p. 251) hoped, the focus of chapters 9 and 10.
will ultimately display "dynamic signs of life in the great concert of
this globalized planet." Calling for the creation of effective strate-
gies to handle the challenge of cultural globalization, he urged edu- In Closing
cators to pursue all possible alternative pedagogies that will prepare
thls chapteq, I attempted a concise review of the emerging pro-
our children in school to get ready to face the globalized world. In
of globalization that have political, economic, social, cul-
such a pursuit, language educators, it seems to me, have a special
, and individual dimensions. I presented a brief historical sketch
role to play.
the development of the concept of globalization with a particular
is on what is significant about its current phase. I then fo-
3.3.CulturalGlobalization on cultural globalization and its twin processes of homoge-
and LanguageEducation
tlon and heterogenization.In the last section, I briefly men-
More than any other educators, language teachers face distinct chal- the relevance of cultural globalization to second language
lenges and opportunities to help learners construct their own sub- n. a strand that will be taken for a detailed treatment later.
jectivity and self-identity. This is mainly because, as Chris Weederr If we are serious about preparing our language learners to face
(1987, p.2t) pointed out, "language is the place where actual ancl challenges of the twenty-first century we need to foster in them
possible forms of social organization and their likely social and po- cultural consciousness. We need to re-view our past and
litical consequences are defined and contested. Yet it is also thc practices of teaching culture in order to re-vision our future
place where our sense of ourselves, our subjectivity, is constructed." of action. That is preciselywhat I set out to do in subsequent
This is even more applicable to second language education, whiclr
brings languages and cultures in close contact.
Amid the centrifugal and centripetal pulls of globalization, tht,
construction of self-identity becomes dauntingly difficult. As tlrt'
relative security of tradition and custom slowly recedes, "the vcrv
basis of our self-identity-our sense of self-changes. In more trir ,J
'll
ditional situations, a sense of self is sustained largely through tlrc r
"i' rl
l
stability of the social positions of individuals in the communitv, ;il
r,{l
Where tradition lapses,and lifestyle choice prevails, the self isn'l c.x
empt. Self-identity has to be created and recreated on a more active
basis than before" (Giddens, 2000, p. 65).
It is my contention that in these days of cultural globalizertiorr,
the edifice of an individual's identity can be constructed and r(](.()n
structed only on a strong foundation of global cultural consciorrs
ness.To myknowledge, there are very few secondlanguageeducaliorr
programs that seem to have fully grasped the imperative ncecl lo rlr
velop global c:trlttrrarl
consciousnessin the learner. Even thc Arrrt.r'l