Evaluate the impact of globalisation and Western values on the cultures of East and Southeast Asia. Do you think that globalisation will lead to the homogenisation of culture? Why/Why not?

Some scholars argue that while the cultures of East and Southeast Asia are impacted, sometimes to a great degree, by globalisation, the result is a passive adaptation or cultural hybridisation. However, I will argue that while cultural hybridisation does exist, cultural homogenisation is a necessary condition for engagement with globalisation.

Perhaps the primary point of engagement with the above question is in exploring just what is meant by globalisation. Globalisation is a contested term and many scholars disagree with its use, the reason being that many concepts traditionally sheltered under the term globalisation can validly be explained using pre-existing terminology (Knight 2004, p. 185; Scholte 2000, pp. 44-46). To satisfy such criticism let us look at what globalisation is not so we can decide just what globalisation is. According to Scholte (2000, pp. 44-45) globalisation is not, in line with many critics, internationalisation, liberalisation, universalisation, nor is it westernisation. These concepts can be and are explained coherently using preexisting terminology. What cannot be explained with pre-existing terminology, however, is the concept of ‘deterritorialisation’, or as Scholte (2000, p. 46) would put it, ‘the growth of “supraterritorial” relations between people’.

Deterritorialisation is the end of territorialism¹; in this global world territory is only a single aspect of our geography (Scholte 2000, p. 46). Internationalisation, liberalisation, universalisation, and westernisation all depend, to some extent, upon interterritorial relationships. These interterritorial relationships occur spatially between borders while supraterritorial relationships need have no specific spatial location at all (Scholte 2000, p. 49). Some common illustrations of supraterritorial relationships include telephone calls and ozone depletion (Scholte 2000, p. 47).

However, the phenomenon that has become the internet would be a more pertinent example. The conditions of globalisation which may exist within borders or territories also exist, simultaneously, within the world as a whole, or to borrow another term from Scholte (2000, p. 48), within a ‘transworld space’.

To move on from globalisation we are confronted with another term in the above question, Western² values. Values are a difficult concept to define and Australia is going through a process of attempting to define Australian values of which there seems to be no consensus (Insight – Aussie Rules 2006). If Australian values can’t be effectively defined what then of Western values? The Western values referred to in this question can most effectively be defined with the theory of ideology and one of the most obvious illustrations of Western ideology is, according to Knight (2003, p. 318), the ‘Enlightenment narrative of a world constructed of nation-states’. Globalisation, as defined above, may not have introduced the concept of the nation-state to East and Southeast Asia, however, without the concept of the nation-state there would be no territory to transcend, no ‘transworld space’ to occupy.

After the nation-state the most widely recognised Western ideology is capitalism. Capitalism has many forms and functions of which the foundation is economics (Van Krieken et al. 2000, p. 244). The relationship between economics and globalisation will be developed further below, however, it is important to note that the economic situation of most, if not all, East and Southeast Asian countries is based on this Western capitalist paradigm and bears little, if any, resemblance to their pre-colonial economies (Tan 2000, pp. 23-24). East and Southeast Asian economies were traditionally based on agriculture and with the introduction of capitalism and the gaining of independence, shifted towards industry (Tan 2000, pp. 23-24).

With globalisation, or the removal of territorial relationships, globalised economies can now exist in ‘transworld space’. With modern telecommunications corporations can buy and sell subsidiaries, or even other corporations, in a matter of seconds from anywhere in the world with sometimes little or no government intervention. Commodities, including labour, can be sourced from many different locations around the world and combined into a single marketable product. And individuals can now deposit their finances, electronically, in a foreign currency in a supraterritorial ‘offshore’ bank or financial institution (Knight 2004, pp. 186-188; Scholte 2000, pp. 50-52). But need the impact of economic globalisation, particularly upon East and Southeast Asia, be seen as negative or is it a ‘two edged sword’ as the leaders in China refer to it? (Knight 2003, p. 328)

East and Southeast Asian peoples do receive many benefits from globalisation such as access to the internet. Many commodities are produced and refined in East and Southeast Asia and with the internet for example companies can now trade directly and efficiently with consumers, other companies and between offices internationally (Knight 2004, p. 189). However, with the Western ideology of capitalism it may be so that the ‘third world’, of which many East and Southeast Asian countries belong, may have been created. The creation and maintenance of the poor economic and social conditions present in many East and Southeast Asian countries may be a necessary condition of globalised capitalism (Lewellen 1995, p. 24). Economic globalisation simply maintains these poor economic and social conditions of the ‘third world’ and allows for the continued exploitation of its citizenry. Although the dynamic may appear contrary, economic globalisation is imperialistic in that it supports the peoples of the ‘first world’ in the same way that
the colonies supported the coloniser (Amin 1999, p. 166-167).

If globalisation is a colonising ‘tool’ used by the peoples of the ‘first world’ over and against the peoples of the ‘third world’ surely it would have some cultural impact, perhaps even an impact as large as cultural homogenisation. One theme in the discourse surrounding globalisation, however, states quite the opposite. Scholars such as Knight argue that globalisation is not causing a homogenisation of culture at all. Culture may be adapting, possibly becoming hybridised, but not homogenising (Knight 2004, pp. 190-196). Western pop culture has established itself in East and Southeast Asia through globalisation with Western technology and cultural norms becoming popular. The internet facilitates many of these supraterritorial relationships spreading Western fashion and music for example through even the remotest of locations (Knight 2004, p. 192).

Western corporations are represented in East and Southeast Asia offering local peoples a chance at a Western way of life. McDonalds, for example, is present throughout East and Southeast Asia offering customers the same or similar products as their Western counterparts and Coca Cola offer the same beverages the world over (Knight 2004, p.192; Nancarrow, Vir & Barker 2005, p.301). While McDonalds and Coca Cola are often looked upon as homogenising local culture it is a fact that they have had to adjust their operations to suit the local culture. To meet cultural needs McDonalds had to withdraw its beef burgers and substitute them with lamb burgers in India and the same corporation introduced McHuevos into Latin America to meet cultural demand (Nancarrow, Vir & Barker 2005, p. 301).

The products a corporation markets may adapt to the local culture and the same can be applied to fashion or music trends as well. An Indian drinking a bottle of Coca Cola is no more American than an American eating Palak Paneer is Indian. This phenomenon is commonly referred to as glocalisation and refers to when corporations that exist on a global scale adapt their products to suit local cultural norms (Jacob 2005, p. 524). However, this does not represent a homogenisation of culture precisely because it does not represent globalisation. The ideologies behind globalisation are present and homogenous throughout the world. A valid counter consideration, however, states that globalisation erodes the authority of the Nation State and since culture may not be specific to any given Nation State globalisation does not harm culture. Statements like this fly in the face of scholars such as Giddens who claim that cultural homogenisation is a necessary condition of globalisation (Knight 2004, p. 192).

As mentioned above, globalisation and capitalism are fine bedfellows. In fact globalisation can be viewed as a necessary condition of capitalism (Scholte 2000, p. 15). There is little doubt that globalisation erodes the authority of the Nation State but this should not assume that globalisation will not affect culture, specifically the cultures present in East and Southeast Asia. Globalisation is culturally specific, acting on behalf of the American hegemon, driving neoliberal ideology such as the free market, deregulated economies and labour markets, and privatisation (Mishra 1999, pp. 7-8). Scholte (2000, p. 23) describes the ‘culture’ of globalisation as focusing on such things as ‘consumerism, mass media... [and] Americana…’ Individual citizens may have a choice between a beef burger and a lamb burger but to exist in today’s globalised world a miscegenation of cultures is not possible. The cultural and social norms mentioned above are necessary and cannot co-exist with any others (Scholte 2000, p. 23). Cultural hybridisation exists on a glocalised level while cultural homogenisation exists on a globalised level.

Globalisation, for better or for worse, has affected the peoples of East and Southeast Asia greatly. It has introduced new technologies and boosted local
economies. With access to the internet businesses and individuals alike can now participate in a global community. Globalisation is culturally specific, however, and for the peoples of East and Southeast Asia to engage with a globalised world an adaptation of culture is not enough. Globalisation represents a single culture, a globalised culture, and to effectively engage with globalisation pre-existing cultures need to homogenise themselves in line with globalisation’s dominant cultural norms.

1545 Words.

1. Territorialism is where our social landscape is based on territory (Scholte 2000, p. 46).

2. The term Western used here is referring to values, concepts,
ideologies that derive from a European context. Northern is another
term often used in place of Western, however, it too cannot be
universally applied. With respect to the essay question, the term
Western will be used throughout this essay. For a discussion on Europe
and Asia, or Western and Eastern, see Knight 2004, pp. 9-14.

References

Amin, S 1999, ‘Capitalism, Imperialism, Globalisation’, in Chilcoate, RM (ed.), The Political Economy of Imperialism: Critical Appraisals, Kluwer Academic
Publishers, London.

Insight – Aussie Rules 2006, television program, ABC Television, 25 April.

Jacob, N 2005, ‘Cross-Cultural Investigations: Emerging Concepts’, Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 514-528.

Knight, N 2003, ‘Imagining Globalisation: The World and Nation in Chinese Communist Party Ideology’, Journal of Contemporary Asia, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 318-337.

Knight, N 2004, Understanding Australia’s Neighbours: an Introduction to East and Southeast Asia, Cambridge University Press, Port Melbourne.

Lewellen, TC 1995, Dependency and Development: an Introduction to the Third World, Bergin and Garvey, London.

Mishra, R 1999, Globalisation and the Welfare State, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

Nancarrow, C, Vir, J & Barker, A 2005, ‘Ritzer’s McDonaldization and Applied Qualitative Marketing Research’, Qualitative Market Research, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 296-311.

Scholte, JA 2000, Globalisation: a Critical Introduction, Palgrave, Hampshire.

Tan, G 2000, Asian Development: an Introduction to Economic, Social and Political Change in Asia, Times Academic Press, Singapore.

Van Krieken, R, Smith, P, Habibis, D, McDonald, K, Haralambos, M & Holborn, M 2000, Sociology: Themes and Perspectives, Pearson Education Australia, Frenchs Forest.