What has globalization ever done to you?

[Arrian]

Oh please, not the "Americans are from Mars, Euros are from Venus" crapola.

Spiff, you better watch about, that Florida OJ might just dilute your culture! BEHOLD the evil of the American Cultural Imperialists, that they stoop so low as to use orange juice as a weapon against the purity of ancient cultures!

-Arrian

[General Ludd]

Fast food and hollywood are not just hamburgers and movies, they are a complete pre-packaged culture and way of life. Mybae you don't realise this, because it is all you have.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Naturally, You're American

Yup... I'm the penetrator, not the penetratee

[Arrian]

It's not all I have, culture snob. It's all you SEE, though, apparently.

-Arrian

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Arrian
It's not all I have, culture snob. It's all you SEE, though, apparently.

-Arrian

I said maybe it is, but I think you are wrong. I have a hard time believing the USA is the cultural paradise you make it out to be when I live right next to you in Canada, and see nothing but fast food culture dominating both sides of the border. I am, of course, talking about the culture of the region as a whole.

[Spiffor]

Arrian :
Except if you lived for a long time out of the US, you can't know how it looks like on the recieving end. Very often, those who live in a more influent culture do not understand why the 'inferior' cultures have resentment.
English-speakers in Canada are surprised by the reaction of the French-speaking community to protect their language. Parisians didn't understand in the 19th century why they were disliked in the rural areas.

It is not a symptom of ignorance or stupidity. Only that a cultural domination means that many things you feel "normal" are spread elsewhere, in places where they are not "normal". And you fail to understand why people resent them.

[Oerdin]

Osweld: Please tell me how globalization is harmful. I'd like to hear what you have to say.

[Sava]

3:1 = "in awe of"

[Sava]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Osweld: Please tell me how globalization is harmful. I'd like to hear what you have to say.

Not culturally, but American companies taking jobs to other countries... exploiting cheap labor, inhumane conditions, and child labor...

[Arrian]

said maybe it is, but I think you are wrong. I have a hard time believing the USA is the cultural paradise you make it out to be when I live right next to you in Canada, and see nothing but fast food culture dominating both sides of the border. I am, of course, talking about the culture of the region as a whole.

I don't claim "cultural paradise!" Frankly, I'm not sure there is any such thing. In fact, I'm rather suspicious of people who tout their "culture" because I see major similarities to nationalism and we all know the dangers of that, don't we?

Further, I'm not arguing that everyone should run out and get a BigMac & a Coke! Not at all. I just can't take the incessant whining about how big, bad America is exporting "cultural imperialism." Why? Because all you have to do is NOT FRIGGIN' BUY THE STUFF! Spiff doesn't, and that's fine (it was his pride at halting the advance of the perfidious ACI* that I took issue with).

You know what really pisses me off? Americans are stereotyped as being uncultured hacks, but at the very same time we're supposedly using our unstoppable culture to take over the world! uke:

-Arrian

* "American Cultural Imperialism" hereforth abbreviated to ACI.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by Sava
Not culturally, but American companies taking jobs to other countries... exploiting cheap labor, inhumane conditions, and child labor...

Of course, the only alternative to that is to have American consumers suffer from higher prices while poorer countries slowly die from lack of investment, unemployment, and civil war.

[Sava]

I agree with Arrian. The obnoxious, culturally bankrupt crap known as American Pop Culture will go away when we stop paying for it. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

[ranskaldan]

As for American pop culture - it's not like any sort of pop culture in the entirety of human history has actually been better.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Osweld: Please tell me how globalization is harmful. I'd like to hear what you have to say.

Oerdin, please read my first post in this thread.

[Sava]

Originally posted by ranskaldan


Of course, the only alternative to that is to have American consumers suffer from higher prices while poorer countries slowly die from lack of investment, unemployment, and civil war.

If the prices of products are too high, they won't be bought, and the businesses will fail. Those that survive will be forced to adapt and improve. It's the pillar of capitalism and a basic evolution of business. The strong will survive while the weak die. As for poorer countries, they are welcome to follow our example. If anything, suckling on the teet of Multi-National-Corporations aren't doing anything to improve things in those impovereshed areas. It anything, it's stifling their improvement. It isn't America's responsibility to support the world. We should help where we can, but other countries need to become self-sufficient so they can support themselves.

[gsmoove23]

The article completely missed the mark on what the beef is with globalization. The fact that it is pushed for the benefit of multinational companies rather then any flowery ideas of cultural exchange.

BTW, saw City of God, I cannot find the words to describe how good it is. Blew Goodfellas or any crime movie I've ever seen out of the water yet its more then a crime movie. Of course, I had to go to BAM(Brooklyn Academy of Music) to see it, it wasn't in any theatres in my area outside of Brooklyn or Manhattan. I cannot express to you how good this film was and yet most theatres would prefer to show whatever crap was playing at the time, prob cause it was in portuguese with sub-titles. The last foreign film that got a wide release here was "Life is Beautiful". What does that say about globalization?

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Arrian


I don't claim "cultural paradise!" Frankly, I'm not sure there is any such thing. In fact, I'm rather suspicious of people who tout their "culture" because I see major similarities to nationalism and we all know the dangers of that, don't we?

Further, I'm not arguing that everyone should run out and get a BigMac & a Coke! Not at all. I just can't take the incessant whining about how big, bad America is exporting "cultural imperialism." Why? Because all you have to do is NOT FRIGGIN' BUY THE STUFF! Spiff doesn't, and that's fine (it was his pride at halting the advance of the perfidious ACI* that I took issue with).

You know what really pisses me off? Americans are stereotyped as being uncultured hacks, but at the very same time we're supposedly using our unstoppable culture to take over the world! uke:

-Arrian

* "American Cultural Imperialism" hereforth abbreviated to ACI.

Then what is the problem, why are you laughing at Spiffor for boycotting it if you think that is fine, and is what you should do if you don't like it?

And my reference to a "cultural paradise" is that everytime someone critisises american fast food culture someone always goes on about how diverse the country is - how they know some guy who doesn't speak english, or there is this quaint ethnic resteraunt down the street.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Sava
Not culturally, but American companies taking jobs to other countries... exploiting cheap labor, inhumane conditions, and child labor...

I agree that companies shouldn't exploit people or force workers into inhumane conditions but who decides what is explotation and what is a fair wage? I say local laws and local workers get to decide whither workering for a certain employer benifits them or not. But remember you can't expect to demand employers treat everyone like they're working in Germany or else why should a company bother to set up a factory in Bangladesh? For the most part the local people and governments know investment will help them but it won't cure all of society's ills.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by Sava
If the prices of products are too high, they won't be bought, and the businesses will fail. Those that survive will be forced to adapt and improve. It's the pillar of capitalism and a basic evolution of business. The strong will survive while the weak die.

Well then, globalization is a perfect model of this "ideal" society applied to the entire world.

As for poorer countries, they are welcome to follow our example.

And how many years would you want to take? 50? 100? Are they also welcome to have approximately the same number of wars, famines, and epidemics that the West went through between 1750 and 1950?

If anything, suckling on the teet of Multi-National-Corporations aren't doing anything to improve things in those impovereshed areas. It anything, it's stifling their improvement.

It is fast-forwarding their improvement. And it has worked before - South Korea for one.

It isn't America's responsibility to support the world. We should help where we can, but other countries need to become self-sufficient so they can support themselves.

Well then, there's the perfect counter-example to South Korea for you - North Korea.

Unlike the South, NK is a hermit kingdom closed off from the world. This means that it has no pressure to adapt, no incentive for progress, and, worst of all, its people are ignorant of the outside world and have to put up with the slow failure of their own system.

---

The news stories about terrible working conditions and child labour are horrendous. But then - the alternative is even worse. So we don't have a choice.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Sava
If the prices of products are too high, they won't be bought, and the businesses will fail. Those that survive will be forced to adapt and improve. It's the pillar of capitalism and a basic evolution of business. The strong will survive while the weak die. As for poorer countries, they are welcome to follow our example. If anything, suckling on the teet of Multi-National-Corporations aren't doing anything to improve things in those impovereshed areas. It anything, it's stifling their improvement. It isn't America's responsibility to support the world. We should help where we can, but other countries need to become self-sufficient so they can support themselves.

hi ,

, and what then with firms who give jobs to a large number of people overseas in europe , ..... or the ME , .....

have a nice day

[Sava]

But remember you can't expect to demand employers treat everyone like they're working in Germany or else why should a company bother to set up a factory in Bangladesh? For the most part the local people and governments know investment will help them but it won't cure all of society's ills

Yup, I'd much rather create an environment in America that is attractive to MNC's.

[gsmoove23]

Oerdin, one of the major sticking points is that these companies invest in these countries and then use their influence and money to break unions and stifle work reform in the country. Often globalization leads to the stifling of growth in these countries.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by Sava
Yup, I'd much rather create an environment in America that is attractive to MNC's.

And poorer countries would be left to grope in the dark on their own?

[Sava]

panag: Can you elaborate? I'm not sure how your question is relevant.

ranskaldan: I'm not advocating a withdrawl of US companies. I'm advocating a level playing field. South Korea's success is attributed to the people, not some MNC's.

[Sava]

Originally posted by ranskaldan


And poorer countries would be left to grope in the dark on their own?

No, don't red herring yourself into a tizzy. I want a level playing field... But, if you're going to be silly and make me choose between Americans and non-Americans... well I choose Americans.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by Sava
panag: Can you elaborate? I'm not sure how your question is relevant.

ranskaldan: I'm not advocating a withdrawl of US companies. I'm advocating a level playing field. South Korea's success is attributed to the people, not some MNC's.

South Korea's success is attributed to the system they were working under. They had investments coming in and exports pouring out. NK did not.
After all, NK and SK are populated by the exact same people with the exact same cultural values.

As for a level playing field - the current demographics of the world does not allow for a level playing field.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by Sava
No, don't red herring yourself into a tizzy. I want a level playing field... But, if you're going to be silly and make me choose between Americans and non-Americans... well I choose Americans.

This is not a matter of choice. As an American you would NOT want the world to be populated by poor, hostile, frustrated, desperate countries. You need to set up a moderate elite in every country so that these countries would stay down and quiet. And those countries get a headstart on their own development. Is there a problem?

[gsmoove23]

I don't think its feasible to carry out these industries in the US on a large scale anymore, but I do believe that MNCs should have to follow guidelines when carrying out business in foreign countries enforced from the home country or some international org. They should be obligated to treat their workers at a higher standard then the average in the host country and their should be some lines that aren't crossed like child labor, union breaking and other nastiness.

[Arrian]

Then what is the problem, why are you laughing at Spiffor for boycotting it if you think that is fine, and is what you should do if you don't like it?

I thought I had made that clear. It's the rhetoric, and the moral self-righteousness of it. Read my first post in this thread. I picked up on the "and proud of it!" nature of Spiff's boycotting and felt it was worth mocking.

That was all I was doing - it was a pretty specific point.

Oerdin, one of the major sticking points is that these companies invest in these countries and then use their influence and money to break unions and stifle work reform in the country. Often globalization leads to the stifling of growth in these countries.

I agree that this is a problem. It's an issue that I think the world needs to deal with, and US companies are certainly smack in the middle of it (though it isn't just us, fellas!).

For Osweld: But Spiff's from FRANCE, for ****'s sake, not some poverty-stricken 3rd world country. There's a big difference in my mind between the issues raised by gsmoove and whining about "cultural imperialism."

-Arrian

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by gsmoove23
I don't think its feasible to carry out these industries in the US on a large scale anymore, but I do believe that MNCs should have to follow guidelines when carrying out business in foreign countries enforced from the home country or some international org. They should be obligated to treat their workers at a higher standard then the average in the host country and their should be some lines that aren't crossed like child labor, union breaking and other nastiness.

What if the child has no choice other than to work in the textiles factory (let's say)? What if, in order to supplement his family's income after being laid off, the 11-year-old boy must now go into the city dump and forage for batteries? What if the sudden stop of his steady income forces his 13-year-old brother to quit school and start work in the coal mines?

Unfortunately what I have given above is quite the typical situation in many third world countries.