They also claim that globalization is an uneven process, the see it as a spread of Western culture, where a traffic of one culture moves primarily in one direction. Tsing (2000) thinks that the theoretical frames used in the study of globalization is limited because they have the tendency to think about complex problems in simplified terms of opposition. She compares the charisma of globalization to the charm of modernization in the post war period that made people imagine a new world in the making. She argues that the phenomenon of circulation fails to examine the different modes of regional to global interconnection. She proposes ‘scale’ as an object of analysis in globalization, because to understand the proliferation of particular globalization projects a sense of their cultural specificities is needed.
The instability and inconsistency of the “American” during bouts of contention fortifies his central claim of the mutability of national identity. America’s history of warfare is definitive evidence of the expansion and contraction of people to be considered apart of the American citizenry. Higher prominence was stressed on the boundaries of inclusion and exclusion the more substantial the rights of citizenship were. Foner articulates that the definition of these rights have changed as a result of battles at Americas illusory border- the demands of excluded groups for inclusion. For example, Foner specifies that following the Civil War and also in the 1950s and 60’s “the struggle for full citizenship by former slaves and their descendants inspired similar claims by other groups and transformed what it is to be an American.”(Pg.
Using material from the Item and elsewhere, assess the view that media imperialism threatens ‘the cultural identities of many countries’. Media imperialism is the view that news is dominated by the West; as the media is linked to politics because of the benefits of capitalism, the effects of the media is threatening cultural identities with this same lifestyle which theorists such as Marxists disagree with. How media imperialism is threatening, what it is doing to threaten cultural identities and the effects of it need to be looked at to assess this matter properly. First of all it is how the Media imperialism is threatening cultural identities in other countries that is important to assess. The dominance and power of the west is affecting cultures.
Edward Said’s piece on Orientalism gives the reader a profuse amount of information about “the Orient” and Orientalism. The Orient is symbolized by the character and culture of the people primarily in the Middle East. From Edward Said’s reading, I’ve learned that Orientalism is the false representations and assumptions perceived by the Western people about the Orient’s historical account, culture, art, and writings. Basically, this term refers to the Orient or East, in contrast to the Occident or West, though this is generally seen by the West’s point of view. In one of Disney’s movies, Mulan, I saw the use of Orientalism.
In matters related to Persian Gulf geopolitics, IsraeliPalestinian conflict, and the politics of Islamic revivalism, American policy preferences for maintaining stability and control through a system of regional alliances are met with contrary regional preferences for dramatic change. Frictions generated by conflicting interests and desires spill over into the cultural domain, resulting in the politicization of identities and an escalatory conflict dynamic in which the basic value commitments, beliefs and mores of the “other” are regarded as threatening and
Human Rights have been a contentious issue on the international political stage for hundreds of years, and have been even more hotly debated in modern international politics since the conception of the United Nations in 1945 (Taylor 2001). The nature of human rights is very subjective, and opinions differ widely, based upon a number of variables, least of all the cultural norms of the society in question. There are a number of different views that can be taken in regard to human rights, and some are of the opinion that Human Rights are an expression of western imperialism (Bricmont 2006). This essay will critically evaluate the claim that human rights are an expression of western imperialism and present evidence that shows human rights do exist in their own right, however, are commonly used by western imperialists as a front for other ventures (Bricmont 2006). Human rights have been around for hundreds and hundreds of years, and have a very dynamic definition that has developed from the perspective of 18th century enlightenment thinkers.
In fact, the imbalance of power between western men and oriental women in the western literature not only reflects the westerners’ ethnocentrism but also their belief of western culture’s dominance over oriental culture. The Westerners are said to be masculine and powerful while the Orientals are perceived as feminine and feeble. Thus, it is natural for them to think that the west should conquer the east and make Orientals their appendages and trophies. The stereotype and prejudice mentioned above may have its cultural origin as Orientalism, which depict the relationship between west and east
Apart from wars , both the countries have had a lot of tensions and differences. People have had their opinions about the issue. While some feel that terrorist strikes in India are a result of this issue, the others feel that India has not done the right thing and hence led Pakistan to this condition. The two countries share some good times and have seen the worst times. The below paper evaluates the role of Bollywood movies in the portrayal of this relationship.
The international system has often been described as a anarchy of states, mainly due to how there is no international governing body. This anarchic state of the balance of power could be caused by a selection of reasons. One being that foreign and also domestic policy are two separate areas in politics, as well as that such policies change between the different states, often causing a struggle for power. This struggle for power is key in international politics and proves that there is a anarchic environment within international relations. If such statements are to be taken as fact then it can be assumed that any state is only out to protect and achieve it’s own international relations.
Many tendencies appeared when asking this question, and it is important to emphasise the fact that the answer to this question varies in function of the interlocutor, mainly due to the fact that the term 'globalisation' itself is rather broad and subjective. Two main tendencies are showing up; the Hyperglobalists and the Skeptics. To Hyperglobalists (such as Scholte and Ohmae), the state’s power is being altered by non-state actors (McGrew, 2008).They hold a pessimistic view and argue that globalisation is diminishing the sovereign state by undermining the ability of governments to control their people, their own economics and societies. The most relevant issue is the increase in technology and the declining power of the state through media