The defining factor of this multicultural re-orientation of discourse analysis is that it breaks out of the limits of the cultural imperialism on the other hand and maintains multicultural dynamics on the other. The Cultural nature of Discourse Studies Discourse analysis is verily influenced by culture in a number of ways. For research to be done certain aspects have an influence in the way research is done. Certain discursive characteristics and tendencies have been identified notably and proposed by (Xu, 2006): Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) - is modelled upon language as conceptualised in structural linguistics. Language is understood as unfolding and evolving because of many interactions across the world.
As the economic and regional power of these groups expands, their sociopolitical interests will further separate them from the culturally assimilative efforts of the West. According to Samuel P. Huntington’s hypothesis, the conflicts yet to come will be incited by differing cultural identities, for example: religion, race or the “highest cultural grouping of people”, civilizations (Levy 2010: 127). The Clash of Civilizations’ explanation is in direct opposition to modern theories such as Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History and the Last Man, which takes a more assimilationist view to America’s Cold War triumph. While I cannot critique all aspects of Huntington’s postulate, I will be focusing on the validity of some of his arguments, and the quantitative and qualitative deficiencies of
For as long as cultures have been meeting and clashing there has existed cultural exchange and a transference of cultural goods. This transfer is inevitable but when does this cultural exchange cross the threshold into cultural appropriation? While cultural appropriation has existed in many forms across time, in the modern world of globalization this phenomenon has become an issue ameliorated by the flow of information and how stretches from food and fashion to deeply cultural expression and traditions. As we move forward and aim to achieve a truly multicultural society, one must understand where lines are drawn and how to properly respect the cultural property of other groups. To begin this understanding, we would like to understand how an
International Relations have used globalization to achieve its goals of understanding cultures of different nations. IR focus on how countries, people and organizations interact internal and external and globalization is making a profound effect on the relations across the
In Ishiguro’s novels The Remains of the Day and Unconsoled it is deliberately foreground the problematic engagement of the individuals with the concepts of globalization. They respond against attempt of global capitalism in describing hybrid cultural and diasporic forms in homogenizing, absolutist and pseudo-liberating terms. One such attempt , is to define the experience of diasporic as a self-empowering , unproblematic cosmopolitan project, neglecting the problems and inequalities in power that illustrate when transacting between the connection to the homeland and the need to fix to a cultural realm that is foreign. For instance Paul Rainbow described Diaspora as a global ontological connection and announced that "we all are cosmopolitans
It could be reasonably argued that the first step toward an understanding of this theory is exchanging views on culture, power relations, and history in a particular society. Tom Fish and Meredith Anne Skura affirm that New Historicism deals more specifically with the issues of power (the ways in which dominant group exerts its influence over others) and culture (social forces of constraint and mobility), and to the plays’ effect on power relations in the new world. (qtd. in N-avarro 14) The most obvious way of illustrating the culture over the past centuries is considering the various discourses in literary texts. New Historicism has changed the way in which we are obliged to think about the culture over the past centuries through literary
Cultural theories of globalization typically line up along one of three positions (Tomlinson, 1999; Nederveen & Pieterse, 2004). First, theories of homogenization see a global cultural rapprochement and tend to emphasize the rise of a world beat, world cuisines, world tourism, uniform consumption patterns, and cosmopolitanism. Second, heterogeneity approaches focus on continued cultural disparities and highlight local cultural autonomy, cultural resistance to homogenization, cultural clashes and polarization, and distinct subjective experiences of globalization (Esfahani, 2017: p.125). Finally, hybridization theory stresses new and ever-changing cultural forms and identities produced by numerous transnational processes and the merging of distinct cultural processes. In addition, hyperglobalists view globalization as a process, which has an internal logic and predictable outcome, and the global society as being based on a fully integrated market.
She identifies the types of movements that develop within social movements through explaining that not all social movements aim for a progressive change but instead some work to return the society to the way it was before the occurrence of a “change”. From that, the author draws an explanation for why social movements matter by highlighting their impacts on institutions and their abilities to dissolute political regimes and states and allow the emergence of new ones. Moreover, she moves on to define globalization by elaborating on its complexity through its homogeneity and heterogeneity. With both characteristics diversifying globalization at both ends, the emergence of global civil society and global values is witnessed to shape the development of a global consciousness. Through these establishments, global social movements expand to mobilize as networks on national and international
These highly active networks are transforming many kinds of social, cultural, economic and political relationships. In these ways the dispersed Diasporas of yesterday have become today’s ‘transnational communities’ which are sustained through distinctive modes of social organisation, mobility and
This can be seen as a contrast to Eurocentric anthropology practice as the idea of indigenisation is not so prevalent in their writings. According to Zawawi Ibrahim and Noorshah M.S. (2012), the aim to indigenisation of social sciences is to expand to alternative discourse that is in influence of Orientalism (as founded by Edward Said), to be able to oppose knowledge shaped by colonial power. Also, Zawawi Ibrahim (2015) cited Atal to define the idea of ‘indigenisation’; which means to exchange the external and Western ideas with local and internal, as internal knowledge creates an “incorporation, localization and fine tuning of the concepts in the context of local circumstances” (p49). This highlights the importance of participation of local intellectuals to produce own knowledge to be able to create validity and representativeness from the inside point of view, and this is to replace the outsiders and Western discourse that might not be valid and in line to reality of the locals.