Positive Consequences Of Globalization

1151 Words5 Pages
Critics of globalization, particularly nationalists, often perceive globalization as an extension of western cultural imperialism. They fear that this western domination will promote western cultures; imposing their goods, customs and language at the expense of other cultures. As a consequence, these non-western countries will lose their linguistic and cultural diversity and turn into western colonies. The questions that spring to mind from this are: Is globalization a destructive force as nationalists claim? And does it really cause a deathblow to local cultures? Two scholars challenge this perspective, claiming that those criticisms are unacceptable as it involves confusion between two separate trends, globalization and westernization. The…show more content…
According to Giddens (1999), the world has been biased towards men since the early ages. However, globalization has handed the mic over to women, who are now in active pursuit of greater equality. This achievement, spurred on by globalization, has allowed women to become active participants in this modern era of globalization. For example, women being given the right to participate in global events and take a lead role after being suppressed by sexist governments for many years. Here in Qatar I can see how Giddens’ view is applicable as women were given leadership roles in education. For instance, Sheikha Moza bint Nasser Al-Misned who played a leading role in education and social developments in Qatar as a chairperson of the Qatar foundation that brought top American universities to the country. However, his view does not apply when it comes to nation states. Giddens asserts that nation-states are still powerful however they can’t be as effective as they once were. Their role has simply changed according to the contemporary demands. Vargas Llosa and Giddens perceive the weakening of nation-states in a positive light. Since nation-states attempt to restrict the slow infiltration of globalized tendencies by imposing so called national identity. Vargas Llosa (2001) disputes their approach when he writes, “Seeking to impose a cultural identity on people is equivalent to locking them in prison” (p.7). The essence of Vargas Llosa’s argument is that nation-states in their attempts to defend of their national identity oppress and deny their people individual freedom. Mainly because the “collective identity” they impose is based upon language, religions, customs and characteristics which can never fully define individuals. After all “individual differences prevail over collective traits” (Vargas Llosa, 2001, p.5). This
Open Document