George Ritzer

Globalization


Скачать книгу

years with the reassertion of national and regional cultural independence, and culture in general has grown increasingly varied and is shaped by many different sources with many different effects. For example, the Internet has been nationalized to a large degree and one could speak of a German, a Japanese, or – especially – a Chinese Internet.

      In a related point, the globalists emphasize the decline of people who rigidly adhere to fixed political identities. Such a decline leaves people much more open to global popular culture. In contrast, the skeptics point, once again, to the more recent resurgence of nationalism and national identities. This is not only important in itself from the point of view of globalization, but strong national identities would serve to restrict the influence of a global popular culture.

      We will have occasion to return to many of the issues debated by the globalists and the skeptics in the course of this book. However, it is important to state unequivocally at this point that, in the end, and in spite of the merit of some of the positions and criticisms of the skeptics, we conclude, unsurprisingly, that there is a set of processes and structures that can legitimately be labeled globalization. In that sense, this book, as mentioned in Chapter 1, adopts a globalist position on globalization, albeit one that is not insensitive to at least some of the arguments of the skeptics. A nuanced view, which avoids overly simplified caricatures, is required.

      In a related debate, some scholars argue that rather than globalization, we have transnationalism

      Transnationalism: (Mitchell 2017) or regionalism (Holden 2016). Transnationalism refers to “processes that interconnect individuals and social groups across specific geo-political borders” (Giulianotti and Robertson 2007: 62). A related concept is transnationality, or “the rise of new communities and formation of new social identities and relations that cannot be defined through the traditional reference point of nation-states” (Robinson 2007).

      The case of baseball is useful in clarifying the distinction between globalization and transnationalism (Kelly 2007). Baseball is a transnational sport because many of its fundamentals – techniques, strategies, etc. – and players have circulated across the borders of a small number of nations, especially Japan, Taiwan, Cuba, the Dominican Republic and, of course, the US. However, it is not global because it has not flowed on a planetary basis to a large portion of the world.

      In contrast, football (soccer) would be much more clearly a global sport because it exists in virtually every area of the world. For example, over 200 of the world’s nations are members of a global organization, the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). Another example of globalization in the realm of sports is the summer (and winter) Olympics sponsored by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in which about the same number of nations participate (for more on this see Chapter 8).

      Like transnationalism, regionalism is more delimited than globalization but in a more intuitive manner. A region is a “limited number of states linked by a geographical relationship and by a degree of mutual interdependence” (Kacowicz 1998: 8). The linkages are typically reinforced by political and legal arrangements for mutual benefit (Holden 2016). One clear regional example is the European Union, which is connected via political ties (e.g. the European Parliament and Council), legal arrangements (carried out through the EU’s “Ordinary Legislative Procedure” and its resulting laws and regulations), economy (the EU Single, or Common, Market), and culture (e.g. a set of shared cultural and linguistic roots).

      As globalization skeptics, regionalists contend that much of what we refer today as globalization would be better described as regionalization, or even inter-regionalization. Regionalization refers to “the process of dividing or sub-dividing a given territorial area into smaller units called regions for administrative purposes” (Holden 2016: 57). As noted above, skeptics emphasizing a regional perspective don’t view MNC’s as truly global. They argue that most of the world’s largest firms have the vast majority of their operations in their home region. Consider the example of Wal-Mart. As one of the world’s largest MNCs, it is often referred to as a global company. However, the bulk of its operations are in North America (1.5 million of 2.2 million workers are in the US alone [Wal-Mart 2019]); its only European locations are in Great Britain; most of its international locations are in Mexico and Canada, which borders the US; and it has failed to enter many new markets, such as Germany.

      From the perspective of this book, the reality is that transnationalism, regionalization, and globalization are all present in the world today. Some phenomena can be considered transnational while others regional, and still others are truly global; the nuances are subtle but the distinction helps clarify the ubiquitous nature of globalization.

      We will offer in this section five different ways of thinking about what turns out to be a very complex issue – the origin of globalization.

      Nayan Chanda (2007: xiv) argues that “globalization stems, among other things, from a basic human urge to seek a better and more fulfilling life.” This leads him to trace “the initial globalization of the human species, [to] when in the late Ice Age, a tiny group of our ancestors walked out of Africa in search of better food and security. In fifty thousand years of wandering along ocean coasts and chasing game across Central Asia, they finally settled on all the continents.” Chanda’s view that globalization is hardwired into humans is not the one accepted here since we argue that we are now living in a distinctive global age.