Consumer Culture: Globalisation, Materialism and Resistance - Essay Example

Consumer Culture: Globalisation, Materialism and Resistance Table of Contents Introduction 3 Different Perspectives of Globalisation of Consumer Culture 3 Homogenisation 3 Assumptions Regarding Cultural Homogenisation 4 Cosmopolitanism 4 Assumptions Regarding Cultural Cosmopolitanism 4 Globalisation Leads Deterritorialisation of Local Culture 5 Effect of Globalisation on Local Authenticity 6 Globalisation leads to Deessentialisation 6 Arjun Appadurai’s Five Global Scapes 6 Globalisation and Commodity Fetishism 7 Globalisation of Consumer Culture 8 Homogenisation Manifested through the McDonaldisation of Society 8 Four Dimensions of McDonaldisation 9 Whether Globalisation a Reflection of Political Power 9 Conclusion 9 Reference List 11 Introduction Globalisation has provided the suppleness of having most of the alternatives of consumption at reasonable prices as well as formed a slew of hopes moving forward. It has created the aptitude to purchase the life changing products or goods for the consumers as well as changes in cultures and societies around the world (Basu, 2008). Globalisation is described as the method through which the cultures have an impact on one another and they become more similar through immigration, trade and the transfer of thoughts and information. Culture is described as the complete pattern of the human behaviour as well as its products personified in action and speech and depends upon one’s capability for learning as well as transmitting knowledge to others (Neumann, 2014). Cultural impact of globalisation has also been seen on the local culture. On the local level, the globalisation has changed the characteristics of business. Most of the local and smaller companies have been thrown away by their competitors of transnational corporations. Traditional rituals and customs are replaced with the well-liked culture of the UK. Local people are not much fond of local food, but they like to visit the fast food restaurants like McDonalds and the restaurants with the foreign dishes (Mooij, 2010). The main objective of this paper is to explore the extent to which the globalisation of consumer culture has resulted in the openness as well as tolerance for a divergent of cultural experiences. The concept of cosmopolitanism and homogenisation will be taken into consideration to discuss the cultural consequences of globalisation. The cultural consequences of globalisation will be explained by taking the example of the food segment. The essay will also explain the deterritorialized quality which is acquired by the cultural inheritance in the conversion from initial modernity to the globalised modernity. Different Perspectives of Globalisation of Consumer Culture Homogenisation Cultural homogenisation is referred to the feature or aspect of the cultural globalisation. It leads to the diminution in the cultural diversity by means of popularisation as well as diffusion of broad collection of the cultural symbols such as ideas, values and customs. It is mainly referred to the process through which local customs are transformed into overriding outside culture. Cultural homogenisation would result in the development of sole global culture as well as elimination of entire local cultures. It has been argued by some critics that the supremacy of American culture is having an impact on the whole world and this will lead to the end of the cultural diversity (Tomlinson, 1999). Assumptions Regarding Cultural Homogenisation Cultural homogenisation is viewed in terms of both perspectives i.e. positive as well as negative. It is assumed that the positive impact of the cultural homogenisation is on the education of people. It produces reliable norms of conduct and behaviour across modern institutions, therefore binding institutions like formal education and modern nation state together in an unyielding political sphere. Educating universal values like rationality by means of mass schooling is the affirmative benefits which can be produced or created from homogenisation (Tomlinson, 1995). On contrast, the negative impact of the cultural homogenisation is that it is having influence on the national culture and identity. People are showing less interest in their national culture and adopting the western culture such as shift from the local food preference to the fast food. Trend of fast food consumption is increasing around the world (Ben and Rogerson, 2003). Cosmopolitanism Cosmopolitanism is defined as an observation of the entire world which is related to openness in the direction of different cultures. The cosmopolitan behaviour is related to the positive attitude of the people towards different cultures. The lifestyle of the people reflects their adoption of different cultures which is not related to their home culture (Vertovec and Cohen, 2002). Assumptions Regarding Cultural Cosmopolitanism It has been assumed that globalisation is recognised with the appearance or emergence of universal civilisation or cosmopolis that devastates all the local differences as well as robs unique identities of people (Oonk, 2002). Cosmopolitanism also shares some features of universalism; specifically the worldwide acceptable concept of the human dignity which must be enshrined and protected in the international law. Moreover, it also calls for the equal safety or protection of environment as well as against the unenthusiastic side effects of the technological progress (Vertovec and Cohen, 2002). Globalisation Leads Deterritorialisation of Local Culture The extension and development of the method of commodification, migration and mediatisation which symbolizes globalised modernity create a significant intensification of the deterritorialisation, which is taken as a propagation of the trans-localised cultural experiences. Deterritorialisation is considered as the main feature of the globalisation, which entails the growing existence of the social forms of involvement and contact which go further than the limits of specific/definite territory. It takes people closer to the external cultural and it creates proximity in distance (Schuurman, 2001). The demonstrations of the cultural deterritorialisation are mainly two types, cultural heterogenisation and cultural homogenisation, which are considered as the cultural terms or expressions of ‘particularisation of the universalism’ and ‘universalisation of the particularism’. This states that the particular could be projected or universalised to an international level and the general/universal could be rooted and particularised with the local. Cultural homogenisation signifies both an integrated face (i.e. it can have a favourable manifestation and its boundary is always the dynamic reception of the cultural asset) and an apocalyptical face (i.e. it is understood in terms of McDonaldisation, absolute marketisation and westernisation of the world culture). Cultural heterogenisation states that region cultures are widely accepted and disseminated by other cultures and societies and temporarily also boost cultural diversity in the local society. The outcome is that the richer countries provide incentive to the poorer countries in order to safeguard their natural surroundings and also to adopt sustainable practices. Hybridisation indicates fusion, synthesis and racial mixing of varied cultural plans or policies which are affected by local/global opposition (Husted and Tecnologico, 2002). At present, American food such as the fast food as well as films and music are available around the world. These products are becoming favourites to all individuals and the consumption of these commodities is authentic as well as everyday practice (Xue, 2008). McDonald’s is regarded as the main player in the UK in terms of foodservice. It is the third biggest player after Subway and Greggs in the UK (Euromonitor, 2014). It shows that people of the United Kingdom are highly inclined towards other cultures and are preferring fast food more than their local foods. Effect of Globalisation on Local Authenticity Globalisation is increasing the accessibility of foreign products and is disrupting the traditional producers. Besides this, it is also augmenting global trade in the cultural services and products, such as music, food, publications, tourism and movies. The growth of trade into the cultural products is raising the experience or exposure of local communities towards foreign cultures. The exposure towards the products of foreign culture frequently brings changes in the local traditions, values and cultures. Local cultures have been affected by the globalisation. Traditional rituals and customs are being substituted with the fashionable culture of the UK or the US. Local societies are no longer fond of only the local cuisine, though are expected to have some fast food restaurants. The languages of the local societies or communities are also lost. In particular, the younger generations are embracing incorporation (the adoption of attitudes and customs) into an ‘Americanised’ society (Pieterse, 2009). Globalisation leads to Deessentialisation The over-standardisation of the goods or products by means of global or international branding is a general criticism of the globalisation. Critics of the globalisation highlight the probable loss of occupations in the domestic markets which are caused by unfair and increased free trade. Globalisation could also augment the pace of the deindustrialisation. Occupations may be lost due to the changes which is taking place from globalisation. These structural changes may result in structural unemployment as well as expand the gap among poor and rich within a nation (Economicsonline, 2015). Globalisation has undermined or weakened the poor countries’ position and exposed the poor people towards harmful competition. It has not just increased the gap among poor and rich but also has increased the inequalities between them. The rich are becoming richer and the poor are becoming poorer (Emory, 2001). In the UK, the short term growth may become unstable because the global/worldwide economy becomes more and more interconnected. The latest credit crunch is a proof that unstable progress is a likely consequence of the globalisation (Economicsonline, 2015). Arjun Appadurai’s Five Global Scapes Arjun Appadurai proposes five aspects which contribute towards the worldwide exchange of information and ideas. He marked these five elements as ‘scapes’, which are constantly shifting like cultures (Appadurai, 1997). The initial three scapes are finanscape, technoscape and ethnoscape, which are closely entwined and also shift or move in relation to one other. Ethnoscape means the migration of individuals across borders and cultures, presenting the globe and its communities as mobile and fluid instead of stagnant and static. Technoscapes generally brings about novel types of exchanges and cultural interactions through the technology power, which can at present, take place at exceptional speeds. Technology is closely tied with economy, which is continuously in fluctuation and, despite the finest efforts to influence, is extensively unpredictable and this is known as finanscapes. The last two scapes are known as ideoscapes and mediascapes. They deal with the international and national creation as well as dissemination of images and information. Mediascapes could be understood in terms of media outlets such as newspaper, radio and television that form the ‘imagined world’ where images and narratives are the only means through which one forms a belief or opinion about a culture or place. Ideoscapes centres are highly reliant on the situation or context of spectator (Hogan, 2010). Arjun Appadurai states the main problem of globalisation as the debate or tension between cosmopolitanisation and homogenisation. The argument in relation to homogenisation which is caused by the globalisation frequently relates to arguments about Americanisation or McDonaldisation, and most often these two are correlated. However it has been claimed by Appadurai that several cultural factors which under internationalisation or globalisation reach new communities are frequently indigenized towards local culture. Besides this, he also argues that the fear of cultural incursion or invasion is not just limited to McDonalisation but to each circumstances in which aspects from one culture infiltrate another. Globalisation and Commodity Fetishism Globalisation is considered as the absolute development of capitalism and commodity fetishism. Commodity fetishism is referred to the discernment of social relationships which is involved in the production and not as connection among people. It is an economic relationship between the commodities exchanges and the money in the market trade. It converts the subjective aspects of the economic value in real things or objective aspects that individuals believe encompass intrinsic value (Michael, 2003). Commodity fetishism explains that consumers and producers perceive one another through money and commodity exchanges by them. This can be explained by taking the example of coffee consumed by people on daily basis. Each day, billions of consumers drink billions cups of coffee. It is the most accepted adult beverage, but in spite of its huge popularity, it is not cultivated in the moderate climate of the United Kingdom. All the coffee beans are formed in the regions of Asia, Africa and Latin America. So, it is imported from the Southern regions (Laura, Murray and Wilkinson, 2007). The commodity i.e. coffee beans becomes fetishized as a self-determining or independent item with its own inherent value rather than becoming the end outcome/result of other people’s work (Michael, 2003). Globalisation of Consumer Culture The ‘Wal-Mart effect’ will better explain the disadvantages of the globalisation on consumer culture. The superstore moves into a society and within few years other small toy stores, hardware stores as well as other retailer shop are placed out of the business. It indicates that globalisation is eating the small retailers and hampering their business (Goodman, 2007). It has been argued that small retailers go under due to the fact that Wal-Mart provides a wider selection of products at low or reasonable prices. In the Wal-Mart store, consumers get limited choice because it is a national chain and it purchase products at the national level and therefore the local producers suffer and soon the whole communities or societies lose their individuality to mega companies (Balko, 2003). McDonald’s is also doing the same thing. People who are fond of fast food prefer McDonald’s over small fast food restaurants. Therefore, it is destroying the business of local fast food shops (Scholte, 2005). Homogenisation Manifested through the McDonaldisation of Society The global impact of the American culture, businesses and products in other nations or countries is referred to as McDonaldisation. Main American companies like Coca-Cola and McDonald’s have played a crucial role in spreading the American traditions around the world. McDonaldisation is considered as a threat or danger to the local identity of nations. It is resulting in the demur in the public ownership or possession of locality. McDonaldisation is replacing the real vicinities with the homogenized superstores. McDonald’s and Wal-Mart are destroying the rural businesses and local communities. It is transforming the connection among the places where individuals inhabit and their cultural practices, identities and experiences. In the UK, fast food now makes up over half of entire meals consumed outside the home (Telegraph, 2015). Four Dimensions of McDonaldisation Efficiency: It is referred to the optimum means for satisfying the needs of consumer. The line of production is optimised for the mass consumption. Predictability: It explains that there is standardize goods at all the locales. Calculability: McDonald’s makes efficient use of space and time to ascertain maximum profit. Control: It ascertain control through self-service of consumer. McDonald’s have the potential of replacing the human effort with the dehumanize machine (Ritzer, 2009). Whether Globalisation a Reflection of Political Power Globalisation is linked with the emergence of deformed global or international politics in which the power asymmetries as well as global institutions does not boost the interests of the global leaders at the cost of broader world community. Global politics which are distorted has weak self-governing or democratic credentials. Redressing the democratic deficit together with the reduction of global poverty is considered as the greatest political and ethical challenge of today’s world. Cosmopolitanism provides a fundamental critique of deformed global politics in which it maintains global injustices and global inequalities (Hirst and Thompson, 1999). Conclusion The paper highlights the extent to which the globalisation of consumer culture has resulted in the openness as well as tolerance for a divergent of cultural experiences. It has been analysed that cultural homogenisation is having both the negative and positive impact on the society. Positive impact of the cultural homogenisation is on the education of people. The negative impact is that people are showing less interest in their national culture and adopting the western culture. The cosmopolitan behaviour is related to the positive attitude of the people towards different cultures. Globalisation is increasing the accessibility of foreign products and is disrupting the traditional producers. It has also weakened the poor countries’ position and exposed the poor people towards harmful competition. Arjun Appadurai proposes five aspects which contribute towards the worldwide exchange of information and ideas. Commodity fetishism explains that consumers and producers perceive one another through money and commodity exchanges by them. McDonaldisation is considered as a threat or danger to the local identity of nations because it is replacing the real vicinities with the homogenized superstores. Reference List Appadurai, A., 1997. Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions in globalisation. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. Balko, R., 2003. Globalisation & Culture. [online] Available at: < https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/162/27607.html> [Accessed 11 May 2015]. Basu, R., 2008. Globalisation and the Changing Role of the State. New Delhi: Sterling Publishers. Ben F. N. and Rogerson, S., 2003. The problems of global cultural homogenisation in a technologically dependant world. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 1(1), pp.7-12. Economicsonline, 2015. Globalisation. [online] Available at: < http://www.economicsonline.co.uk/Global_economics/Globalisation_introduction.html> [Accessed 11 May 2015]. Emory, 2001. Globalisation Issues. [online] Available at: < http://sociology.emory.edu/faculty/globalization/issues03.html> [Accessed 11 May 2015]. Euromonitor, 2014. Fast food in the United Kingdom. [online] Available at: < http://www.euromonitor.com/fast-food-in-the-united-kingdom/report> [Accessed 11 May 2015]. Goodman, D. J., 2007. Globalization and consumer culture. The Blackwell Companion to Globalization, 2(2), pp.330-351. Hirst, P. and Thompson, G., 1999. Globalisation in Question. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hogan, A.M., 2010. Appadurai’s 5 scapes. [online] Available at: < https://www.amherst.edu/academiclife/departments/courses/1011F/MUSI/MUSI-04-1011F/blog/node/229354> [Accessed 11 May 2015]. Husted, B. W. and Tecnologico, C., 2002. Cultural balkanization and hybridization in an era of globalization: Implications for international business research.  United States of America: Edward Elgar Publication. Laura, R., Murray, D. and Wilkinson, J., 2007. Fair trade: The challenges of transforming globalisation. London: Routledge. Michael, D., 2003. The Consumer Trap: Big Business Marketing in American Life. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Mooij, M., 2010. Consumer Behaviour and Culture: Consequences for Global Marketing and Advertising. California: SAGE Publication. Neumann, 2014. The Impact of Globalisation on the Consumer. [online] Available at: http://www.neumann.edu/academics/divisions/business/journal/Review2014/Scriven.pdf.> [Accessed 9 May 2015]. Oonk, G., 2002. Globalisation and culture, globalisation and identity: Dialectics of flow and closure. Journal of World History, 2(1), pp.532-537. Pieterse, J. N., 2009. Globalization and culture: Global melange. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. Ritzer, G., 2009. McDonaldization: TheRreader. California: Pine Forge Press. Scholte, J.A., 2005. Globalisation – A Critical Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Schuurman, F.J., 2001. Globalisation and development studies. California: SAGE Publication. Telegraph, 2015. Fast food becomes the UK’s meal of choice. [online] Available at: < http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/9016251/Fast-food-becomes-the-UKs-meal-of-choice.html> [Accessed 11 May 2015]. Tomlinson, J., 1995. Homogenisation and globalisation. History of European Ideas, 20(6), pp.891-897. Tomlinson, J., 1999. Globalisation and culture. Cambridge: Polity Press. Vertovec, S. and Cohen, R., 2002. Conceiving cosmopolitanism: Theory, context and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Xue, C., 2008. A Review of Tomlinson’s View on Cultural Globalisation. Asian Social Science, 4(6), pp.112-114. Read More