Risks in the Modern World - Assignment Example

?Q The risks that are faced in the contemporary world are largely invisible, uninsurable and democratic, which makes them the kind of issues that cannot be taken care of on one and for all basis. Analysis of this statement reveals that most of the risks that the world faces repeatedly are not felt immediately. This makes them invisible and only those that come to be in the future and after then current generations are gone will be able to tell of the risks that have taken place and remain invisible to the present. This is because based on past records, current generations are able to tell how the past was especially in cases of global warming when the climate was predictable, considering that humans still use these records to base what they expect the climate to be. However, the insurability of the issue cannot be proved based on Ulrich Beck statement and current trends in climate change. This is following the presence of measures taken by different organization including governments to ensure that the effects of climate change are countered, and even prevented from taking place in the first place. Because of this, there are efforts to guarantee a secure future in relation to climate change, where factors that lead to climate change are in the process of being handled with the use of conventions and agreements signed by different pro-environmental conservation groups. All this is in a bid to prevent further damage to the environment while taking local measures to reverse the damage done to the environment especially in relation to global warming and climate change. In addition, the insurability of the risks we face today can be questioned and even proved wrong following the presence of immediate benefits thanks to conservation efforts. As such, the risks we face today in climate change are invisible, but can be made visible by accepting and learning from the past, as well as putting measures in place such as environmental conservation to make them insurable. The other part said by Ulrich Beck is about risks being democratic and an evaluation of this proves that they are democratic in spite of the other parts being questionable (Beck 2009, p.2). This is because, for conservation efforts to be made and even recognized, there is need to make a conscious decision to make the choice and make visible, as well as attempt to reverse them. Looking at global warming and climate change, all the organizations and governments that have come together to implement policies and conventions on conservation indicate a conscious efforts and decisions made to prevent them from impacting the world as global risks (Beck 2009, p.6). In addition, there are those that are opposed to ratifying conventions and agreements, but it is still their choice as they are of the opinion that it infringes on their best interests. This, therefor, indicates the democratic nature of the risks faced in this day and age by the globe due to conscious efforts and choices to either improve or ruin the world. Q.4 There are different theories that look into globalization, in which there are also contemporary theories of the same of which we shall analyze two. The world system theory of globalization acts as a critic against capitalism, where it looks at capitalism as an attempt to expand its reach further than it currently is. Then world system theory is of the perception that the entire world seeks to come together and act as a full system with different subsystems meant to serve the world and its needs. This is in which case it is absorbent of all existing mini systems creating a new world order in an attempt to create the earlier said single system. The single system of the world system theory looks at bringing people together under a single understanding of the occurrences on the globe, but it is divided using distinct boundaries. The boundaries in this case are three and entail the capitalist view of the world bringing the first division to be that of the core or the developed centers of the system (Robinson 2007, p.129). The second division of this theory is the periphery that has been affiliated or brought close to the core through global power shifts such as colonization, and show the formative ages of capitalism in the bigger full system absorbing these mini systems. The final division is that of the semi periphery and includes those sidelined from the core or those that are depreciating in their value to the core meaning that are moving away from the core. This shows that the world systems theory includes a hierarchy of usury, where certain nations are more important than other is, and that it these nations that determine the value of others. On the other hand, a second theory is the political theory of globalization that serves as a means if identifying the position of a nation in terms of power and its control over other nations. This political theory differs from the world systems theory in that it shows the competition for power between different countries and leaders as they attempt to control limited resources found around the world. This way, the theory focuses on how different leaders and countries relate to one another in order to come to power and exploit the resources alone or together (Robinson 2007, p.126). However, it bears a strong resemblance to the world systems theory in that it views the world as one that is composed of numerous systems that can come together for the benefit of one another or that can stand alone and develop themselves independently at the cost of established relationships. It also borrows from sociology in the same way that world systems theory borrows in that it looks at the source of political power, whereas world systems theory dwells on staying on top of the hierarchy and being the most valued nation to the rest of the world (Robinson 2007, p.126). This way, the look towards the same goal, this is that of remaining relevant to the world and not depreciating. Q. 5 In regard to culture, two theorists; Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer argue that mass culture is inauthentic, which brings about the question of the authenticity of contemporary culture. This is in relation to whether it can be considered authentic or inauthentic based on its mass following by the contemporary world. As such, Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer are of the view that the culture industry remains focused on two things, which are controlling revolutionary instincts, and business, rather than looking at the conventional understanding of culture (Andrae, 1979). This is in which case culture can be defined as the total way of life of a given people, and only using this can a culture be deemed as authentic. Considering the large population that seeks to follow contemporary trends, this cannot be considered as an authentic culture as is focuses on imposing its desires and needs on people, instead of people choosing that which they feel represents their lives as is the case of authentic cultures. As such, Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer deem this unauthentic since there is no choice to be made only a force to pull people into it is how mass culture thrives. Bringing in the perception of other theorists on the same issue proves that mass culture cannot be viewed or even recognized as authentic culture because there is a district inclusion of business in the way of life in an attempt to bring people and be part of a group in which they do not fit. Fischer Verlag published a book that termed the culture industry as a tool of mass deception, which seeks to enlighten the world how certain players in the culture industry attempt to manipulate the way of life of a people (Welty, 1984). This is to an extent of abandoning cultural values for contemporary values that are not meant to last following their use in making business. In this regard, the business concept of cultural values is that of making a culture proves its worth by making it a demand and supply business in making a culture as it is again shown in Marxist concepts. Marxist concepts applied contemporary cultures that were highly populists and attempted to force them on people and their failure to change people's perception only served to prove their lack of authenticity in standing for the beliefs of people and their needs as they only showed those of the few leaders advocating Marxism. Looking at Marxism again indicates the nature of inauthentic cultures, especially in having mass following or overly popular. Marxism focused mainly on the economic base of the Germans, which was only a way of making culture into a business of demand and supply for its advocates and those that felt the urge to follow it (Andrae, 1979). It is as a result of this that Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer label mass culture as inauthentic due to its concern for the few and enforcing itself on many who are not at all interested in it. Q. 8 In the study of celebrity, there are two main approaches that dominate it and they are the sociological and semiotic approaches. As such, the sociological approach bears its focus on the different stars of celebrities and the mechanisms that make them who they are, as well as that, which promotes them as the phenomenon they are (Harmon n.d, p.99). This is all while ignoring their work as being of no consequence to their state of being, where it is viewed as a secondary feature no matter how big or small it is. On the other hand, the semiotic approached does not bear a similar view to that of sociology in that that which is ignored and looked as being of no consequence is the most important aspect from which a celebrity is made. Consequently, the semiotic approach pays attention to linguistic theories, where what celebrities do is used to make meaning. Sociology as an approach therefore bears its main importance on the society in which celebrities come from and work since the force behind their recognition is the focus. Consequently, the approach looks at the perception of people towards the celebrities as well what can be done to increase their popularity, as well as possible reasons for their failure should it occur. Sociology in looking at the driving force behind celebrities’ phenomenon being digs into consumerism as it is part of the mechanisms that create and promote them following demand and supply flows in society. The semiotic approach has a distinct interest in the works of the celebrity, as well as the job in order to give meaning to the celebrity. It is for this reason that their works are treated as commodities making semiotism focus the creation of the commodities for consumption by the society, but this is just as far as semiotism goes in studying celebrities (Tan 2010, p.294). This is because, as earlier mentioned, sociology fills in the gap that comes up after creation of the commodity and into the consumerism culture in society. However, the two approaches have been combined to form an interdisciplinary approach due to the presence of overlapping aspects in celebrity studies. According to semiotics, a celebrity draws from different aspects of society other than creating commodities for consumption, in that a celebrity originates as a resident in the culturally constituted world, then graduates into consumer goods. Finally the celebrity shifts the perception the goods mentioned previously into different meanings that can be used to construct the social identity of a celebrity. As a result, there are three steps in the semiotic approach to celebrity studies and the first one is based on economic value between the celebrity and the society. This is while society perceive the celebrity as the product of society and that the commodities or goods created by the said celebrity are nothing of much concern despite their influence on consumer culture. This way, the study of celebrity in contemporary society focuses mainly on the semiotic approach, as the meaning given to a celebrity and his or her goods is highly influential (Tan 2010, p.305). References Andrae, T (1979.). Adorno on film and mass culture The culture industry reconsidered. Jump Cut, no. 20, pp. 34-37. Beck, U (2009). Imagined Communities of Global Risk. [Online] Available at: http://www.worldeconomyandfinance.org/PDFs/ulrich_beck_global_risk.pdf [Accessed 19/07/2013]. Harmon, K. (n.d.). Celebrity culture. [Online] Available at: http://www.iasc-culture.org/THR/archives/Celebrity/7.1LBibliography.pdf [Accessed 19/07/2013]. Robinson, W (2007). Theories of Globalization. [Online] Available at: http://www.deu.edu.tr/userweb/timucin.yalcinkaya/Theories%20of%20Globalization.pdf [Accessed 19/07/2013]. Tan, D. (2010). The Fame Monster Reloaded: The Contemporary Celebrity, Cultural Studies and Passing Off. [Online] Available at: http://sydney.edu.au/law/slr/slr_32/slr32_2/Tan.pdf [Accessed 19/07/2013]. Welty, G (1984). Theodor Adorno and the Culture Industry. [Online] Available at: http://www.wright.edu/~gordon.welty/Adorno_84.htm [Accessed 19/07/2013]. Read More