علم الاجتماع والأنثربولوجيا
مواضيع مماثلة
    المواضيع الأخيرة
    » مكتبة علم الإجتماع الإلكترونية
    الخميس أبريل 23, 2015 7:53 pm من طرف ahlam yamani

    » سوسيولوجيا العالم العربي.. مواقف وفرضيات
    الأحد مارس 08, 2015 9:13 am من طرف sami youssef

    » نظرية بياجي في النمو أو نظرية النمو المعرفي
    الأحد فبراير 22, 2015 2:31 am من طرف صباح

    » معجم و مصطلحات علم الاجتماع
    السبت فبراير 21, 2015 7:36 am من طرف holo

    » النظريات السوسيولوجية
    الخميس فبراير 19, 2015 8:05 am من طرف صباح

    » مفهوم المدينة عند ماكس فيبر
    الإثنين يناير 26, 2015 2:13 pm من طرف ♔ c breezy ♔

    » بعض مميزات النظام الجامعي الجديد الذي سيشرع في العمل به على مستوى سلك الإجازة ابتداء من الموسم 2014-2015
    الجمعة نوفمبر 07, 2014 3:50 pm من طرف ABDELMAJID IMLOUI

    » ::::اجراءات أولية للبحث ::::
    السبت نوفمبر 01, 2014 9:34 am من طرف الزهرة

    » موضوع الإحصاء s2
    الأربعاء يونيو 25, 2014 2:16 am من طرف Nostik

    التبادل الاعلاني
    منع النسخ

    the limits of cultural globalisation

    استعرض الموضوع السابق استعرض الموضوع التالي اذهب الى الأسفل

    the limits of cultural globalisation

    مُساهمة من طرف abderrahim في الثلاثاء مايو 24, 2011 4:20 pm

    Setting the right time scale, resisting global primordialism
    Possibly the greatest obstacle in the study of globalisation is the terminological chaos
    surrounding not merely the definition of globalisation but its very time span and
    duration. In fact, I argue that the two are closely interrelated. If we do not know when
    globalisation began, then we are unable to understand what globalisation is. For, if we
    think, as some authors do, that the Roman Empire entailed forms of globalisation, what
    use is such an expanded definition of the concept for understanding our present
    predicament? Similarly, what is the usefulness of arguing that Genghis Khan, ‘the world
    conqueror’ and ‘the emperor of all men’, inaugurated the pattern of ‘modern’
    globalisation (Weatherford, 2004, p.16), if not to de-historicize the concept? Why should
    long-distance contact during late antiquity be described as ‘incipient globalisation’
    (Harris 2007)? In this vein, even the Neolithic age could be invoked to promote an
    enlarged version of globalisation. We can indefinitely shift back the rise of globalisation to
    the expansion of the first forms of plankton ‘colonizing’ the planet.
    Borrowing from the nationalist studies literature, this backward looking attitude
    can be defined as ‘primordialism’. Primordialism is the claim that modern entities and
    institutions, particularly nations and ethnic communities, originate back in the distant
    past as intrinsic, given features of human societies (Horowitz, 2004), often based on
    factual 'lines of physical descent' (Smith 1998, p.192), also cited in (Brown 2000, p.164).
    Most ‘primordialists’ are nationalists themselves and have vested interests in exaggerating
    or falsifying the origins of their nations, while imagining thousand-year continuities and,
    eventually, describing national communities as ‘natural’ forms of human organization.
    The related concept of perennialism can also be used to identify a community, institution
    or phenomenon as immemorial and everlasting “insofar as recurrent instances of this
    formation could be found in various periods of history and in different continents”
    (Smith 1998, p.190). Although not all primordialists and perennialists are nationalists,
    they share a common perception that nations and nationhood are pre-political and
    ancient. And, although some comparative historians concur in stretching the rise of
    Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies , Issue 3 (2010)
    38
    nations before modernity (Hastings, 1997), the majority of ‘primordialists’ work from
    within other disciplines, or entirely outside academia. These are important, yet often
    unnoticed, parallels between the use and abuse of key concepts within both nationalism
    studies and globalisation studies.2
    Although its roots can be traced back to the political economic choices
    inaugurated by the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944 (Korten, 2001), globalisation as
    such is more recent: Bretton Woods set the basis for the International Monetary Fund
    (IMF, f. 1944) and the World Bank (f. 1944), establishing, in the IMF’s own words, a
    system of “global surveillance activities” (IMF 2007). In Western Europe, the Marshall
    Plan (1947–51) pushed for the transfer of the US industrial management model
    (Kipping and Bjarnar 1998). As argued by Saskia Sassen (1996, p.20):
    The most widely recognized instance of Americanisation is seen… in the
    profound influence U.S. popular culture exerts on global culture. But it has also
    become very clear in the legal forms ascendant in international business
    transactions. Through the IMF and the International Bank for Reconstruction
    and Development (IBRD), as well as the GATT, the U.S. vision has spread to -
    some would say been imposed on - the developing world”.3
    As is known, these initial agreements were implemented during different stages, rather
    than suddenly. In the wake of Reagan’s mid-1980s deregulation campaign, the
    consumer’s legal protections established approximately since the Progressive Era
    (1890s–1920s) were dramatically reversed. After the 1970s energy crisis, studies
    sponsored by various institutions in the US, like the American Enterprise Institute and
    the Brookings Institution, began to preach deregulation at all levels of society. Since the
    1980s, famous economists like Milton Friedman advocated a global, free market ‘shock
    doctrine’ (Klein, 2007). Although Presidents Nixon, Ford and Carter all played a part in
    advancing ‘trade liberalisation’, it was under the Reagan presidency that the doctrinaire
    and global character of deregulation became explicit and inflexible. Ideologically based on
    a further reduction of government spending and state regulation of the economy,
    ‘Reaganomics’ was advanced during the Cold War by all the above international
    institutions. Structural adjustment loans (SALs) were used to “blast open Third World
    economies once "the Reagan Administration came to power with an agenda to discipline
    the Third World" ” (Bello, 1999, p.27; See also p.16).
    The process continued under George H.W. Bush. During the Clinton
    presidency, globalisation accelerated and expanded so aggressively that voices of concern
    began to coalesce and organize throughout the world, by articulating popular movements
    as in Seattle and elsewhere (Gill, 2000; Halliday, 2000; Kaldor, 2000; Scholte, 2000).
    Most importantly, hard science began to highlight the catastrophic impact of
    The Limits of Cultural Globalisation?, Conversi
    39
    globalisation on climate change (Barkin 2003; Depardon and Virilio 2008; Lipschutz &
    Peck, 2009).4 But this global opposition was indefinitely halted during the ‘War on
    Terror’, which froze debate and distracted public opinion into a global security scare
    (Lipschutz, 2009; Lustick, 2006), reinforcing the already present totalitarian drift of
    globalisation (Barber, 1996). American-led globalisation then turned into war (Barkawi,
    2006), with its indissociable component of cultural hegemony (Bartholomew 2006). For
    Stieger (2005a, p.xii), “the remarkable merger of Clintonian neo-liberalism and the Bush
    administration neoconservative security agenda marked the birth of imperial globalism.
    Indeed, after 9/11, the link between globalism and the U.S. empire became apparent to
    the rest or the world in a stark new light”. Globalism’s agenda became less ‘hidden’ and
    the humiliation suffered by many victims of the ‘war on terror’ prompted early calls for
    global revenge, which in turn reinforced the spread of media-induced obsessive delusions
    (Smith, 2006). Residual cosmopolitan hopes waned as post 9-11 globalisation oscillated
    between obeisance to US diktats and open anti-Americanism. In turn, this prompted a
    larger nationalistic backlash which ripped Europe at its core.
    The impact of Reaganomics on cultural practices was perhaps even more
    extensive than in the economic and financial fields. In Reagan’s years, the robust nexus
    between politics, economics, military and the expansion of mass consumerism was
    amplified through the media industry (Barber, 2008; Moffitt, 1987). For some, 1985
    became a watershed year for global Americanisation or, at least, a rapid acceleration in
    trend (Hilger, 2008; Schröter, 2008a), but the same trend was experienced at different
    times and levels in different countries. Global deregulation led to the collapse of native
    film industries, which in most European and many Asian countries began to be massively
    replaced by products launched in the US via mass distribution agencies. Thus the 1980s
    marked “a period of pivotal transformation for the media industry”, as “Hollywood
    embraced the global marketplace and came to depend on this market to recoup spiralling
    production costs” (Holt, 2002, p.26).5 However, this sort of ‘revolution’ began to affect
    most other forms of popular expression through a ‘culture-ideology of consumerism’
    (Sklair, 2001, p.255-301), which, for some authors, was bent on destroying democracy at
    its very core (Barber, 2008). The ideological content of globalisation and its various
    offshoots, like consumerism, is addressed in the next section. In some countries,
    deregulation prompted the collapse of the local creative industries and their replacement
    by media monopolies under US supervision, like in Berlusconi’s Italy (Ginsborg, 2004;
    Gray, 1996; Hopkin, 2005; Pasquino, 2005).6
    To sum up, I have stressed that the inception of cultural globalisation can be
    dated back to various post-war periods, but the 1980s should be particularly stressed as a
    time when deregulation of the entertainment industry rapidly accelerated, increasing its
    dependency on foreign markets in order to compensate for the high production costs
    and the diminution of support at home.
    avatar
    abderrahim
    سوسيولوجي مشارك
    سوسيولوجي مشارك

    ذكر عدد المساهمات : 61
    تاريخ الميلاد : 10/11/1975
    تاريخ التسجيل : 10/12/2010
    العمر : 42

    الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل

    رد: the limits of cultural globalisation

    مُساهمة من طرف أبو يحيى في الثلاثاء مايو 24, 2011 4:40 pm

    ach hadchi
    avatar
    أبو يحيى
    سوسيولوجي نشيط
    سوسيولوجي نشيط

    ذكر عدد المساهمات : 154
    تاريخ الميلاد : 15/03/1979
    تاريخ التسجيل : 05/11/2010
    العمر : 38

    الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل

    رد: the limits of cultural globalisation

    مُساهمة من طرف abderrahim في الثلاثاء مايو 24, 2011 4:43 pm

    dakechi
    geek
    orale dial anglais
    avatar
    abderrahim
    سوسيولوجي مشارك
    سوسيولوجي مشارك

    ذكر عدد المساهمات : 61
    تاريخ الميلاد : 10/11/1975
    تاريخ التسجيل : 10/12/2010
    العمر : 42

    الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل

    رد: the limits of cultural globalisation

    مُساهمة من طرف أبو يحيى في الثلاثاء مايو 24, 2011 4:54 pm

    wach khasna nhafdoh wla chno
    avatar
    أبو يحيى
    سوسيولوجي نشيط
    سوسيولوجي نشيط

    ذكر عدد المساهمات : 154
    تاريخ الميلاد : 15/03/1979
    تاريخ التسجيل : 05/11/2010
    العمر : 38

    الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل

    رد: the limits of cultural globalisation

    مُساهمة من طرف الحسن سلمي في الأربعاء مايو 25, 2011 9:08 am

    الامتحان شفوي ستطلب منكم الأستاذة اختيار أحد النصوص الثلاثة ثم تطلب منكم قراءة بعض الفقرات ثم سوف تطرح بعض أسئلة الفهم
    avatar
    الحسن سلمي
    سوسيولوجي نشيط
    سوسيولوجي نشيط

    ذكر عدد المساهمات : 170
    تاريخ الميلاد : 19/04/1978
    تاريخ التسجيل : 06/11/2010
    العمر : 39

    الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل

    رد: the limits of cultural globalisation

    مُساهمة من طرف oumalaeddine في الخميس مايو 26, 2011 4:13 am

    salam cvrai qu'on va choisir???merci
    avatar
    oumalaeddine
    سوسيولوجي نشيط
    سوسيولوجي نشيط

    انثى عدد المساهمات : 118
    تاريخ الميلاد : 28/09/1982
    تاريخ التسجيل : 04/01/2011
    العمر : 35

    الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل

    استعرض الموضوع السابق استعرض الموضوع التالي الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة

    - مواضيع مماثلة

     
    صلاحيات هذا المنتدى:
    لاتستطيع الرد على المواضيع في هذا المنتدى