Download Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends I

Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
89
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
I-Chung Ke & Kun-huei Wu∗
In this paper the authors argue that globalization may be interpreted
as a phenomenon of converging means and diverging ends.
The world is
both converging and diverging, but in different dimensions. The
instruments social actors use to achieve their agendas and goals become
increasingly standardized while their fundamental goals and values seem
to diverge in the process of globalization.
With such an interpretation of
globalization, the authors suggest that we clarify our own ‘ends’ first,
from individual, organizational, to national level, and then achieve our
goals with the assistance of standardized means.
We should not only
concentrate on picking up latest technologies but also develop our own
values and visions. Putting Chinese wisdom as the core substance and
using Western learning as the means ( 中學為體 , 西學為用 ) was the
fundamental perspective in the early twentieth century in the East, and in
the first decade of the twenty-first century we should give new meanings
to this perspective.
∗
I-Chung Ke ( 柯 宜 中 ), currently assistant professor at Aletheia University, is
interested in globalization, world culture, global education, and global Englishes.
Kun-Huei Wu (吳坤暉), assistant professor & Chair of Applied English Department,
Aletheia University. He is interesed in the fields related to English Teaching
as Cultural Studies.
as well
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
90
Key words: Globalization, Convergence, Divergence, Eastern
Cultures, Cultural Differences
Introduction
Two years ago the first author read an article in an e-magazine1about
the transferring of Taiwan’s business into Mainland China and its
consequences.
The term globalization appeared three times in that short
article of approximately five hundred Chinese characters, and
globalization was accounted for the intensified international competitions
that forced Taiwan’s business to leave for Mainland China, where cheaper
labor and land cost attracted and are still appealing to investors
throughout the world.
It is likely that we encounter the term
globalization everyday in all kinds of mass media: television,
broadcasting, newspapers, magazines, and periodicals.
We seem to be
continuously reminded that our ordinary lives are connected to the globe,
and it is now a global society or an Earth village.
No matter how we view this phenomenon, may it be globalization,
transnationalization,
3
internationalization,
late
modernity
2
,
4
de-territorization , or space-time compression , even McDonaldization or
1
2
http://www.bwnet.com.tw/article?asp11674 accessed on 2005/6/24
See Giddens, A. The Globalizing of Modernity. In D. Held, & A. McGrew (Ed.), The
Globalization Transformations Reader: An Introduction to Globalization Debate
(Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2000), 92-99
Hay, C. & March, D., Introduction: Demystifying Globalization. In Hay, C. & March,
D. (Ed.), Demystifying Globalization ( London: MacMillan Press, 2000).
4
Harvey, D., The Condition of Postmodernity (CambridgeMA: Blackwell , 1989).
3
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
91
Americanization5, the world is indeed changing as it has always been.
But what is globalization after all? And how do we live with it? The
dominant interpretation of economic globalization seems to simplify the
complexity into a process of forming a global economy in which the
market forces rule the world.
The only way to thrive is to compete
relentlessly in this cruel survival game of global capitalism.
globalization is definitely not only about economy.
But
The emergence of
the global economy definitely made a great impact on the world, but it
represents just the conspicuous surface of the complicated phenomenon;
what lies beneath is the possibility of a new world with better human
conditions. In this short paper we would like to argue that globalization
actually implies converging means and diverging ends. We will first
discuss how the term globalization is defined in most literature, and
follow with a detailed explanation of what we mean by converging means
and diverging ends.
Many scholars have discussed the issue of convergence and
divergence in many ways6, and in this paper the authors have no intention
to delve into the complex work of defining and categorizing convergence
and divergence.
We only wish to point out a new perspective on
globalization and hope that such an interpretation leads to more
meaningful discussions and debates in the field.
5
With such an
Ritzer, G.& Stillman, T., Assessing McDonaldization, Americanizatio, and
Globalization. In U. Beck, N. Sznaider & R. Winter (Ed.), Global America? The Cultural
Consequences of Globalization (Liverpool: University of Liverpool Press 2003), 30-48
6
For detailed discussions on convergence and divergence, see Herkenrath, M., König,
C., Scholtz, H. & Volken, T., Convergence and Divergence in the Contemporary World
System: An Introduction, International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 46 (5-6) 2005:
363-382.
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
92
assumption in mind, we attempt to promote utilizing the converging
means to improve human conditions.
We hope to find a way to make
life better by working with the development of globalization, not against
it.
Globalization
In the current postmodern era, people view the world differently, as
their explanations of the various phenomena in their daily lives also vary.
By displaying the complexity of people’s comprehensions of the
controversial term ‘globalization,’ we would like to depict a fuzzy -and
sometimes contradictory- picture of globalization.
We do not think it is
possible to pin down what exactly globalization is, but we do believe that
it is something significant that impacts the world at individual,
organizational, and probably national levels, if the concept of nation-state
is still valid and powerful enough to balance the domination of market.
As early as 1960s, the term globalization has been in use.
The
7
“Global Village” which McLuhan used to discuss issues around a global
culture is one of the earlier discussions of the phenomenon.
This is often
quoted as an initiation for the following numerous debates 8 . The
increasing attention paid to the phenomenon of globalization started to
explode in the late 1980s. Digging into the Library of Congress in 1997,
7
McLuhan, M. & Quentin, F., War and peace in the global village, ( NY: Bantam Books,
1967).
8
For example, Gough, N., Globalization and school curriculum change: locating a
transnational imaginary. Journal of Educational Policy (1999 14 no. 1): 73-84.
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
93
Busch 9 surveyed the number of published books and articles that
explicitly carry the word globalization in its title. In 1987 the number of
books on globalization was less than ten, while in 1996 that number
soared to two hundreds.
The same trend happened in the number of
articles with globalization in their title.
In addition, the attention from various disciplines has helped to create
a “discourse of globalization.” From economists, political scientists,
sociologists to anthropologists, and recently educators as well as
interdisciplinary scholars of cultural studies, area studies, and feminist
studies, it seems that almost everyone in social science is interested and
influenced by this discourse of globalization. Magazines and periodicals
began to focus on the issue of globalization.
With such a trend, the
discourse is getting so popular across disciplines that the word
globalization has become a catchword in most languages.
So what is this phenomenon of globalization?
.
Owing to the rise of
the globalization discourse, terms such neo-liberalism, managerialism,
economic rationalism10, global economy, outsourcing, and international
division of labor 11 have occupied reports and columns in not only
economic and financial magazines but also those of general genre, like
9
Busch, A., Unpacking the Globalization Debate: Approaches, Evidence and Data. In
Hay, C. & March, D. (Ed.), Demystifying Globalization, (London: MacMillan Press,
2000), 21-48
10
See Mok, K & Tan, J., Globalization and Marketization in Education: A comparative
analysis of Hong Kong and Singapore (Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar 2004).
11
Giddens, A. The Globalizing of Modernity. In D. Held, & A. McGrew (Ed.), The
Globalization Transformations Reader: An Introduction to Globalization Debate
(Malden, MA: Blackwell 2000), 92-99
94
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
Time or Newsweek.
Economic factors are frequently attributed as
potent forces, but other factors are also receiving wide attention12. We
draw from other scholars’ observation to illuminate the phenomenon of
globalization. At a general level prominent indicators of globalization
include: democratic movements; worldwide interdependence in economy,
ecology and finance; free movements of goods, capital, knowledge, and
images; and shared values, processes and structures13. Moreover, the
language describing globalization also flourished with popularity of the
concept: the aspects of globalization (a world economy, international
migration, and the development of global cities 14 ), the bases of
globalization (information and innovation 15 ), and the dimensions of
globalization (forces, connections, and imaginations16).
All these terms
imply tremendous efforts to understand the phenomenon of globalization.
There is a common emphasis in the discourse upon all kinds of flows:
capital, labor, information, technology, culture, images, or people 17 .
The abundance of the literature in the discourse makes understanding the
phenomenon even more difficult and challengeable.
12
On cultural aspect, see Wilson, R. & Dissanayake, W. (Ed.), Global/local: Cultural
Production and the Transnaional Imaginary (Durham, NC:Duke University Press 1996):
1-18; on political aspect, see Kinnvall, C. Analyzing the global-local nexus.
In
Globalization and Democratization in Asia (NY: Routledge 2002), 3-18
13
Cohen, J., (ed.) For the Love of Country (Boston, MA: Beacon Press 1996).
Ibid.
15
Carnoy, M., Globalization and educational reform: what planners need to know (Paris:
UNESCO, 1999).
16
Burawoy, M., Grounding Globalization. In Burawoy, M. et al. Global Ethnography
(Berkeley, CA: University of California Press 2000), 29-35 & 337-351.
17
Kinnvall, 2002.
14
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
95
While few would disagree with the commonly observed ‘aspects’ or
‘dimensions’ of globalization, the interpretations at its core vary greatly,
a group of prominent political and social scholars18 presented three major
camps in the discourse of globalization: the skeptics, hyperglobalists, and
transformationalists.
Some scholars believe that globalization has long
been existent and it is not something new.
that people use a different lens to see it.
The world is the same, only
They are the skeptics. For the
skeptics, the world has been globalizing for centuries and the current
globalization is not much different from the past ones, and some would
even argue that in the imperial era the world was more globalized because
there were less barriers and obstacles since most nation-states emerged
after WWII 19 .
The skeptics pay more attention to historical
development and believe that the current globalization does not differ
much in terms of its core features.
They see the main structure and
social systems remaining stable in the near future, i.e. nation-states will
maintain their dominance over people’s lives.
The long-lasting problems
of inequality and poverty will not be solved by the globalization process.
There are also some others who believe that nation-states are losing
their power to the global market and the accompanying economic forces.
As a result, the basic institutions of society are being “globalized”.
The
world is quite different and everything is changing and will alter rapidly
with the progress of globalization.
These are the radicals, or
hyperglobalists, who regard current globalization as a brand new
18
Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D. & Perraton, J., Global Transformations, Politics,
Economics and Culture ( Cambridge: Polity Press 1999).
19
New York Times’ Kristof argued that we are less global in some respects today than a
century ago, see Kristof, N.D. At This Rate, We’ll Be Global in Another Hundred
Years. New York Times, May 23, 1999.
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
96
phenomenon.
They believe that globalization is changing the world
toward a converging world society with the rise of a single global
economy overwhelming nation-states 20 .
Contemporary globalization
fueled by information technology and free-market ideology is changing
the world in unparalleled and incomparable ways.
They see current
globalization as more than the extension of the previous modernization
project. Technological breakthroughs and a single global economy will in
the near future transcend the current regional economies.
And there are still some people who do not agree with both, and opt to
see globalization as “a social phenomenon that has brought qualitative
changes in all cross-border transactions.” 21
different, but not everything has changed.
The world is indeed
The transformationalists are
not as positive as the hyperglobalists and neither so pessimistic as the
skeptics.
Globalization has to be understood as a multidimensional
process.
They see globalization as a shift or transformation in the scale
of human social organization.
The transformation makes a huge impact
on the power relations across the world's major regions and continents.
The globalization process divides and integrates the world at the same
time.
Globalization may mean a shrinking world for some but for the
majority it creates a distancing or profound disembedding of power
relations. It changes the ways the world operate and how most people live
their everyday lives.
20
See Friedman, T.L. A Manifesto for the Fast World. New York Times Magazine,
March 28,1999
21
Hoogvelt, A.. Globalization and the postcolonial world: the new political economy of
development. (MD: John Hopkins Press, 1999), 121
97
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
The authors’ views resonate with the transformationalists’ in general
principle, as we conceptualize the transformation as converging means
and diverging ends.
We expect that technological developments will
continue to improve the physical being of human kind, but potential
conflicts caused by diverging ends may intensify the political turbulences
across and among the major countries and regions. Nevertheless we still
believe harmonious co-existence is within reach as long as we make use
of the converging means to communicate our diverging ends.
Stability
comes from increased mutual understandings, which should be facilitated
by the converging means that I explain in the following section.
Converging Means
It seems inevitable that the world will become more and more
connected and interdependent.
And the main reason is that the material
infrastructure and cultural institutions are increasingly standardized.
The emergence of a global economy signifies the standardization and
synchronization of national markets in different time zones.
The
medium of communication, even the ways people communicate,
homogenizes with the rise of Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) such as telecommunication and internet.
Inter-Governmental
Organizations
(IGOs)
and
Politically
Non-Government
Organizations (NGOs) have proved to contribute greatly to the evolving
world order since World War II22.
Even the education we offer to the
next generation seems to become more and more similar in its form,
organization, and structure23 and this may lead to the homogenization of
22
Boli, J., Thomas, George, Constructing World Culture: International
Nongovernmental Organization Since 1875. (CA: Stanford University Press, 1999).
23
Meyer, J., Ramirez, F., The World Institutionalization of Education. In J. Schriewer
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
98
ontology, how we make sense of the world and the platform on which we
think.
While the most prominent example of converging means may be the
computer we use everyday, the more significant and probably more
fundamental change is the rise of the modern nation-state.
For most
people it is hard to imagine that just two hundred years ago the notion of
government and nation was not existent for most peoples. Monarchies
and tribes ruled most regions of the world. Although only two centuries
old, the modern nation-state is now taken for granted.
24
community
The imagined
of the modern nation-state gradually developed in Europe
since the eighteenth century.
What makes the modern nation-state the
most fundamental element as a converging means is that we can find
certain common characteristics in any modern nation-state.
We can
expect the particular elements in the government, such as ministries in
charge of foreign and domestic affairs, as modern citizens know that
bureaucracy is similar everywhere in the world.
“Modern educational,
25
medical, scientific, and family law institutions”
are expected in any
(Ed.), Discourse Formation in Comparative Education ( Frankfurt am Main: Peter
Lang, 2003).
The world-institutionalists in sociology works on empirical studies to show that the
world is standardizing in certain dimensions, particularly those what we called ‘means’,
the technical dimensions; see Drori, G., Meyer, J.,Ramirez, F., & Schofer, E. (Ed.),
Science in the Modern World Polity (Stanford: Stanford University Press2003); Lechner,
F., & Boli, J. World Culture: Origins and Consequences (Malden: Blackwell Publishing,
2005).
24
Anderson, B., Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism. (New York: Verso, 1991).
25
p.146 in Meyer, J., Boli, J., Thomas, G., & Ramirez, F. (1997). World Society and the
Nation-state. American Journal of Sociology, 103(1): 144-81.
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
modern nation-state.
99
The infrastructure and social institutions, and in
particular the underlying rational rules, are the elements of the modern
nation-state.
It is easy for people in developed countries to assume these
institutions exist in underdeveloped countries.
But in the last few
decades after World War II, the model of the modern nation-state has been
widely adopted26, thus providing a critical cornerstone for all human
beings to pursue different meanings of life.
With the nation-state assumed globally, the formation of a global
economy, or a world capitalist economy, drastically synchronizes the
world.
After the fall of the Berlin wall, and subsequently the ideal of
Communism, the market economy was adopted globally. The market,
functioning as a level field, facilitates the flow of capital, skills,
information, and even labor.
It allows individuals to pursue their own
goals while making little intervention in what the actors in the market
intend to accomplish.
Market provides another important means for
modern actors to carry out their intentions. But the rise of the global
market would not be possible without the development in technology.
Technological development has indeed transformed our life, and in
particular the pace of its development has accelerated since World War II.
Electronic products are being made and invented as human beings pour in
more and more time and effort.
And the results are the changing
instruments by which we do our work.
Computers and mobile phones
has become common commodities, and the creation of a virtual world
26
The nation-state developmental model was once thought to lead to similar societies
around the world,; see Inkeles, A., One World Emerging? Convergence and Divergence
in Industrial Societies (Boulder, CO: WestviewPress1998).
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
100
greatly influenced how the real world operates. The monopoly of certain
technologies in our life may be illustrated by the dominance of Microsoft
Office and recently Google.
Many teachers and administrators might get
bored by all the PowerPoint presentations.
And we have to keep in mind
that the post-war technological developments go hand in hand with
capitalism.
We also should not neglect the roles IGOs and NGOs play in
standardizing the global environment. Literature investigating IGOs and
NGOs and their roles in shaping up the current world abounds27. It
should be recognized the significance of World Trade Organization
(WTO), United Nations (UN) and its subordinate organizations, and other
intergovernmental organizations to the creation of the current world.
These organizations negotiate common standards and compatible
platforms for communication and dialogues for respective purposes. In
the meantime, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) play similar roles
in parallel with various agendas that the official institutions cannot
achieve.
These organizations bring modern knowledge and instruments
to every corner in the world. Although each may have different goals in
mind, their presence greatly enhance the convergence of instrumental
means.
Another important means in modern society is mass education.
Mass education is regarded as an indispensable component in the
27
For example, Finnemore, M., National Interests in International Society (Ithaca:
Cornell University Press1996). Boli, J., & Thomas, G. Constructing World Culture:
International Nongovernmental Organization Since 1875 (CA: Stanford University
Press1999). Drori, G. United Nation’s Dedications: A World Culture in the Making?
International Sociology, (2005 20 no. 2): 175-199.
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
101
construction of nation/state in Europe in the nineteenth century28. And
by now almost every child in modern nation-state is required to go to
school.
A study29 that surveys the curricula around the world from late
nineteenth century found that what is taught in modern schooling is
becoming more similar over time.
Math, language, science, and social
studies constitute the backbone of school curriculum, and the classroom
as a form for teaching and learning also leads to the assumed conception
of education.
Modern schooling provides children, or future citizens,
with a relatively similar mental framework to work things out in their
future.
The mental framework is presumably based on science and
rational reasoning30, on which modern corporations are also built.
It remains controversial to claim that the means human beings use is
converging, given the lack of historical comparisons to support the claim.
Some might argue that people have long been using similar tools to hunt,
farm, and produce. But we argue that the extent to which people use
similar instruments, or ways to achieve their goals, has intensified with
the rise of modern nation-state and technology. The converging means
reaches out to more populations and increasingly makes greater impacts.
Moreover, what we mean by “means” is more than observable tools; the
implicit rules and habits of thinking and communication indicate
28 Ramirez, F., & Boli, J.. Global Patterns of Educational Institutionalization. In G.
Thomas, Meyer, John, Ramirez, F. & Boli, J. (Ed.), Institutional Structure: Constituting
State, Society, and the Individual (CA: Sage 1987), 150-171.
29
Meyer, J., Kamens, D., Benavot, A., Cha, Y., & Wong, S.. School Knowledge for the
Masses (London: Falmer Press 1992).
30
See Drori, G., Meyer, J.,Ramirez, F., & Schofer, E. (Ed.)., Science in the Modern
World Polity (Stanford: Stanford University Press 2003).
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
102
profound changes in the global landscape. The ways we try to achieve
our goals, both physically and mentally, are becoming similar. In the
near future it seems quite plausible that the current trend will continue,
thus accelerating the converging process.
Diverging Ends
With the societies which used to be bounded by national boundaries
becoming more global, many of the various social problems and issues
are now associated with globalization.
The differences between a
problem and an issue are sometimes quite complicated. The fundamental
difference lies in the standpoint of the viewer.
For some people the
phenomenon is a problem, while for some it is just an issue.
But in
principle, an inner and individual phenomenon tends to be conceived as a
problem, while an outer and collective one, an issue.
For example,
English as an international dominant language could be a problem for
some traditional language preservers, and it could be just an issue of the
homogeneity of languages for some native English speakers.
It could
even be neither a problem nor an issue as some people just take it for
granted.
Diverse opinions and perspectives sprout in this divisive and
integrative world.
We should recognize that there are quite a few problems and lots of
issues that most people acknowledge in terms of globalization.
Globalization simply is not taken for granted and accepted, as the
phenomenon itself is the biggest problem or issue at present, depending
on the perspective.
These symptoms of globalization, if we may call
them that, illustrate the point that the world is diverging on the
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
103
fundamental values and thus, future directions. Our goals, values, and
even worldviews are not becoming more similar even though we tend to
use similar instruments.
And sometimes the converging means
facilitates or contributes to the rising disparity among the different values.
Inequality
This is perhaps the most predominant and conspicuous problem/issue
concerning globalization.
It was estimated that about 80% of the world’s
population lives outside global consumer networks31. The majority of the
flows of capital, information, and people are controlled by a small
population called global elites. It is the elites who enjoy the better life
brought by globalization, as they move freely in the virtual global world.
They are tourists32 and “astronauts”33 who physically move frequently
around the world.
They could be hi-tech engineers, who are seen more
often in the Internet world than in the real world, or financial managers
handling numbers, and the invisible money flows beneath the numbers in
multi-national corporations.
They produce knowledge, and play active
roles in the process of globalization.
The world is changed by these
small amounts of people while the majority of the population only sit and
watch. Throughout history it has always been the elites who determine
the lives of common people, while globalization is alleged to have
31
The claim was made in Barnet, R.J. and Cavanagh, J. Global Dreams: Imperial
Corporations and the New World Order ( Touchstone: New York, 1994).
32
The term tourist was used in Bauman, Z. Tourists and Vagabonds. In Globalization:
The Human Consequences (Polity: Cambridge 1998), 77-102
33
Ong uses astronauts to describe the global trotters and businessmen frequently seen
on international flights. See Ong, A. Flexible Citizenship: the Cultural Logics of
Transnationality (Duke University Press: Durham, NC, 1999), 1-26 and 110-136.
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
104
intensified the gap.
(The skeptics may argue that the situation remains
similar, while the hyperglobalists may offer the dramatic increase in the
number of elites as an evidence that the situation has improved.
As the
difference between the rich and the poor widens, various social problems
are arising.
The disparity between the rich countries and the poor
countries, and in particular, the rich and the poor within most countries,
seemingly continues to increase, and until now no sure method of how to
deal with it is within sight.
.
The following problems/issues are associated with this fundamental
problem/issue to a certain degree.
The rich consume most of the
resources while the poor swallow the bitter effects of the deterioration of
the environment. The rich impose their cultures on the poor and use
their power to exploit the poor.
The rich could refer to a region, a group
of countries, a country, and a group of people. The tension between the
First World and the Third World does not appear to ease with the
ascendance of globalization.
and poor countries.
Nor do the disputes between rich countries
Some ethnicities or races are richer while some are
poorer, and the everlasting conflicts between ethnic or racial groups
surface in global terrorism.
The market may provide a platform, but it
also creates many problems.
We may say that market fueled the
surfacing of the previously hidden conflicts by providing the necessary
logistical means.
Ecology
Environmental problems/issues have haunted the media even earlier
than the rising discourse of globalization. Industrial development has
105
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
cost human beings the unpolluted environment in which we used to live.
But ecological and environmental groups also join anti-globalization
campaigns, since it seems that globalization has sped up the exploitation
of the Earth.
Indeed, the fast movement of capital, techniques, and
workforces has turned what used to be farms or forests into factories.
“In the last five years, globalization has hastened environmental
destruction and eroded community self-determination”
34
.
With
economic forces and concerns as propeller and the priority in the process
of globalization, it becomes worrisome that our Earth might one day lose
its beauty and livable conditions.
The world of humankind has definitely not reached consensus on how
to deal with the relationship with Mother Nature.
People are aware of
the problems associated with global warming, yet the fact that the United
States refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol to curb the emission of carbon
dioxide shows the dilemma.
Human beings, though technologically
advanced, still bicker over what environmental protection is and how to
carry it out35.
Cultural and political imbalance
While a huge amount of information, images, and cultural goods
circulate throughout the world, the majority of these goods are produced
by certain dominant cultures.
The cultures of the indigenous and
minorities may be under the threat of disappearance.
34
Though old
Gersh, J. Seeds of Chaos. Amicus Journal, Summer 1999
That Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” gaining worldwide popularity testifies the
unawareness of environmental problems for most people in the world. Becoming
aware is only the first step; how to deal with it is the hard part.
35
106
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
cultures transform into new cultures as different cultures mingle and
blend, globalization has increased the pace of transformation of cultures
by its powerful forces and networks.
The transformation of cultures may
36
be interpreted as cultural imperialism , as the residue of imperialism still
remains in the present in indirect forms.
Taylor
37
, seeing
Americanization, modernization, and globalization as inseparable, points
out the close relationship between what he terms “the American
hegemonic cycle” in the twentieth century and similar evolving patterns
of processes of modernization and globalization.
Zachary38 attributes
inequality, consumerism, and cultural monotony in the world to the dark
side of ‘Americanization.’ Questions such as “ should we keep a certain
tribal culture by all means?” and “what is the best political governance for
human beings?” would yield numerous answers.
The technological
innovation brought colonization in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries,
and what will the current globalization, also intrigued by innovation, take
us to?
A lot depends on which value(s) emerges from the competing
field.
Ethnicity/Race/Nationalism
Ethnical and racial conflicts have a long history. Wars are perhaps
always happening throughout human history. But does globalization
help reconcile the conflicts? Or does it intensify the fights for resources?
For many people globalization means more competition, which leads to
36
Said, E.. Overlapping Territories, Intertwined Histories. In Culture and Imperialism
(Alfred E Knoff: NY, 1993), 3-61.
37
Taylor, P.J.
Izations of the World: Americanization, Modernization and
Globalization. In In Hay, C. & March, D. (Ed.), Demystifying Globalization (London:
MacMillan Press), 49-70
38
Zachary, G. P., The World Gets in Touch with its Inner American. Mother Jones (1999
Jan/Feb).
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
107
confrontation in pursuit of interests. Every nation attempts to “win” in
this global competition and takes actions in securing “national” interests.
There is now more free trade, but in other fields there might be more
invisible blocks within a nation. On the other hand, while “the freedoms
of the post-cold-war era have come too quickly for law and order,”39 the
boundaries between ethnicities, races, and nations are falling apart. The
complicated relationships among ethnicity, race and nation is exemplified
in the Balkan case 40 . The issues concerning certain ethnic, race,
nationality, and human beings as a whole seem to heighten as
globalization rolls along. We are becoming more global, cosmopolitan
on one hand, and local, indigenous on the other hand at the same time.
Terrorism
There seems to be no universally accepted definition of terrorism.
However, current definitions of terrorism mainly share one common
element: politically motivated behavior. Historically, international
organizations fail to agree on a definition of terrorism due to distinctive
illustration. In general, one man’s terrorist is often another man’s freedom
fighter.
This is a complex and emergent issue, involving all the issues
mentioned above.
countries claimed.
It may be seen as a particular form of war, as some
We would rather define it as the surfacing of
long-existing hidden conflicts. And what enables the surfacing certainly
would include technology, which brought globalization.
The global
terrorism network is an extreme case of anti-globalization. But such
negative form of globalization definitely will be an important issue within
next few decades. The case of terrorism shows that globalization is
39
40
Lloyd, J., The Godfathers Go Global. New Statesman, December 20, 1999.
See Longworth, R.C., A New Kind of War. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
108
indeed facilitating and serving to different and conflicting purposes.
These issues/problems are just some major cases, much less than the
anti-globalists have provided and wish us to be aware of41. However, the
issues/problems were already existent, either overtly or covertly.
Globalization itself is not the source of the problems; instead it simply
intensifies or amplifies what was not so conspicuous before.
Actually
we, human beings, are the source of the problems, and only we ourselves
can solve the problems we created.
We would argue that the different
values and ends of humankind should be the major source of these
problems and issues.
And these conflicts and dissonances intensify
because both parties utilize the converging means of globalization to
further their diverging ends.
development
in
instruments
As a result, the (technological)
(or
means),
without
corresponding
development in human values (or ends), denotes disaster and a doomful
future for human beings.
Globalization as a Facilitator
There are certainly quite a few problems and issues with the thesis of
globalization as converging means and diverging ends. The first and
most critical one is the division of means and ends. The question is
whether we can cleanly separate means and ends.
In many cases means
and ends go together, just like in research, you use different methods for
different research questions, and every method has a methodology, which
July/August 1999.
For instance, Walden Bello’s “Deglobalization” (2002, Zed books: NY) provides an
example of an antiglobalist’s attempt to build a better world.
41
109
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
implies a philosophical stance and value underneath the ‘means’.
We
have to admit that in certain cases, the means does have an effect on the
ends, and without doubt, the converging means did create some common
cultural commodities42 and similar values in younger generations43. But
in terms of deeper ends, such as the meaning of life and human being, we
see no consensus showing.
Another problem is the complexity beneath the general categorization
of means and ends. If we are to explore all the possible means and ends
and examine the trends one by one, inevitably we would find examples of
diverging means or/and converging ends. We have more options for
communication, transportation, and production.
But despite of more
tools to use, modern people seemingly tend to use only a few.
There
may be more tools available, but the tools that are used may be quite
similar.
As for the issue of universal ends, some traditional values and
ethics, such as conforming to seniority and gender norms gradually do
lose ground to modern ideas of equality, human rights, and freedom.
But so far we do not observe the emergence of a set of universal ends at
fundamental level.
We acknowledge that some interpersonal and
intercultural norms may not be diverging, particularly at the surface level,
but the fundamental ontology and meaning of human existence seem to
deviate with the development of a global economy.
Modern people live
their life on more diverse foundations. Various religions do not die out,
42
Most discussions on “global culture(s)” involve consumerism and commodification of
cultures. See Tomlinson, J., Globalization and Culture (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1999).
43
Schlegel, A., The global spread of adolescent culture. In Crockett, L. & Silbereisen,
R. (Ed.) Negotiating adolescence in times of social change (London: Cambridge
University Press, 2000).
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
110
but instead, flourish in postmodern societies44.
The point here is that globalization does not equal to neo-liberalism,
marketizaion, or a homogeneous world.
to achieve our aims.
It is a process that facilitates us
Thus our work should not be against globalization,
rather with globalization.
Mutual understanding should go beyond
knowledge and deeper into the realm of value among all human beings.
We can be critical of globalization, but on the other hand we should
utilize the platform of globalization to improve human conditions.
Do
something rather than be cynical.
We think Joel Spring45 provides an example.
With his critical stance
against globalization, he investigated into issues concerning globalization
and educational rights through what he termed an inter-civilizational
analysis.
Global culture is generally regarded as standardization and
homogenization, in which economic forces play a powerful role.
But his
focus was on the concept of human rights and related concepts like
freedom and equality.
By looking into the major civilizations,
Confucian, Islamic, Western, and Hindu, in terms of the meaning of
educational rights, Spring tried to integrate the ideas and offered his
statement of the educational rights, hoping it to become acceptable
worldwide.
Globalization facilitated his investigation, which helps communicate
44
Thomas, M., The global resurgence of religion and the transformation of
international relations (N.Y.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005).
45
Spring, J. Globalization and Educational Rights (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: NJ,
2001).
111
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
the concept of human rights for readers in different contexts.
He would
not be able to meet so many people around the world and access so much
information two decades ago.
If the rapid flows of information could
help in some form communicating abstract ideas like value, the mutual
understanding between different peoples may go deeper.
As peoples
from different cultures know each other more and more, it is more
possible that we see all human being as our “fellow city-dwellers or
countrymen46”.
The dialogue and communication should be helpful to
alleviate the rising conflicts among diverse worldviews.
Though Spring’s search for universal rights is questionable, his efforts
toward a better world should still be recognized.
The proposed route
involves making use of the converging means to construct platforms or
foundations on which different values and worldviews co-exist with one
another so as to accommodate the diverging ends.
And the most critical
step in the platform-constructing process would be re-evaluating the
fundamental values at individual and organizational level. It should be
done from bottom up, as national governments are supposed to play minor
roles in this globalization era ruled by market.
Corporations, local,
multi-national, or global, may be the locomotive of this process47.
Eastern Wisdom
Clarifying our own ‘ends’ first and then achieve our goals with the
assistance of standardized means is our proposal.
46
We should not only
Page 9 in Nussbaum, M. Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism. In Cohen, J. ed., For the
Love of Country (Beacon Press: Boston MA, 1996), 3-19
47
See the “spiritual turn in entrepreneurs” in Aburdene, P., Megatrends 2010: The Rise
of Conscious Capitalism (VA: Hampton Roads Publishing Co, 2005).
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs
112
concentrate on picking up latest technologies but also develop our own
values and visions. Putting Chinese wisdom as the core substance and
using Western learning as the means (中學為體,西學為用) was the
fundamental perspective in the early twentieth century in the East, and in
the first decade of the twenty-first century we should give new meanings
to this perspective.
After a century’s development in material aspect, the
East Asian countries saw great transformation brought by Mr. Democracy
and Mr. Science (德先生及賽先生). However, the problems of these
Western thoughts and practices, particularly applied to Eastern cultures,
are gradually recognized worldwide.
Democracy and science are
definitely not panaceas. They may serve well in material world, but in
terms of spiritual realms, Eastern philosophies increasingly gain currency.
Oriental ideals such as human-based governance (人治) and respect
for nature (敬天) may sell well (and perhaps serve well) in this globalized
world.
ends.
We should use available material technology to further spiritual
Our utmost priority ought to be establishing our fundamental
values and ways of living and seeing the world.
These are the sources
and motivations of our every action as well as the guiding lighthouse in
the ever-changing globalization era. And they are easy to be left out in
the blind pursuit of economic and technological advancement.
We believe all scholars involved in the discourse of globalization
prefer to see a better future and our works are in some ways related to this
ultimate goal.
The challenge remains huge, but progress has been made.
As Nobel-Prize winner Stiglitz reminds us that “[t]he problem is that
economic globalization has outpaced the globalization of politics and
Globalization as Converging Means and Diverging Ends
mindsets
48
113
,” the converging means brought about by economic
globalization has to be balanced by compatible development in diverging
ends.
Material progress and spiritual development are both necessary
for a better future.
The quest for our meanings as human beings is always there no matter
who we are.
We need balance in materiel life and spiritual life, for only
with external growth together with internal development do we sustain
our everyday life.
The world is changing and everyone in the world has
the power to participate in the change.
What we need most in the
twenty-first century is not so much an objective observer as an
enthusiastic actor. Globalization does not always lead to certain
consequences, for we are the decision makers that make the
consequences.
48
Stiglitz, J., Making Globalization Work. Project Syndicate, 8 September 2006.
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stiglitz74.
114
Tamkang Journal of International Affairs