I found Theorizing Globalization by Douglas Kellner to be a very information heavy reading. I did like the fact that it was shaped by critical theory because I was able to take what I had learned from the critical theory week to assess this reading as well. Kellner looks at the transformations in the global economy, culture, and politics within the context of the relationship between technological revolution and the global restructuring of capitalism. He also hopes to understand globalization in a dialectical framework between the progressive and emancipatory features and oppressive/negative attributes. With globalization, change can be both imposed from above and from below. Kellner explains that, “one should avoid both technological and economic
…show more content…
558). I typically think of globalization as being something from the top such as from governments, nations, and corporations. For example, in connecting with other parts of the world, tourism is a big way of doing this. Tourism is often promoted through aspects such as buildings and resorts, which has to be promoted and built by those higher up. International organizations are also an indicator of globalization. I never thought about globalization in terms of things such as social movements. My mind wanders to revolutions. Are revolutions considered globalization from the bottom? Revolutions can often lead to new ideas and ideologies, such as communism or democracy. During the first half of the 1900s, there was the transition to communist regimes in countries such as the Soviet Union, often in the form of revolutions. I would consider these examples as globalization from the …show more content…
Some of the elements make complete sense; however, some of the elements do not make sense at all, at least in present times. For example, from country to country, menus are often different. For example, the Netherlands has a sandwich called the McKroket, whereas almost every other country doesn’t. Canada has poutine at their McDonald’s, whereas the USA doesn’t. Ritzer explains in the reading, “the work is predictable; employees do and say essentially the same things hour after hour, day after day” (Ritzer, 2002, p. 206). However, McDonald’s are becoming increasingly franchised. That means that a different owner owns each McDonald’s restaurant. They have a say on the prices charged, the food served, the renovations that are made, management is run based on how the owner wishes to run it, etc. Despite this, McDonald’s is still an interesting example to use for globalization. I see arguments for globalization being both positive and negative, and I, therefore, cannot choose a clear-cut position. I really like Marshall McLuhan’s idea of a global village that I was introduced to in SOC1020. The world as a global village allows people to experience and connect with other parts of the world, spread cultures, and the spread of languages. Yet, I also think that globalization has detrimental effects on the labor force and often leads to exploitation
558). I typically think of globalization as being something from the top such as from governments, nations, and corporations. For example, in connecting with other parts of the world, tourism is a big way of doing this. Tourism is often promoted through aspects such as buildings and resorts, which has to be promoted and built by those higher up. International organizations are also an indicator of globalization. I never thought about globalization in terms of things such as social movements. My mind wanders to revolutions. Are revolutions considered globalization from the bottom? Revolutions can often lead to new ideas and ideologies, such as communism or democracy. During the first half of the 1900s, there was the transition to communist regimes in countries such as the Soviet Union, often in the form of revolutions. I would consider these examples as globalization from the …show more content…
Some of the elements make complete sense; however, some of the elements do not make sense at all, at least in present times. For example, from country to country, menus are often different. For example, the Netherlands has a sandwich called the McKroket, whereas almost every other country doesn’t. Canada has poutine at their McDonald’s, whereas the USA doesn’t. Ritzer explains in the reading, “the work is predictable; employees do and say essentially the same things hour after hour, day after day” (Ritzer, 2002, p. 206). However, McDonald’s are becoming increasingly franchised. That means that a different owner owns each McDonald’s restaurant. They have a say on the prices charged, the food served, the renovations that are made, management is run based on how the owner wishes to run it, etc. Despite this, McDonald’s is still an interesting example to use for globalization. I see arguments for globalization being both positive and negative, and I, therefore, cannot choose a clear-cut position. I really like Marshall McLuhan’s idea of a global village that I was introduced to in SOC1020. The world as a global village allows people to experience and connect with other parts of the world, spread cultures, and the spread of languages. Yet, I also think that globalization has detrimental effects on the labor force and often leads to exploitation