Analysis Of Globalization In Kwame Appiah's The Case For Contamination

Improved Essays
Kwame Appiah’s “The Case for Contamination” is an article written about the analysis of globalization. He provided a history of globalization, and its effect on the world. Appiah presented the arguments for cosmopolitans, and neo fundamentalists. A cosmopolitan is a “citizen of the world” and is pro-globalization. Cosmopolitans believe in the individual’s culture. Neo fundamentalists are against globalization and believe in preservation of traditional ideals. I read his essay, and felt that I was more inclined to side with cosmopolitans. I appreciate their views of cultural acceptance and integration. Neo Fundamentalists though are on the right track in their ideals on preserving some traditions. I feel that the best situation would be a combination …show more content…
Their theory is justifiable. I do agree that traditions should be preserved, but not to the extreme that they want. This community is adamant that all traditions should never change. Neo fundamentalists each believe that they are living in the correct way, and that everyone else is incorrect. I did not agree with this extreme counter-cosmopolitan view of, “If you don 't want to be my brother, then I 'll smash your skull in.” This is a very group centered thinking, and they do not acknowledge that globalization is beneficial to a certain extent. Many neo fundamentalist communities end up secluding themselves from society in attempt to preserve their traditional ways, and they condemn others for not following them. Globalization is definitely inevitable, and happens naturally. No matter how much they try to isolate themselves, they cannot run away from the ever changing world. A flaw in their theory is that they do not acknowledge the benefits that globalization has achieved. If we agree with neo fundamentalists then we would’ve never abolished slavery, or become so advanced in technology. Not all traditional views are bad, because traditions are the roots of many religions and communities. The world has to grow and improve though. If globalization did not exist then majority of the world would still be in a backward third world …show more content…
They believe that each individual has the right to think and shape their own culture to the way they want. This group does not place emphasis on the culture that would benefit the community or nation as a whole. This mentality has been a driving factor that has led to many improvements in society, but it could also lead to downfalls. If we agreed and followed this fully then people who still believed in slavery, such as the KKK, should not be persecuted for thinking and acting the way they do. The same would go for murderers or cults who make their warped views their culture. Maria Montserrat Guibernau i Berdún voiced similar concerns in her book “The Identity of Nations”. She wrote about her apprehensions on globalization used in politics. Berdun acknowledged that they could use it to defend the principles of cosmopolitans, or “to promote values hostile to global justice and defense of human rights.” There definitely needs to be a certain level of society census on major views of the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    “He argued that people in Arab lands are intrinsically not nationalistic. He argued that they do not hunger for pluralism and democracy in the way these things are understood in the West.” This is telling us that everyone really wants freedom, no one wants to be suppressed and controlled. This is one of the reasons I agreed with Mr. Brooks because I believe that people do want to be free and some types of civilizations are always fighting for that but don’t always get it. Mr. Brooks goes on to talk about the Arab nation and uses the words “living under regimes that rule by fear.” This is true to me about this nation, people their do want to be free but they are suppressed by their government. Mr. Brooks also says Huntington is wrong about his definition of culture, and I agree as well with Mr. Brooks.…

    • 762 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In other words, diversity of opinions was not allowed. They knew that something had to be done, and they revolted against their government, later establishing a new country where people could have different opinions and not be persecuted for them. Of course, the practice of diversity can be done on a much smaller scale. This means respecting all races, beliefs, and values as long as the beliefs do not bring harm to others. Even when we disagree with others, we must respect their opinions as it is a great aspect of diversity.…

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Cultural relativism says all one has to do is check if their action is in agreement with their societal code to determine if their action is right or wrong. But what if their societal codes are wrong? “Cultural Relativism not only forbids us from criticizing the codes of other societies; it also stops us from criticizing our own” (Rachels 34). Rachels final argument against cultural relativism is that it destroys the idea of moral progress and social change. We could not say that Martin Luther King, Jr. changed society for the better as that would be judging the social standards of another time.…

    • 412 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Columbus’ genocide of millions, and his hunger for wealth, glory, and power at the cost of his morality are far from praisable. Columbus’ “achievements” of discovering America and proving that the world is round have also proved to be invalid, uncovering more evidence as to why he should not be praised. Columbus Day should not be a time for celebration as such an event should be instead mourned. Many would say that we should not judge Columbus with the standards of today’s society. We should not look to the past and judge from their perspective.…

    • 1114 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    How inappropriate it is to erase some countries history and path because developed nations are set up as example and only what they do is correct. At the same time, the authors emphasize how important it is to respect each country’s autonomy and focus on their assets, their culture their success in order to achieve development. Agencies should stop focusing in the problem and how all is wrong and shift this attention to what their strengths are and how they see the world. Every underdeveloped nations deserves to right their own success story through their own fights and improvements instead of being guided towards an utopia that will never be achieved because it is not based on their culture, necessities and…

    • 704 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The philosopher Bertrand Russell argues that the easiest explanation is best, and until proved otherwise, should be regarded as the truth (Russell). Without proof of absolute morality existing, for that would require that all individuals share the same beliefs, the simpler explanation is that morality is constructed by culture. This is because morality is founded on belief, It is what one believes is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ that constitutes their morality, not what they have been taught. For example, I know that it is wrong to kill my parents not because I was told murder is bad, but because I believe everyone has the right to life and because I am rather fond of my parents. Culture, like morality, is also founded on the beliefs of its people.…

    • 1047 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Ethical egoism varies from other ethical positions since it proposes that the enthusiasm of others anything to never be an element in good choice making. An ethical egoist accepts that helping others is not an ethical activity and that they anything to help other people just seeing that it would offer an advantage over the long haul. If it does not better me I “morally” do not have to do it. So, if killing, torturing, or robbing someone will help me better myself then morally right. The book claims that ethical egoism cannot be true because it requires killing rape, or theft just because actions of this promote self- interest.…

    • 1259 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Furthermore, Appiah cites the neo-fundamentalist’s ideology of a global utopia, which can have a negative impact on individual’s identities and humankind. In Appiah’s book, he explains that a religious utopia illustrates a façade in human faith and enforces shared values across the world. However, behind this façade is wretched intolerance that can promote war against any nation that obstructs their sense of universal justice. For Appiah,…

    • 1321 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In “The Case for Contamination,” Kwame Appiah discusses the positive effects of globalization. Appiah defines globalization as the “contamination of cultures,” or the process in which different cultures share their ideas and products with other cultures resulting in the spread of diverse concepts and goods. Appiah acknowledges the concern of cultural preservationists—people who want to ensure that other cultures maintain their customs for the sake of remaining “authentic”-- that globalization would result in a homogenous society where one culture overwhelms other cultures, thus erasing them. However, Appiah prioritize the ability of people to select certain aspects of cultures they enjoy. In fact, he refers to such people as “cultural consumers,”…

    • 1352 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kant defines this cosmopolitan hospitality as the right of a foreigner not to be treated with hostility because he has arrived on the land of another. One can see the relevance of this right in the contemporary world, as accessibility in traveling to other states has become an everyday routine. Therefor this right of hospitality is something we have to bare in mind, to protect people on a global scale. Through a summary of Held’s arguments on cosmopolitanism law one can see why its necessary in the realization of human rights projects and global social justice as it enables people the rights to be heard. As far as critics go, Calhoun is a fairly sympathetic critic within his writing one can see that he likes the idea of cosmopolatinism yet he suggests in it’s current sort of form it just does not go far enough.…

    • 1222 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays

Related Topics