Un McPollo, Coca Cola, y Gazpacho, Porfavor.
As I walked out the door to my home, in a rural village in northern Spain, my vision was crowded by mountains, trees, a little boy on a bicycle singing in Gallego, and two iconic, yellow Golden Arches. It seems out of place, a sort of “one of these things is not like the other” moment, but this was globalization hitting my town. In one of the most culturally unique and historically dedicated areas of the world, this flaming symbol of American mass production managed to put its boots on the ground.
This McDonald’s presented the paradox that is globalization. As for those my age, we were drawn to it. It brought jobs to our little town where most people were fearing for their financial security as Spain faces the economic crisis straddling it today. It connected us with the mythical country America that everyone dreamed of traveling to once they got older. For those slightly older, it was a disgrace to our region of deep history and tradition, an invader that came to destroy our native culture and replace it with the facade of American consumerism. While this may be a simple, surface level example of globalization, it presents the contradictory nature of globalization. In its essence, globalization simultaneously pulls us further apart, while also bringing us closer together.
In my McDonald’s example, globalization brought my town and the US closer together, by bringing American Culture to a place where it never before had infiltrated so deeply. At the same time, it pulled us further apart by eliminating our culture and causing scorn and discontent among other members of the community. This is a small example, but its roots penetrate much deeper.
Globalization can easily bring people together. As technology penetrates our society, anyone who has access to these technologies can connect with anyone in the world at any given moment. The issue here is that not everyone has access to this technology. What about those who don’t? These people are left out of the equation, often forgotten about as society forgets that there are those who live differently. Here is where the issue lies: those in areas that are more developed can be brought closer together, while those in areas that are less developed are pulled further and further apart.
Taking this example, lets consider cell phones. For an average college student like myself, it seems like everyone has a cell phone. Quite frankly, I have yet to meet a student who doesn't have a smart phone. For me and the group that I spend my time with, cell phones are ubiquitous. I often forget that others don't have this luxury. And by others, I mean 57% of the world (Business Insider). The following map shows the percentage of people in each country who own a smart phone (Twitter):
When we look thing about globalization and technology, naturally those who live in regions of the world that are more “green” on this map will be brought closer together, while those in other regions will be pulled further and further apart as they are left out of the trend. That is the impact of globalization. It picks and chooses who it wants to bring up with it. Simply said, globalization discriminates.
Another example of globalization “discriminating” is at the World Cup in 2010. While this event served in many ways to draw people closer to a country that they may not be inclined to visit, when you look at the countries and people who attended, most of them are largely developed countries with the resources and ability to make the expensive trip to South Africa. These countries were brought together by globalization, while those without the means to make the journey were drawn further apart.
Globalization also “chooses” who it wants to pull together, and this choice is often made by rich and powerful countries without caring about who else it impacts. Consider fruit consumption in the United States. Over a third of the fruits and vegetables consumed in the United States are imported, and the countries that they are imported from, often in Latin America, frequently provide subpar living situations, and exploitation of labor (New York Times). In this case, by consuming Latin American fruits, the US is brought closer to Latin America, while Latin America is drawn further away from the US. How does this work? Well, by thinking about how globalization has allowed an avocado to be in Mexico one day and on my plate in Central PA the next is a feat of globalization essentially bringing me closer to the country where it was produced. By the same token, the people who put in the effort to produce this avocado where most likely living in difficult situations, struggling for money, and simply working to keep themselves afloat. These people are pulled further away from the consumers as their role is often forgotten. Because of their socioeconomic status, these workers are isolated from the ability to hop on a plane or train, as their avocado did, and make the journey to Central PA. Essentially, because of globalization, the avocado has more opportunity than they will ever have.
Another issues here lies in the definition of globalization. It is commonly defined along the lines of: a series of processes that serve to drawn people closer together in spite of the physical distance between them (Knox and Marston). One can easily say that because of this definition, globalization is naturally bringing people together. However, why should we trust words to label our reality? Why is it that we often try and classify things as black and white rather than in the grey? Globalization falls in this grey, and it’s up to those who are at it’s upper hand to decide if we want to change this. Like I said earlier, we are the ones in power here. At the end of the day, its our choices that demonstrate what we believe in.
Next time you bite into a McChicken or an avocado, think about who you are getting closer to, but also consider who you are being pulled away from. Globalization as a powerful force, but in many ways, its in our hands.
Comments
Post a Comment