Especially in last century, the concept of globalization came out with developing technology which brings communication and transportation facilities. Actually globalization represents economical integration and means fewer barriers between countries. But it is seen that with globalization, cultural domination has risen up as a sort of power. So, globalization affects the cultures, to some people it is bad, to some it is good. Julia Galeota argues that globalization threaten cultural diversity negatively. She tells that with globalization, American imperialism came out.
Because American products reached to whole world and they mean more than a simple consumer goods for local people. So, now there is an American domination that cannot be ignored in whole world and this domination give damages to local markets economically and culturally. The surprising part of this domination is that the majority of the world believes that American culture is superior to the others, the lesser ones. America’s strategy to convince people for this belief is very effective. With their marketing strategy, they offer coolness, happiness and richness.
They are advertising not only with American idols, they also use local idols too. Clearly, she is not asking if Americanization is a negative or positive phenomenon; instead of that she argues that globalization came out as Americanization that affects other cultures. On the other hand, Philippe Legrain argues that globalization does not threaten cultural diversity. Even though it provides people freedom against to tyranny of geography and also it helps to revitalization of cultures and serves to cultural artifacts through foreign influences, technologies and markets.
He declares that the American spread is not as same as t is seen. For example it is talked that Hollywood is dominating the media sector in whole world, but Hollywood is not purely American; many studios belong to foreigners and all the artists are not American at all. Or for example baseball could not be popular in whole world, compared to soccer. Globalization provides a bigger range of choice mostly in restaurants. Not only American fast food, also Chinese food had spread out. So globalization increases individual freedom and give more options to choose.
Moreover, new hybrid cultures are emerging and regional cultures are reviving. For example, in Amexica, people are talking Spanglish. Globalizations bring different cultures together and people get chance to meet them but they are not obliged to adopt it. Additions to these, there are more scholars who have different point of views. For example Marxist core-periphery ideology supports that the economically dominant one, dominates the others, and others becomes as s periphery. Here, US become the core because it is dominating other local cultures, and dominated ones become peripheries.
Secondly, constructivist view tells that in future clash of civilizations will occur as a reason of cultural differences which will be sharpened because of globalization. Contrarily, liberalism likes globalization because globalization brings lots of things together, and so many options, choices will be served to people. so it will give freedom to people. So, nobody will be obliged to adopt its born-regions attitudes. To sum up, globalization is a reality of the international relationship and there are lots of thoughts on this topic even positive or negative.