CULTURAL GLOBALISATION: HYBRIDITY AND POST-COLONIAL THEORY By Course Tutor University State/City Date        

Table of content

  Chapter 1: CULTURAL GLOBALIZATION.. 2 Globalization. 2 Culture. 5 Cultural Globalization. 7 Risks involved in the cultural globalization. 8 CHAPTER TWO: THE LINK BETWEEN CULTURE, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND GLOBALIZATION.. 10 Introduction. 10 The Link between International Relations and Culture and globalization. 10 The Link between International Relations, Culture and Globalisation. 11 CHAPTER FOUR: HYBRIDITY AND POST-COLONIAL THEORY.. 12 Introduction. 12 Hybridity Concept 13 Framing the Concept of Hybridity. 14 Racial Hybridity. 16 Language Hybridity. 18 Hybridity of Cultural Globalization. 19 Chapter Three Critics on Hybrididity. 20 Debates on hybridity and critics. 20 Post-Colonial Theory. 23 CONCLUSION.. 25 References. 26                             Chapter 1: Cultural Globalization This chapter discusses the beginning and processes that led to globalization and how globalization influences culture. Besides, this chapter describes the concept of cultural globalisation beginning by explaining the individual concepts of culture and globalisation. The concept. Globalization              The world started going compression dating back as far as the sixteenth century. It argued that globalization was created in the West (Crane, Kawashima, and Kawasaki 2002). The earlier periods of globalization include the age of discovery that transformed to the globalization that happened via colonization in the 19th century and the early 20th century (Kuortti, and Nyman 2007). It, therefore, implies that globalization is divided into three categories namely; globalization beginning from 1492 to 1800; globalization beginning from 1800 to 2000; and lastly, globalization beginning from 2000 to current (Cojocaru, M., 2011, p.992). The first globalization incorporated that of countries. The second globalization involved that of companies, and lastly, the third globalization involved the globalization of persons. Modern globalization started after the Second World War during the time when the US political and economic leadership made Japan and Europe to prosperity. It is evidenced from the 1980s, with an increase in the prominence in the world. Globalization is viewed as the intermixing of persons, economies, cultures, and technologies among other values of interest (Guzzini 2013). Globalization implies the integration of the world’s economies via social and cultural values. Modern globalization affects every aspect of people’s lives whether they are willing or not. Globalization has made the world look very small as information about persons, economy, and cultures are easily accessed (Cojocaru, M., 2011, p.993). According to Hollis and Smith (1990), communication is the main factor that led to globalization, and consequently, delineates globalization as “the transition from integration to differentiation, from territorial society to world society; from identity to difference; from stratified differentiation to functional” (Cojocaru, M., 2011, p.995). Globalization is also associated with the spread of modernization across the globe, meaning that it leads to the increase in the linkages between people, goods, and technologies (Inayatullah 2010). However, globalization does not only imply the flow of persons from one border to another of the world but also encompasses the information, expertises, capital and ideas across the transnational borders (King 1991). In a general sense, globalization means the cross-border movement of people, goods, means of distribution and marketing strategies, financial capital, people and labour, commodities and services, technology, in addition to information. As the per the position of Giddens, modernity in addition to development of capitalism are the major grounds of the ascend of globalization (King 1991). Many of the changes in globalization are linked to urbanization, an increase in tourism and other business associated travels, the rise in the incomes of households, liberalization of markets and foreign direct investments (Reus-Smit 1999). These changes, in turn, affect the behaviours of states as different states interact in the international arena. Today, people can comprehend and see what is beyond their immediate environment as a result of the emergence of globalization. Even though people in the world share many things in common, it is impossible for them to share a mutually intelligible and homogeneous culture. Additionally, it important to a homogeneous culture is not the people of the world want since civilizations do clash, thus making a culture remain dominant (King 1991). States will always stay on the most potent actors in the links of the world even though the primary conflicts of international politics happen between states in addition to groups with distinct society. The existing divisions among people of the world and the dominating sources of conflicts remain to be cultural. Civilization will always dominate in the global arena. Therefore, the imperfection lines existing between societies represents the conflict line for the future (Cojocaru, M., 2011, p.996).  There are human advancement conflicts because of the trepidation of social dominion. As the relations among states increment, numerous states have the trepidation that they are being misused. The trepidation originates from the conviction that popular societies whose birthplace is the West are being sent abroad to whatever other spot on the planet. Then again, some individuals likewise guarantee that homogeneity impacts of globalization are nearly censured by the new patriots and social sentimentalists are in reality positive, and that globalization empowers coordination, and its expulsion may prompt social boundaries as well as the majority of the negative measurements of society (Cojocaru, M., 2011, p.997). It is additionally contended that globalization speaks to a critical step towards both a more steady world and better lives for the persons in it. It suggests that mankind is on an irreversible track toward homogeneity of society (Childs and Williams, 2014). In any case, it was noticed that Africa and South American extensively lingered behind with respect to financial advancement because of social contrasts. Culture              Culture can be easily understood and represents as an essential concept in international relations (Childs and Williams, 2014). In the general sense, culture means the total way of life, including economic, political, and social values, norms, and behaviours. Regarding international relations, culture can be understood in three realms; that is, political, strategic, and organizational cultures (Kroeber and Kluckhohn 1952). It is known that various societies may structure the three categories of culture differently. Political culture refers to all the values, discourses, and the implicit regulations, which express and shape political actions and intentions, as well as determining the claims made have and may not make upon one another, and eventually provide a sequence of political actions (Guzzini 2013). In this category of culture, it no doubt that leaders may be empowered when they seem to symbolize certain cultural beliefs of a nation (Kroeber and Kluckhohn 1952). Many groups around the world have staked a position on the world stage linking cultural aspirations with political actions, for instance, the today’s aspiration of India to be recognized as an advanced technological power, or the belief of France that they are both a military and culturally powerful. The second category of culture is the strategic culture, which seems to overlap with many elements of political culture. Strategic culture refers to the techniques countries and other groups decide to utilize to attain their objectives and the cultural aspects that affect the manner in which they seek to cooperate or to compete in the international arena (Guzzini 2013). For instance, China is considered to have a strong strategic tradition that influences its political activities, foreign affairs, and the activities of defense (Guzzini 2013). Considering this perspective of culture, during warfare or vigorous conflicts particular cultural trends might be increased and become even more essential than otherwise. On the other hand, authoritative society implies the courses in which social orders structure power relations in establishments, sort out gatherings to accomplish the objectives, and energize monetary exercises. The reality of the matter is that the examples of authority, styles of participation and clashes, openness examples and mystery, may be influenced by outskirt social origination. For example, the ability to build viable and strong institutions that carry out their responsibilities and also adapt their roles has become a major element of the American and European Traditions. However, taking into considerations the three cultural perspectives, it is seen that culture is an essential element of international relations that influences values, views of the world, and the structure of mankind relationships (Featherstone 1990). Overall, culture dictates to people what to want, to prefer, what to desire, and therefore, what to value. The manner in which culture affects attitudes in the international scene can be verified by the international relations theories (Kratochwil, 1991, p. 342). Culture can be used to influence the decisions of leaders, thus making it an essential element of international relations th...