Resistance to Cultural Globalization—A Comparative Analysis

Resistance to Cultural Globalization—A Comparative Analysis

From the first discussions of contemporary globalization, its documented rise has been accompanied by an almost simultaneous wave of resistance. For every Thomas Friedman extolling the beneficent inevitability of globalization, a José Bové has expressed a reluctance to be part of a single world system. Obviously, economic tensions and anxieties have played a significant role, but no issue seems to bring forth more of an emotional response than the threat (or promise) of cultural globalization.

In a few cases, this opposition simply reflects a generic and isolationist aversion to external influences. Jingoistic ‘know-nothingness’ may be found in practically every nation, with few historical or geographical exceptions. Much more common, however, is an explicit fear of a particular form of cultural imperialism. In this case, it is not so much that a society rejects external links in a blanket manner, but that another culture is seen as representing a specific threat; that is, the opposition does not come from a simple desire to be autarkic, but reflects a strongly felt fear of cultural subjugation by a powerful outsider. In this essay we emphasize the latter form of anti-globalization; our attention is on binary oppositions. We do not do this because the more general form of cultural conflict and resistance is unimportant. Rather we emphasize these more ‘bilateral’ fights because: a) they tend to be more concrete and involve policy actions, and b) even in a globalized world, conflicts tend to be between individual players.

We begin by sharing the definitions of culture and globalization discussed in the co-editors' ‘Introduction’. For us, globalization involves increasing connectivity, while culture includes a broad sense of national identity. What we are calling resistance stems from the perception of a threat that increasing connectivity will lead to the dilution or even pollution of a national culture. These threats are particularly significant when power is seen as asymmetric. The asymmetries may arise out of political or military threats, demographic competitions, or simply perceptions that the external culture is just ‘too attractive’. While many individuals in a variety of societies may perceive these threats, we are focusing on the manner in which resistance has been institutionalized through government policy We believe that these deserve privileged attention as they are the first challenge to the creation of any form of global governance that would allow for conflicts to be mediated.

While focusing on three cases, we believe that they represent generalizable examples that will allow us to think about larger questions dealing with culture and conflict including notions of intractable ‘civilizational’ clashes, oppositions between ‘modern’ and ‘traditional’ forms of life, the coexistence of differing cultures within the same nation-state, and the balance between the defense of the freedom to choose and the defense from imperial practices. We next provide a framework with which to study and compare these resistances and then provide three examples of resistance that allow us to explore them in greater detail.

...