Global Village

The global village develops when technologies collapse physical and perceptual time and space, a collapse in which cultural and spatial differences collide and epistemologies of human otherness change. Travel technologies such as roads, boats, cars, trains, and planes and information technologies such as books, radio, television, and the Internet allow people to move faster and easier, physically and perceptually, to places once considered far away. When this collapse happens, when human relations to geography blur, one culture—the village—begins to emerge.

Marshall McLuhan developed and popularized the concept of the global village during the 1960s and 1970s. Influenced by James Joyce's Finnegans Wake and Wyndham Lewis's America and Cosmic Man, McLuhan devoted much of his career to understanding how technologies influenced human interaction, perception, and cultural change. The emergence of the global village was one measure of technological influence. Ironically, McLuhan died on December 31, 1980, well before the advent and rampant use of the Internet, the technology that makes an ever more connected virtual village possible.

There are benefits to the development of a global village. Being in constant physical and perceptual connection with different others can allow for a blurring of cultural differences. The global village thus accommodates an assimilationist, “melting pot” philosophy of difference, a philosophy that welcomes the emergence of one (or a few) cultural ideal(s) and, as such, encourages people to adhere to a dominant set of views and values; individual and cultural differences are erased or made tangential. Any attempt at making English the dominant language—a move that, consequently, makes other languages secondary—is an example of assimilationist philosophy. And there are benefits to assimilation: People transcend barriers of cultural difference and relate with ease; fewer get “lost in translation.”

The development of a global village also makes physical travel no longer a necessity to experience “other” spaces. Such exposure and access can cultivate respect for human difference and allow people to learn innovative ways to accomplish everyday tasks (e.g., cooking, farming, shopping). Such exposure and access can also benefit individuals who lack the physical and economical resources for travel. For instance, it is difficult for people using wheelchairs, visually impaired persons, or economically disadvantaged individuals to physically travel. However, with the assistance of technologies like television, film, and the Internet, individuals can experience, albeit virtually, distant areas with little effort; the technologies provide alternate and inexpensive routes for perceptual interaction with a place.

However, there are consequences to the global village. When the physical and perceptual boundaries of cultural groups blur, culture-specific views and values begin to disappear; local heritage, relational bonds, and unique customs can get lost or forgotten. A liberationist, “tossed salad” philosophy—a philosophy that embraces multiple, often contradictory views and values and a philosophy that allows individual and cultural differences to flourish—thus becomes difficult to maintain. The emergence of one global village encourages people to meet and mold together, transcend differences, and develop a dominant set of views and values; there is little room for multiple villages.

A liberationist philosophy warrants other concerns as well. Powerful people and nations may decide to change or obliterate a culture's views and values for ones considered better and more advanced (e.g., implementing democracy as the most ideal ruling philosophy, Christianity as the most important religion, or capitalism as the best [Page 316]economic system). Powerful people and nations may also consider particular culture-specific practices unworthy, animalistic, and in need of eradication (e.g., male and female circumcision, hunting whales for food and killing seals for fur, female foot-binding, and arranged marriages). In the global village, powerful people and nations may force “inferior” others to conform to “superior” views and values and, in so doing, may motivate new kinds of conflict.

...