The Explorer Islamabad: Journal of Social Sciences

ISSN: 2411-0132(E), 2411-5487(P)

Vol-1, Issue (12): 470-474
www.theexplorerpak.org

GLOBALIZATION AND ITS IMPACT ON THE THIRD WORLD ANTHROPLOGICAL

PERSPECTIVES
1

Lubna Sausan Bajwa , Shaheer Ellahi Khan

M.Phil Student, Bahria University Islamabad
2
Lecturer, Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, Bahria University Islamabad
1

Abstract Globalization has mushroomed a host of complex issues which are relatively new; the erosion of the
nation-state, the decaying morality of people, the subjugation of weaker cultures by powerful ones, the increasing
commoditization of cultures, the increasing gap between the rich and poor, and the creation of others living in
the same locality. At the same time, many scholars conceive it to be a magical force characterized by progression,
development, and the coming together of the world in strange ways that strangles time, space and distance. Some
regard it to be something which should be welcomed and celebrated. This essay seeks to describe the various
scholarly voices within the globalization debate and examines how these voices explain the varied and differential
impact of this phenomenon on the Third World.
Key words: Globalization, Third World, Development, Neo-Colonialism, Global Village, Exploitation,
Underdevelopment, Capitalism.

INTRODUCTION
Globalization is not a straightforward or unidimensional concept that can comfortably be
defined in an empirically sound way. It is in fact
multi-dimensional and penetrates through
various disciplinary surfaces on which it operates.
It is linked with economists, sociologists,
anthropologists, and stirs debate on global
political aspects as well. Hence the term is of
interest to various disciplines and is defined by
each in their own way. Politically grounded
definitions of Globalization comment upon the
irrelevance and decline of sovereign nationstates, while highlighting the issues of
governance that occur as a consequence.
Economists conceptualize Globalization as
expansion of free-market economy and forced
capitalism encapsulating the entire world. For
critical sociologists like Schirato and Webb, it is
an ideological blanket used by the powerful to
order and influence the lives of people by
imposing a set of norms and values, a discursive
regime which eats anything in its path (El-Ojeili
and Hayden 2006). For McLuhan, it represents
the remarkable advancement of technology, the
compression of time and space, and the speed at
which communications across the globe take
place.
METHODOLOGY
The essay is a qualitative analysis of literature
produced on the Globalization discourse and is

based on an analysis of secondary data sources.

The literature covered includes the multiplicity of
voices that offer their own respective criticisms
as well as virtues of the phenomenon of
Globalization. The researcher has studied various
dimensions social, political, and cultural aspects
of the debate. The analysis has yielded a rich
commentary on the debate within the
Globalization discourse.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
A reasonable way to approach Globalization must
take into account that it essentially represents a
process, a phenomenon that cant be located on
a distinctive timeline and at best can said to have
been observed tangibly since the collapse of
communism representing the victory of Global
Capitalism (Jameson 1998).This view discusses
Capitalism, Imperialism and Globalization as
interchangeable concepts, in a manner that fails
to register the distinction amongst them. This
negativity is most pronounced in Wallersteins
theorizations of Globalization, the argumentative
dynamics of whom considers Globalization as a
cause of Neo-colonialism, and something which
uses Capitalism and its structure as a tool to
exploit and impoverish the peripheral countries.
For Wallerstein then, Globalization is something
essentially negative, a disruptive force which has
resulted in further deterioration of the
developing world.

470

In stark opposition to Wallersteinian conceptions

stands McLuhans definition of Globalization
which talks about the mass movement and
circulation of people, ideas, objects, capital etc
across geographical territories. This kind of
definition allows one to conceptualize todays
world as a Global Village whose characteristics
according to McLuhan are essentially positive.
Marshall McLuhan was the first amongst these to
talk about globalization, and gave the concept of
'Global Village' which is created due to increased
social, political and economic interactions. He
was of the view that these technological
advancements, like communication networks,
transportation etc would result in the coming
together of the world in a way where difference
and distance would be minimized. He explained
that these increased interactions would result in
awareness of each other's cultures and way of life
whereby people will mutually respect each other
by developing insight and understanding.
This concept of Globalization implies a sense of
unison underlying the shrinking of the world,
which would cause international enmities and
hatred to be eliminated. In McLuhan's
hypothesized global village, violence was
supposed to be an antiquated concept. He
assumed that this new global structure would be
supportive of peace and harmony and therefore
the need to invest in extensive peace-keeping
activities would no longer exist. The resources of
the world were to be cumulatively used for
constructive purposes only and war would have
become redundant and unnecessary. McLuhan
thought that the growing movement of ideas will
create 'global knowledge' that will inform the
conduct of people. Anyone who lived to see the
21st century would understand how and why
McLuhan's utopia that he theorized in 1962 was
naively informed and hence failed in its
predictions.
Building on McLuhans optimism, we have David
Harvey who explains how Globalization has
actually resulted in humans coming together and
collectivizing their efforts and resources to help
each other. He stresses on the fact that how
grief, suffering and happiness are now common
and shared across diverse cultures and places.
Resonating McLuhans concept of Global Village,
he mentions how new and creative avenues of
learning have emerged all over the globe which

has resulted in intellectual progression and better

use of global resources for the greater benefit of
the society. Global circulation of knowledge and
ideas has led to a mutual understanding of
cultural differences where people are coming up
with shared problems and creative strategies to
address these problems (Oke 2004).
The pessimistic view of Globalization is deeply
rooted in the theorizations of Dependency School
with Immanuel Wallerstein outlining the evils of
this phenomenon which have severely inflicted
the Third World. His first argument rests on the
issue of environmental degradation where he
talks about how Globalization has horrendously
destroyed the global environment through a
grave loss of bio-diversity, a loss that periphery
has been made to bear because of the activities
of the core. He explains with reference to his
World System Theory how the First World or core
countries are the pioneers and front-players of
Industrialization. These highly industrialized
nations produce in large amounts, toxic waste
and chlorofluorocarbons causing Ozone depletion
which further exposes the periphery to a host of
other problems including dumping of this waste
into their seas, extinction of species and marine
life, skin cancer etc. He further problematizes the
issue of concretization or urbanization, a process
that is very much the result of Capitalist economy
and Globalization. He explains that as a
consequence of this Development, many lifeforms have been deprived of their natural habitat
and the land has been used to build large
metropolitan centers. His second argument is
centered around the sociological impact of
Globalization where he explains how people all
over the world have been trained and
programmed to become consumption-oriented, a
phenomenon that takes its root in the ethos of
Capitalist forces. He also talks about people
becoming increasingly machine-oriented with the
spread of technology. This has raised several
environmental and health issues as well where
extended use of machinery, e.g. cars, motorbikes
have produced several types of pollutions, and
negatively affect a persons well-being by
fostering in him a culture of reliance on
technology. Finally, the argument that
Wallerstein
presents
while
critiquing
Globalization is that of commoditization of
cultures. He explains that how smaller cultural

471

identities with their language, cuisines, dress,

festivals etc have been destroyed and mostly
eaten up by more powerful cultures. His
argument is essentially based on the discursive
effect of Globalization which has divided the
world into two groups: the civilized world (which
unquestionably is the core) and the uncivilized
world (the periphery), through which the
periphery has been classified as something which
is not normal. This very difference from normalcy
has been labeled as the other-which has
resulted in objectification of cultural artifacts
which are now celebrated and observed as
objects of an exotic culture devoid of their
original value and robbed off of their meaning,
something which results in a loss of symbolic
capital of that particular culture. Wallersteins
objection to this commoditization lies in loss of
context and cultural richness that results from
Globalization.
Building on the cultural aspect of Globalization,
we have Frederic Jameson who explains that how
this export and import of culture is not an equal
relationship that McLuhan had assumed. In fact
at the core of it lies the essential inequality and
dissymmetry of relationships between powerful
and weak cultures. In this context, Jameson says
that apparent diversity and pluralism of cultures
assumed by McLuhan really isnt pluralism in its
true sense, instead there is one powerful marketoriented culture with a superior language, which
blinds us to all other cultures whose existence
pale in comparison with that of Americas. Hence,
Americanization over the years has presented
itself as the only desirable culture worth
adopting, wiping out other cultures materially
and socially in the process. Free movement of
American films, literature and other forms of art
has slaughtered domestic production and
homegrown local film industry elsewhere and no
other country or culture has been able to present
itself as a competitive alternative to
Americanization.
The pessimistic view of Globalization also
features Anthony Giddens, a development
sociologist who gives the concept of time and
space being stretched due to Globalization. He
explains how globalization through its
technological exploitation has caused presence
of one to interact with absence of the other,
therefore the world hasnt essentially shrunk the

way McLuhan thought, but has actually

expanded. Giddens view of globalization isnt a
geographical concept, in fact he conceives the
globe as made up of social, economic and
political processes taking place within the globe.
Giddens pessimism lies in the disconnection that
has occurred due to connection of presence with
absence. He explains how people living in the
same locality have stopped to interact and
connect with each other, and have formed
linkages with people across continents living in
faraway places. While McLuhan would say that is
a good thing, according to Giddens when people
connect with those abroad whose economic and
political interests differ greatly from their own,
their connection with their own people suffers,
leading to a sense of alienation. This also results
in feeling of insufficiency at home where people
tend to under-value their own resources.
Furthermore,
human
interactions
are
transformed from personal to impersonal where
social groups and activities exist is space, on the
internet obscured through the element of
anonymity (Giddens 1990). Moreover, Giddens
talks about how globalization leads to opening up
of new avenues for foreign adventurism and
exploitation. Building on this, he explains how it
allows others to have a gaze 1 into your life,
thereby completely damaging ones own privacy.
This also allows the others and the dominant
discourse to construct the reality for you.
Aside from these two views of pessimism and
optimism, there is a third group of scholars who
approach Globalization from a middle standpoint.
These differ from the two discussed above in two
ways. Firstly, they stress on the element of
human agency which causes humans to behave in
unpredictable and diverse ways. They oppose the
deterministic ways in which Wallerstein and
McLuhan had talked about the impact of
globalization, in manner that fails to realize that
humans are not machines and they have freethinking
capacity.
Therefore
the
way
Globalization will affect the people living in the
1

This concept was first given by MichealFacault who

explains it as a political tool used by the powerful to
subjugate the masses and keep the society under
surveillance. Giddens uses this concept to explain how
Globalization has opened up new ways of exploitation
and appropriation of reality through this foreign gaze.

472

periphery depends on the individuals and their

agency. Secondly, they point out that humans are
not only economically driven, but are culturally
and socially oriented. Therefore the effects of
globalization must be observed and grounded in
their socio-cultural realities.
Most importantly, this group with James
Ferguson and Akhil Gupta as its pioneers
emphasizes the phenomenon of Localization that
has been occurring simultaneously in reaction to
Globalization. They postulate that when world
becomes one and when messages are received
from a powerful culture by peripheral societies,
they may be received differentially. These
messages might be rejected or resisted. In this
context, they talk about a range of effects that
globalization has caused on the periphery. Firstly,
there are the revivalist movements, a return to
origin or roots of oneself and ones identity.
Instead of developing mutual respect as
hypothesized by McLuhan, many in the periphery
have grown increasingly more intolerant towards
others, giving the so called Global Village a
strong resemblance to a battle field. Secondly,
they argue that the encroachment of global
culture has divided the peripheral population into
diametrically opposing poles, so within periphery,
a schism has taken place between the
fundamentalists (those who reject the messages
of the West conveyed through Globalization) and
Liberals (who accept or assimilate these
messages). This has lead to a deep sense of
alienation seeping through once culturally united
populations. This also resulted in otherization of
each other within people who live in the same
locality, same neighborhood, belonging to the
same cultural and religious groups as noted by
Marcus and Fischer (Gupta and Ferguson 1992).
Furthermore they talk about the intellectual
renaissance that has taken place in the periphery
where local parties and groups have come up
with opposing and revivalist interpretations of
their respective scriptures, leading to a debate
about authenticity of interpretations. In some
local spaces, hybridization has occurred where
assimilation of foreign elements into local
cultures have given birth to hyphenated
identities. This group of scholars also
acknowledges the good that has resulted from
globalization. They highlight the fact that
globalization has led to an economic boost in the

economies of numerous countries which are on

the path of development and modernization. It
has also provided the initially backward people
within the periphery with higher standards of
living and have provided them the access to
global knowledge. Migration other such forward
global avenues have been created where people
can choose from a range of economically
lucrative job market.
In the same bracket, we have Benedict Anderson
and John Hemit talking about Diasporic Studies
and Regionalization respectively. Regionalization
is a concept that sprouted from Localization in
1990s and explains the connecting and coming
together of regional communities which share
similar cultural roots to repel the foreign
influence coming from Anglo-Saxon Protestant
whites which is eroding their cultural values. The
creation of Diaspora resulting from migrants has
led to the concept of Imagined Communities
which has resulted in de-terrotorilization of
identities and cultures and a condition of
homelessness blurring the lines between center
and periphery. At the same time where cultural
distinctiveness and actual localities are becoming
more and more blurred, the ideas of culturally
distinct places have become more pronounced.
REFERENCES
El-Ojeili, Chamsy, and
Patrick Hayden
2006 Critical Theories of Globalization.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Giddens, Anthony
1990 The Consequences of Modernity.
United Kingdom: Polity Press.
Gupta, Akhil., and James Ferguson
1992 Beyond Culture: Space, Identity
and the Politics of Difference. Cultural
Anthropology 7(1):6-23.
Jameson, Fredric
1998 Notes on Globalization as a
Philosophical Issue. In Masao Miyoshi,
Fredric Jameson, The Cultures of
Globalization. Durham: Duke University
Press.
Oke, N.
2004 Globalization Theory and the
West: The Integration of Temporal and

473

Spatial Considerations. The Australian

Sociological Association.
Publication Date: Dec-31 -2015
2015The Explorer Islamabad Journal of Social Sciences-Pakistan

474