Article Review – Globalization and the impact on local cultures

In the article Globalization and Local Cultures: A Complex Coexistence written by Mary Christine Wheatley in the Premier Journal of Social Science (2024), more specific attention is paid to the existence of the two-level wholeness of the phenomenon of globalization and the local cultures. Wheatley (2024) addresses the status quo of relations between globalization processes and the society of locally identified persons. The author criticizes and analyzes the challenges, as well as opportunities, of this process through the prism of economic, social, and technological contexts where people are also influenced by Globalization and sometimes even jeopardized by it. This review condenses this argument and the main arguments put forward by Wheatley in her work, highlighting the computations of the effect on the local culture of Globalization.

Generalization of the effects of Globalization on the local cultures.

The article by Wheatley (2024) starts by defining the concepts of Globalization as an agent of change that transcends across cultural, economic, and social borders. This is a phenomenon that is driven by technological changes in communication and transportation and affects cultural identities at a global level. The article recommends that Globalization, despite increasing the level of interconnection, mostly causes erosion of the traditional forms of culture. Nevertheless, Wheatley (2024) also mentions the opportunities for cross-cultural exchange and hybridization, wherein local practices could develop within any interaction with the external global world. These two points of view enable the author to conceptualize the problem as one of balance, namely, finding a way to preserve local cultural flavors by engaging at the global stage.

Cultural Homogenization and Cultural Hybridization.

The main theoretical controversy offered in the article are based on the notions of cultural homogenization and cultural hybridization. Wheatley (2024) is trying to homogenize cultures, a process in which local cultures seem to be in the shadow of other global or superpowers, especially Western cultural standards. This is made possible due to the accessibility of multinational corporations (MNCs) and international media giants that help to spread Western commodities and ideologies to the rest of the world. Some of the theories mentioned by Wheatley are cultural imperialism and the cultural ideology of consumerism, which postulate that the proliferation of consumerism and Western ideology around the world contributes to the loss of local cultures as a homogenous and global marketplace.

Instead, Wheatley brings up hybridization of cultures as a volume. This theory states that Globalization is one of the processes that not only results in the loss of culture but also promotes the convergence of the world and local aspects to bring new cultural forms of hybridity. The article relies on the research conducted by other authors, such as Pieterse and Hannerz, drawing its focus on the strength of local cultures (Wheatley, 2024). Globalization usually does not destroy other forms of practice but instead turns them into new ones, thus forming new forms of cultural identity, which incorporates both the global and the local aspects. The theme of glocalization is developed to show that global influences can be localized and that such a move can end up being creative as well as culturally based. This non-dichotomous consideration is that, as Globalization is realized, it is a two-way transaction between the forces of the world and the forces of the local, where cultures are not dominated by Globalization, but instead respond and serve to assimilate Globalization into varied ways.

Culturally Coexisting and Conflicting Case Studies.

Case studies contribute to the analysis of Wheatley as they demonstrate the positive as well as the negative issues of Globalization on local cultures. A certain example is the restoration of the Ainu culture in Japan. The Ainu are an indigenous community that lacked prominence throughout modern Japanese times, but has been enjoying the indigenous movement in support of the rights of indigenous peoples around the world. This has been contributed to by international recognition and support, and as a result, we have created cultural preservation programs, like the Upopoy National Ainu Museum and Park. As a result of these activities, Globalization has assisted in the revival of Ainu traditions and made them a part of the national and international cultural arena. It is, on the other hand, the hopeful obliteration of the traditional practice of weaving that Wheatley points to in Southeast Asia, and more to be considered in Indonesia and in the Philippines, where the mass-produced cloths have taken the place of handwoven fabrics. The erosion of the traditional crafts as a result of cheaper products symbolizes the loss of culture, which is economically connected to Globalization. These illustrations highlight the conflict that exists between cultural authenticity and economic development.

The Power of Technology and Media.

The media also contributes very little to the Globalization of culture, as technological developments are. Wheatley (2024) provides an explanation of how the internet and other digital media create a means of cultural exchange where people and communities can share, use, and implement cultures across the world. The press has facilitated the spread of the cultural practices; cultural flows across the world have been made easy through social media up to now. In the meantime, the article is also conditional on the way exposure to cultural dilution comes in the process of commodification of traditional practices that are devoured by audiences across the globe.

The possibility of enhancement of cultural identities exclusively is further supported by the fact that the digital diasporas (the global communities that maintain their cultural bondages through the use of digital technologies) also act as a testament to the fact that cultural identities can be changed and preserved through the use of digital technologies. On the one hand, technology can facilitate the enhancement of local cultures in other nations in the world, but on the other hand, technology poses some threats in terms of authenticity and commercialization. Talking about the medium of technological and cultural exchange, Wheatley believes that special care is to be taken to ensure that technological exchanges are not stripped of the cultural namesakes that they are meant to glorify.

Tourism and Economic Effects.

The effects of Globalization on the surrounding cultures appear economically as depicted in the light of threat and growth. The source of the multinational corporations (MNCs) in the local economies can lead to the homogenization of local industries since small businesses receive an opportunity to compete with international brands. Globalization has also been known to introduce significant ills to the business world and the economy of countries, beyond the familiar ones in local economies, as it introduces not only novel technology but a new business culture as well, which can create organizations that are more productive, as it has been observed by Wheatley. Multinational corporations (MNCs) have cultural heritage and economic wealth, and this may increase the watering down of the localized products and practices.

Another significant cause of globalization is tourism; it is more complex regarding the integration of the world in terms of cultural preservation. Then there is the monetary reward and coexistence of cultural primacy, and more so, the risk of micro-customization/ homogenization of the indigenous tradition that tourists come along with. Attempting to profile that choice of certain cultural behaviours is adjusted to meet the requirements of tourists, Wheatley explains that they undergo changes, rendering them unnatural. Alternatively, the issue of the potentially helpful effect of the responsible tourism program is that the local cultures are being conserved by the introduction of sustainable practices accepted by the local societies through the involvement of the community in the representation and management of the local tribes.

Cultural Preservation Strategies.

The article ends with a discussion of how globalization can be balanced with the preservation of cultures. Policy intervention variation, including the Cultural and Creative Ecosystem (CCE) by UNESCO, is very important in cultural heritage protection or conservation, but allows links between different and most culturally related countries around the world. Policies being advocated by Wheatley (2024) do not necessarily shield the traditional practices, as they subsequently allow the active development of these traditional practices amid the forces of globalization. These online-based programs and grassroots tourism are just part of the local encounter with the community, which have been shown to be ineffective in introducing ethnic innovation and conservation. The campaigns can also facilitate the eradication of threats of globalization, besides enhancing the exchange of cultures by enabling the local population to control and maintain their own cultures.

Conclusion

Wheatley (2024), in the article Globalization and Local Cultures: A Complex Coexistence has recorded a balanced narrative of the impacts of globalization on local cultures. By using a reflective study, she provides an observation of the threats and opportunities of interdependence across nations by indicating that policies and community-based programs are required to ensure the protection and conservation of cultural heritage. The article by Wheatley complies with the tendency, as per which, via globalization, a further threat to the established cultures can emerge, yet this is accompanied by a chance to blend, renew and share cultures. The world has not been defined by the process of globalization, but it is necessary to find a way to include the local cultures in this international system to ensure that it can be sustained and thrive.