FIELD 4: globalization and how everything now Is extended to an International rather than national dimension, the national cultures and nations risk to fall apart.
The writer firstly explains that some time ago as there were less sources from which the people could choose from, it was better as they were forced’ to hear to a variety of ideas and points of view: “As long as there ere newspapers and a small number of radio and television news networks, people were exposed to a variety of views. ” After this Sacks explains that nowadays with many more radios, global news channels, internet, etc. People can choose from which source to hear a certain news or event; as the writer says there is a great difference In watching al-Jazzier or watching Fox, as they will say different things and even If the argument was the same they would soul have completely different points of view. Therefore due to globalization everyone can practically choose what they want to ear and can act as if it was the only truth’ or point of view.
With this Sacks means that it Is not longer necessary to have to hear and possibly accept different points of view, one can rather always listen to the same channel or TV show whose points of view are most similar to his, and ignore everything else. The writer says: the result is that our prejudices are confirmed, and need never be disturbed”. The meaning of this is very clear; due to this vast variety of sources and of opinions to which many can have access to (especially online), the people who believe to be getting informed re always getting a distorted version of the truth and never a objective vision of anything.
Jonathan Sacks also shows some of the downsides of globalization. Normally we consider globalization as very positive thing, both from an economic, social and political point of view. However Sacks believes that It has It downsides as well, for example the fact that everything is now international rather than national, from the music one hears to the shops and fast-food restaurants. This implies that some national traditions and the culture in general, can be forgotten as there is a lobar culture which as Sacks says, destroys the nations.
Therefore the thesis which Jonathan Sacks seems to present in this extract is that of the destruction of national cultures. All the things which the author says are true, we can see the things he is talking about daily. When we turn on the radio or TV in the morning we are very likely to hear or see a song or a program which Is not of the country we live In but comes from another one, sometimes translated sometimes not.
Furthermore the customs and fashions are also not related to the nations anymore, there are the very same customs and fashions in various countries. Strangely enough, these fashions can also be very different from the national culture and way of life, however are still taken on by the people, especially the younger population. After evaluating these phenomena, Sacks has decided that this could have consequences which might be underestimated by most people. The author believes that since the national cultures with it.
This is because everyone dressing the same, listening to the same music (not in sense of genre), eating the same food (fast-food chains) etc. According to Sacks, the act of losing the national cultures could lead to less loyalty and virtually zero sense of belonging and patriotism: “whether this is sufficient to generate loyalty, belonging and a sense of the common good is an open question. ” It must however be said that this phenomena which Sacks puts forth as very dangerous is for now not a great risk in my opinion.
The countries which might feel this loss of culture are for now not that many, for example the countries and continents such as Africa, southern America and Asia, not having the same amount of wealth such as Europe, America etc. I live that for now this issue is not totally true seen that many people are very patriotic and so are still attached to their nation. It is true that in some fields the fact of nationality has changed dramatically.
If we consider the music field, the music people listen to is international, and so if we listen to a song in the US or in Europe it is likely it will be the same one. It is the same for shops, for example all the chains which are in every big city around the world, and not only luxury goods such as Louis Button, Channel, Carrier etc. But also more affordable ones such as Ezra, H&M. So generally speaking, if this ‘globalization’ of cultures becomes too strong then it could lead to certain consequences like the ones Sack mentioned in his extract.
In any case in order to prevent these consequences from becoming real (if they are not so already) we, as in people, have to pay attention. Society should teach the sense of belonging and a bit of patriotism already at young ages for example in schools. So although as Sacks says, there are many things that are becoming common at a global level while before they might have belonged to a certain region or nation, the important thing is to accept other new things but also to keep in my mind who we are and where we are from.
Rather than examples like that of brands, one that comes to my mind is that of food. Countries such as Italy and France for example, which are renowned for their food should not allow their ‘culture’ in food to be taken over by fast-. Food restaurants. That would ruin both the locals which would lose their traditional restaurants and the image of the nation would also be ruined as the tourists would not come for the food anymore as they would know that they would find the same fast-food restaurants as anywhere.