Jane Sternbach-- Last Post!

Jane Sternbach

5/7/12

Sociology of Globalization

Last Response!

            I found Roy’s essay to be a very concise and articulate view of what we have learned about globalization in this class: it is contradictory, omnipresent, and hard pin down. She uses India to exemplify the ways in which globalization can affect a place, a nation, and a society. However, I think that her conclusion was a little too rosy. Roy says, “Corpratising India is like trying to impose and iron grid on a heaving ocean, forcing it to behave. My guess is that India will not behave.” I feel like the whole point of globalization is to get everyone in the world to “behave.” One of the main criticisms of globalization is that it is a homogenizing force. This is true in a lot of ways, and untrue in some others. But if globalization continues on its current path, I do believe that globalization will “tame” the world. Of course, I cannot predict the future, and I hope that something will change globalization for the better.

Class Reflection

            There is no way for me to choose my single favorite topic that we discussed thus far, but I will name some of them. The week on labor/sweatshops and the Maquilapolis video were really interesting for me. They opened my eyes to the true extent of this particular kind of globalization. Something that really stuck with me from that week was the environmental damage caused by these companies, and the effects that the pollution and exploitation of resources can have on the population of those places. Maybe next time you do this class, you should add a week about environmental globalization? We talk a lot about people and culture, but what is globalization physically doing to the earth? How are globalization and global warming connected?

            Another of my favorite topics was media representation. I found it really interesting to learn how American media impacts other countries, and how their own media is being altered by globalization. Media is such a powerful social tool that influences the way we think that the globalization of media is bound to be interesting.

            My last favorite topic was the globalization of beauty. I feel like this topic is the one that really takes aspects of all the other topics and rolls them into one. It brought up issues of feminism, capitalism, media representation, culture, and labor. It is scary to think what people do to their bodies, and others bodies for an arbitrary social construct.

            This is probably where I am supposed to discuss my least favorite topics, but I don’t have one, so I’m not going to. Instead I will reflect on what I’ve learned. I started the class with the idea that globalization is just the modern word a continued Western imperialism. While some of these articles have only reinforced that notion in my mind, others have broken it down. Imperialism does need to be discussed when discussing globalization, but it is not the only driving force of globalization. Also, imperialism has a negative connotation of exploitation and abuse, but globalization is not all bad. There are positives to a globalized world, and now that the semester is basically over, I agree most completely with a reading from the first week. Sen argued that there is no point to debating whether globalization is more good than bad or not because globalization is here stay. We need to focus on how to make globalization more beneficial for more people, rather than dwell on its bad aspects. 

Thomas Schrader - Final Post - 5/7/12

            The article was a perfect culmination of the course. What we read in this article is exactly what we have seen time and time again throughout the semester. In speaking about India, the author admits “somehow we manage progress and regress simultaneously." To go as far as to say that progress has been schizophrenic is actually quite accurate to say. What is even worse is that most people seem okay with it or at least are too apathetic to do anything about it. I think members of our class have something very much in common with how the writer sees her position. “The trouble is that once you see it, you can’t unsee it.” So as highly aware individuals, are we now compelled to do something about the problems we talked about. As ignorance is erased, whose job does it become to deal with issues that no one else seems to be dealing with?

            India, as are many other developing countries, is facing severe consequences from what we confuse for clean cut progress. India faces severe unemployment and failed development projects.  In what seems like some sort of new form of imperialism, “creating a good investment climate is the new euphemism for third repression…this time around, the colonizer doesn’t even need a white presence” as “implementation [of projects] now rests with the local administrations. It seems that a clash is occurring that is pushing true progress to a standstill. In attempts to stop corruption and such, many villagers can’t find jobs in the cities they fled to for work and entrepreneurs who were encouraged to flourish in a free-market are left to deal with corruption.

            The author declares “there is a lot of money in poverty.” This is quiet a fascinating statement which suggests that perhaps less is being done to truly make positive change happen because so many academic scholars who study poverty and despair are making some easy money by researching the issue. I think that many scholars are probably just as frustrated with the problems around the world and see their role in positive change being their jobs as researchers; to get the information to those who have the power as well as media. Nonetheless, it seems many of their claims are met with resistance and failing political leaders.

            So what is the author’s role as “writer” activist,” a title she doesn’t seem to embrace? I would follow that up with what is our role as educated students? We have explored and written about so many themes over this course, I feel that in many ways we are aware of what is really going on and what the experts seem to ignore. We’ve asked the tough questions, as the authors did as well, and we have sought after possible solutions.

            This course has opened my awareness to an array of global issues, expanding my narrow understanding of what exactly globalization is. Beforehand, I visualized globalization as a sort of sweeping movement that sort of set everyone on an equal playing field. By simply spreading one culture’s ideas, technologies, and values onto another has proven in many cases harmful and simply unfair. I don’t think globalization in itself is bad. It is still a very exciting idea to me because it paves the way for exciting new advances and changes that may produce some really great progress. In thinking back to our first readings about the “Clash of Civilizations” and” The Clash of Ignorance,” it is obvious that what is going on in terms of globalization is often oversimplified. Our histories are all interconnected; they have been for centuries. Unfortunately, the West has repeatedly attempted, both intentionally (and unintentionally perhaps), force itself onto other cultures. It seems that as tensions rise and more are educated about these issues like us, something will change.

Final Thoughts

Rachel Becker

Last Week Post

May 7, 2012

            In reflecting on what I learned from this semester, I am also thinking about what I learned as a sociology student at Connecticut College.  Sociology was never a subject that was offered at my high school, so my entire experience with the discipline comes from this college.  Although we don’t really offer capstone courses here, I think of this seminar as my capstone of studies with Professor Jafar.  It brought several narratives that we’d been discussing through all of my four years here to a much higher level.  I think over all that we have been asked to question how we all relate to each other.  That is, after all, what sociology is about – how societies and the people within them function on an individual and global level.  As we have seen with really every reading this semester, there is always much more interplay than we are aware of.  And often there is no easy solution – just because something is wrong does not mean that it can be stopped immediately without repercussions.

Of course, once we are tuned into how we function, it is hard to unsee it.  Arundhati Roy (2002) perfectly captured how it feels to me to be a sociology student when she wrote, “Or, on the contrary, in the midst of putative peace, you could, like me, be unfortunate enough to stumble on a silent war.  And once you’ve seen it, keeping quiet, saying nothing, becomes as political an act as speaking out.”  I have many times found myself in a position where my eyes have been opened to an issue that I feel passionate about and I feel pressured to stay quiet.  It is usually accompanied by a feeling that no one cares or it is too heavy an issue to bring up randomly, but it is nevertheless in my head.  A funny example of this is that I was talking to my friend about coffee and the terrible conditions under which a majority of coffee is imported into the United States and she said she didn’t want to know because once she knew she would have to care.  We finished our conversation, and she now buys different coffee.  It is advantageous to politicians and corporations for individuals to feel this pressure to stay silent or this weight if they do choose to speak up and make different choices.  It is these scare tactics that allow for our current systems of power to stay in place.

In terms of globalization specifically, I think the aspect that’s been most disturbing to me is the way the American perspective has been deemed the utmost authority.  There is a feedback cycle where the American opinion is then validated and the arrogance is made to seem reasonable.  It scares me that this is the case and it scares me that most people will not work to get another perspective.  That’s another thing that was enforced this semester – multiple perspectives are essential to understanding an issue.  It is highly probable that both sides will have some bias or some fact wrong, but you will at least get a more complete picture.  I have been consistently surprised by the intricacies of issues, both global and right in front of us.  It is also important to note that what goes on locally could be as a result of global actions or local issues could have global repercussions.  We may not have been able to decide if the world is flat or not, but we are certainly overwhelmingly connected.  I will not be able to give up this lens but I also wouldn’t want to.  

Final Post

Allison Terlizzi

            Arundhati Roy’s article served as a great wrap-up for this course as it ties in many of the larger themes we have discussed in class. Roy says we live in a schizophrenic world, stuck between modernity and tradition. We try to fit in with one or the other and this struggle is what we have been discussing all semester. This can be applied to any aspect of society, drawing on themes of liberalism and conservativism. It is this endless struggle that determines reform.

            Roy says that India is a microcosm of the world and that versions of things that happen there happen everywhere, but on a larger scale. I liked Roy’s analogy on wealth disparity, when she said that the people of India have been loaded onto two convoys of trucks headed in different direction. The tiny convoy is headed to the top of the world and the large one melts into the darkness. This reminds me of the dowry murders article and how in the United States we have violence against women, it’s just called something else. Issues such as these are global, but when looking at different social, cultural and historical contexts it is difficult to make these connections.

            Roy also discussed the role of a writer in society, which I found to be very important. She contemplates to what extent does is free speech actually free? Is it used for entertainment and not internalized? She takes offense to being called a writer-activist because she is seen as a writer through her fiction books, and an activist through her political essays. She says as a writer that she takes a side, and has a clear point of view. She doesn’t mask her morals or writes with ambiguity, setting her methods apart from corporationalism, a mask for “progress” and an “escape from poverty”. I thought this connection was a great way to show humility vs. greed. This article also had strong connections to as she wonders what is going to happen to the fate of India after globalization has taken place. She asks, “What is it going to do to a country like India in which social inequality has been institutionalised in the caste system for centuries” and where close to half the population is illiterate. India has no choice but to conform to modern demands, to be the sweatshop workers. We can only hope the government is strong enough to recognize the potential danger and has not already been bought out by these corporate industries.

            One of the major questions I have been grappling with this whole semester is “Is globalization the same thing as Westernization?” Many of the commodities and cultural practices we have read about seem to have been intrinsically Western, such as McDonalds and standards of beauty. Additionally, the articles we read on sweatshops and corporate globalization have been modes of Western colonization. The articles we read for last week have even shown that Western mental illness has become globalized through the seemingly forced diagnosis of those in Japan and China to have symptoms of Western illnesses. Furthermore, the drug industries have expanded their market into these countries as a way to commodify feelings according to Western standards. When looking at “cultural issues” in the “other” through our own modern Western lens, we often fail to see how these issues are parallel to issues we face in our culture. The most compelling piece of information I will take away from this course is that globalization shows us that we all have universal issues, but no real universal solutions. I have become frustrated with many of the issues we have discussed in class because these issues have become institutionalized at this point and are in a sense now irreversible. Whether we like it or not, all cultures include ideals from others. To me it seems like many of these ideals first started off as Western.

Final Post Leah Feutz

Leah Feutz

Final Post- Resisting Globalization and Class Reflection

            As our final reading for our class, Arundhati Roy’s article “The Ladies Have Feelings So…Shall we Leave it to the Experts?” looks at a couple of interesting themes in terms of resisting globalization. She starts from the context of a locality, explaining that “India lives in several centuries at the same time”. She goes on to say India is undergoing a process of regression and progression within a microcosm of the world on an unparalleled magnitude. She writes that, “In India, your face is slammed right up against it. To address it, to deal with it, to not deal with it, to try to understand it, to insist on not understanding it, to simply survive it-on a daily, hourly basis-is a fine art”. I think that this speaks to the experience of reading and discussing most of the articles/topics from our class. There are so many conflicting thoughts that come up when addressing these issues within globalization and globalization in general. Sometimes I find myself feeling idealistic, and wondering if there isn’t a way that we can genuinely do things better in our world and for the people in it. At other times, however, the sheer number, complexity, and magnitude of many of these problems seem insurmountable and overwhelming. I tend towards more of a negative lens, unfortunately: that there are so many corrupting influences within the world, that the drive towards enacting positive change is consistently impeded by greed and the desire for power. However, I want to find as many instances as possible that can challenge and maybe reverse this.

Roy brings up a very interesting set of questions when she asks, “What is the role of writers and artists in society? Do they have a definable role? Can it be fixed, described, characterized in any definite way? Should it be?” I really liked her response, where she fears the assertion that writers and artists should somehow have an “immutable charter of duties” dictating that they must be socially and politically conscious and have certain prescribed beliefs. The only “rules”, then, that she states are that there are no rules and then, (ironically but secondly), there aren’t any excuses for “Bad Art”. There are inherent responsibilities of engaging in the art itself, but the top-down, societally imposed responsibilities are where the complications lie and where creativity and excellence can be subverted. From this, I thought her question “If what we have to say doesn’t ‘sell’, will we still say it?” was particularly striking. I definitely feel that, for many people, the commercial viability of whatever they are creating is central to their impetus to pursue an idea. Also, though, I tend to believe that people who are artists and writers and dancers by profession genuinely want to share their work with people, and so commercial viability is symbolic of a willing and interested audience. I don’t blame anyone, then, (if this last idea could be generally true), in wanting their art to be perceived as having monetary value.

One of my favorite quotes from this reading is where Roy writes that, “everything works in Paradise”. She says that under certain conditions, (“if we have the right institutions of governance in place – effective courts, good laws, honest politicians, participatory democracy, a transparent administration that respects human rights and gives people a say in decisions that affect their lives”…etc.), globalization will be beneficial to all people, poor and rich. Just as Roy states, however, these are lofty aspirations for a world that is undeniably imperfect. She also questions whether or not the world leaders are genuinely doing whatever they can to achieve these conditions, if they are perhaps working towards something completely opposite, and what is even meant by “right institutions of governance”. These types of questions have come up in a lot of the courses I have taken, especially in what types of systems of government work well and the most effectively, and how this can be drastically influenced by locality and the cultural and social environment. I have always been really interested in U.S. government and politics, and many of my courses address the question of the degree to which our government system is truly democratic. I also know that there are innumerable problems within our society, which is intrinsically tied to the systemic and political flaws within America. This is where I see the same connection to Roy’s idea- in which good government can help render a better world, but that, in the same vein, perhaps, bad government keeps society from certain levels of improvement. I think that one good answer to this bind could be found in Roy’s condition of participatory democracy and people having more of a voice, because this at least gives the chance for more accountability. I don’t think, though, that this is by any means the full answer and I am definitely left wondering how all of these issues can even begin to be addressed. Maybe there is never really a coherent, obvious, or articulable solution (equally as complex and confusing as the issues themselves).

In reflecting on this semester in our class, I definitely had some favorite readings and discussions, as well as questions that still remain unanswered (or perhaps are just unanswerable). One of my favorite readings, or I guess the one through which I started to develop my lens of analysis and understanding for a lot of the subsequent ones, was the article about McDonalds in Hong Kong. It stressed the various different factors that made this common symbol of globalization an outside influence, but also how locality did truly have an influence on how McDonalds is seen and experienced there. This helped me to understand the importance of cultural and local specificity, and that generalizing often leads to inaccurate analysis or conclusions. We saw this in particular when discussing the veil, which built upon the idea of seeing historical background to get a more full and accurate picture. Also, the articles on sweatshops and what the factory environments were actually like reemphasized just how different experience can really be, to an even more “local” degree (as in, not just seeing locality as nation or region, but that experiences vary even within miles of each other, just as we see on our college campus versus the city of New London). 

I also loved all of our discussions of culture and globalization, especially seen through media representations and common perceptions. I think that the question of what is “culturally authentic” is one that is perhaps unanswerable, especially even that I don’t think there is one person or authority to whom that question should even be posed. Furthermore, I was consistently frustrated with the feeling that a lot of these issues seem irreversible. It isn’t that self-education and learning as much as possible isn’t effective in reversing perceptions, but that access to (and even desire for) a more nuanced understanding of other cultures is often very restricted. Additionally, I know how stubborn I can be in continuing to believe what I already do, and just seeking out information that helps to support what I think I already know. I sense that people have an understanding of their own truth and have a pretty solid view of the world, and there isn’t that much that can penetrate that view. It is convenient that I find it important to try to understand these types of issues better (especially in hindsight having taken this class). This is why I do feel some sort of reservation when people deaminize the ignorance of others; just as I am a product of my environment and experience, so to are those who present views that I do not agree with. There are, obviously, certain viewpoints and opinions that I do not tolerate and do really hate, but I don’t necessarily blame all of these people for what they believe. However awful it is that people are prejudiced, hateful, intolerant, commit violence, etc., I do feel some sense that this comes from somewhere, and not out of the inherent evil in people’s hearts.  

Just as Roy puts it, “We don’t live in a clean, perfect world”. While I am left questioning where solutions to all of the issues we discussed could lie, I really like Roy’s following statement: “Time to ask, in ordinary language, the public question and to demand in ordinary language, the public answer….One is not involved by virtue of being a writer or activist. One is involved because one is a human being”. This resonates with me very strongly- we all do have a hand in the way that our world works, and, even, because this is not an equal hand for many people,  it is essential that the idea of “the public” be revitalized in order to have everyone’s activism included and heard.  

Monica Butler ---- Final post

Monica Butler - 5/7/12 - Final Post

This week the article by Roy was a different take on assessing globalization in the modern world. It was less informative and factual but posed many of the same questions we have been asking all semester in the context of India. I think what is most significant was this struggle between new and old. This is something that applies to the many developing nations across the world entering the world’s globalization transformation. It is a complex because there is no answer between the two; neither is good and neither is bad. The problem in India is the extremely strong inequalities among the caste system that are worsened through this conflict of new and old. Roy references this as a tiny convoy going to the “top of the world” with the modern and the other, much larger, convoy heading further and further into darkness and poverty.  This larger convoy is that 50% of the population that is illiterate in a country that is pulling into the lead of the Information Revolution and the 5 million people living in Delhi slums. She poses questions that ask what this type of globalization means for countries like India. Will it further the economic gap or close it? She asks if the current globalization is just a mask for a “mutant variety of colonialism” that mirrors the history of India in the past? India is trying to develop and become a bigger player in the global scheme, however, Roy points out that if they are not careful they will continue to be a pawn in the game of economic globalization. It is like she describes about pollution “This is our in-house version of first world bullying in the global warming debate, i.e., we pollute, you pay.” 

Among her many questions about a solution to the issues surrounding economic globalization she sees political accountability and major collaborative world dissent as the solutions. However, she discusses the hardships that language instills in the missions of people like her. Labeling her work as activism. She argues that she is simply taking a point or giving an opinion. By doing so she alienates herself in the writing world. Activists are labeled as crude and bias. However, she explains that she is solely taking and point and trying to effect change through what she knows best, writing. I think the most important thing to take away from this is that we don’t need to be an activist to get involved. We are all involved because we are human beings living and cohabitating this world together. “Activists” should not be taking the lead but we should be acting on these issues in a collective manner. 

I think that this article is a great way to end the semester because it addresses many questions that we bring up every class. The article seemingly reads like one of our class discussions, poses questions and provides evidence to provoke thought. On the topic of globalization we have learned that there is no solution to its problems and it is not something that is going away. Each week we have tackled a different negative result of globalization along with the positives that come with these effects. However everyday we leave with unanswered questions. With a topic that is so difficult to answer it is important have insightful conversations and to evoke questions to think about. I think Roy’s points about solving the issues of globalization are relevant to every topic we have discussed. In order to solve such major problems they need to be tackled collectively among everyone across the globe. We cannot be so privileged as Westerners and push our issues off into other nations, however, we need to solve our problems both domestically and help others through the benefits that have come with globalization, like technology, trade, and communication. 

I think what was one of the most significant things from this course was the range of topics that discussed. The issues that were discussed allowed us to understand the ways globalization effect every culture in literally almost every aspect. Often times the effects of globalization are lessened by its economic significance or its technological relevance. However the way we react to economic and technological globalization have had a significantly strong effect on the social context of every culture across the world. I think the that the importance of this class was based in how globalization in its smallest forms can effect the everyday lives of people across the world. From their basic psyches to their interactions with others to their religions. 

Greg Demetriou Class overview and Roy

The schizophrenic state that India is in, as described by Roy, speaks for beyond the personal circumstance to which he is referring. I do not mean to dismiss the sentiments of the article, but the larger point he addresses at the beginning of his article speaks volumes about modernity. History and progression are such independent phenomena that their meshing reflects the highest degree of complexity through out society. The words progression and history are not fundamentally antonyms, but the two words are contradictions. As any society progresses they have to let go of certain parts of history. Because society is made up of some many different people how comfortable they are negotiating progression is a reflection of their homage to history. I am not trying to say that progressive people in society are devoid of the value of history. What I am saying is the negotiation between progression and history becomes complicated by the varying allegiances to different aspects of a countries history.

            At the end of the article Roy speaks about, in my opinion, the biggest obstacle the citizens of the world must overcome. People in positions of power are more focused on progressing personal vendettas than making progressions for the good of the people. It can be seen in something as insignificant as a NBA coach refusing to change his offensive system to fit the talent of his players, to the current tug of war over any issue with democrats and republicans in America. I am not trying to compare the two things I just described, but they both reflect a similar pattern, and a pattern Roy attests too.

Roy also continues by explaining that artists are the ones who can bring the situations of reality in to the focus of every person through their art. (third to last paragraph) Although I completely agree with what Roy is saying I think that this explanation is something that is legitimately holding society back. Modernity has shifted into a realm of specialties. As this is the case it is not encouraged for people to develop an eclectic intellect, they are channeled into areas of specialty, and they only concern themselves with their capabilities within that specialty. This dos not encourage people to question the sentiments of experts, it keeps people from asking truly revealing questions. Designating the recreation of reality to the arts discourages everybody else from trying to accomplish what our artists have. Those people should be valued for their skills, but everybody should be encouraged to do the same thing as these people. It does not have to be to the same caliber because these people are professionals, but recreating reality in a way that is relatable should be a fundamental part of every day life. There is such much diversity in the world that being able to draw personal parallels is a fundamentally valuable skill. It is a skill that keeps one relevant to the world in which they live.  

            Although Roy directly explains that what is going on in India is going on in all different places, the importance of that connection are understated. This directly leads into my review of this class. The most valuable thing that I learned is that as different as cultures are from one another, the more people are the same. What I mean by that statement is that the negative aspect of culture can victimize any person in any society, unless that person understands that society. In formal education the powers at be try to trick you with undervaluing the importance of education because a lot of professors teach from the perspective that their words are fact and there is little room for discussion. An adequate understanding of society not only allows one to critically think about their reality, but it also allows them to value their education. The lessons that I have learned about different societies in this class have taught me more about the society that I live in than I could have ever imagined. The ability to draw parallels between my life and the lives of others is an invaluable skill that will allow my to keep the correct perspective towards a lot of things I will come across.

            The focus of this course review is the skill that I just expanded. The world is progressing to a place where people cannot see beyond their own lives when consuming any information. People are so quick to judge the actions or opinions of others, but most people are not able to make connections to the people they are judging. Understanding the importance of difference, and the multiplicity of the human experience, people can make connections to experiences that are invaluable. I may never go to most countries in the world, but the things I have learned about understanding other societies in this class will allow me to make connections to my life that only benefit me as a person. This may seem like a simplistic review of this class but I honestly cannot think of a more valuable lesson that has been taught in a classroom. There are so many things in this world that separate people it is not encouraged for people to find parallels to their own life. It seems that the biggest secret in life is that we all have so much in common. We do not have the same things in common but our interests reflect similarities in the lives of all humans. As humans our emotions reflect of relationships to different aspects of culture. Although what evokes those emotions may be different from culture to culture, the fact that the same human emotions are expressed connects all people. The only differences are the vehicles of those emotions.