Culture is the outcome of Human-Nature relation . In its early Stages, cultural Identity was (to a great extent) relatively homogenous . There was no Specifying environment of human Cultural Identity, because there was no Settlement. After the moving Tribes settled down, it became possible to detect cultural differences produced through regionalization of human-environmental relation. Although certain cultural Characteristics remain shared, in so far they are the prototypical characteristics of the Nature . That is to say; cultural differences are to be reduced to environmental differences.
Dialectics: The Settlements became a Nucleus rather a base of making the world a circuit of dominance attempts. Wars, imperialism, plunder invasions etc. were the traditional Instruments.
Today; The industrial revolution enriched the common cultural ground, and made it possible to overcome distances. The world became at the disposal through Transport and communication Technology.
The Collapse of the Soviet Union (1989) and the World wide defeat of the Censor intelligence made the Access to the World a Matter of" click to view, see , Hear, comment, export ,import etc". So the cultural Health and Wealth of the nations became more and more Interdependent.
The more it becomes possible to communicate and make the access beneficial, the more national Health depends on freedom of relations to the World.
Globalization of Cultures is the way to support Consumption of economic Goods, which would require relevant and responsive politics also. In democratic Countries, Politics is the product of Culture, and if it opposes Culture, it turns into a dictatorship. So the Globalization of Cultures lead to the Globalization of political Systems. On the other hand ; Globalization of economic Systems lead to the Globalization of Cultures and vice Versa. A circular relation is the state of the "economics-culture-politics" dualism. Culture surrounds the matter with protective and perpetuating Values.
In order to make Globalization functions, you need three major Conditions:
1.Globalization of Policy: the goods reach the Market through ;
a. The ability to jump over or remove the political Barriers. Globalization of liberal political systems happens (from democratic point of view) via Culture . Within a liberal World, cultural Values produces a homogenous Policy, hence the Globalization is not supposed to face political Barriers. But Goods may be subjected to technical Tests merelyï¿½ The Barriers are usually thrown, because of cultural differences.
b. The power to overcome cultural Barriers: this happens through Globalization of Cultural Values and supportive political education.
C. Consumption Power: Production of Goods depends not only on the Demand, but on the consumption Ability. The last is the Criteria of the social Classification in the Capitalistic Society.
The Absence of unnatural cultural differences makes Goods face sometimes very few and limited natural Barriers, which don't exceed the natural Diversity i.e. the heavy winter Clothes in Africa.
1.TV and Radio Stations( when Pavlov invented the TV system, he wanted to get connected to his Mother)
2. News Papers; Books and Magazines
3. The Internet
(The mentioned Instruments faced Censor Challenges in the Past)
1. The Family. Computer and Satellite Systems (which were intelligence monopoly during the cold war) became part of Family life today, and they are in fact the most important cultural Instruments of cultural Globalization.
2. University and School Systems, for which an international standardizing Measures are already given.
There are two kinds of anti-globalization Movements;
1. Groups opposing the Way and Style of globalization i.e. the left Capitalism with a protectionism concept
2. Groups opposing Globalization substantially;
a. Western Groups with manipulating Concept of Individualism and Tendency to either Colonialism or racism ( Think Le Pen or Oliver Planetaire of France and several other extreme pro Francophony groups like the French politician Pinot who respectively declared: France has lost a military Empire, and should replace the lost past with a contemporarily compensating cultural Empire). Similar Opposing Models are available in all over Europe.
b. Religious Extremists, who bear and preach a Theo-Concept, and use violence against the adoption of liberal values.
Globalization of Culture split into two cardinal Movements;
a. Default emerging Values in almost all over the world
b. Emerging Values in some Parts of the World, with tendency to spread out or comprise the rest of the world :
b1. Liberal or natural Values. The relation to the Nature be replaced through relation to Technology of adapting Nature or evolving the human being to the best possible and homogenous evolutionary rank. The shared relation to Technology makes a comprehensive cultural Globalization possible.
b2. Asocial Individualism with expansive colonial or authoritarian Tendency, and disrespect to other people Values. This Kind of Individualism confuse the Values of War with the values of social lifeï¿½. They affirm that when they refer to Hobbes social contract, or manipulate rather falsify Spencer Theory about Survival of the fittest.
In the first Globalization Period( around the last Third of the 19-th Century), the indigenous Cultures had suffered and some have even approximately perished to an extinctive extent (Because the foreign Policy was mostly led by colonial Individualism, who championed and instrumentalized Wars in the foreign relations).
Today there are international protection for indigenous or other similarly threatened Cultures. In the 11-th UN- Conference following decisions have been met;
A Draft Resolution ( Updated 1994 ).
That is neither to say that indigenous Cultures are natural or liberal, nor the Resolutions are not to be seen as immunity against Changes, but changes happen today through dialog and open Channels based (hopefully) on liberal UN- Criteria. The Challenge that cultural minorities may face lies in the Criteria of democratic Decisions. In a free Society, the self-determination right is a comprehensive decision based on the Majority. To protect the individual rights from becoming a majority Decision- a liberal democratic Concept has been developed in the United States. It is the Motto of the today Republicans and other liberal Groups. But a strict demarcation of what is independently individual and what is not remains a disputed majority decision. We may consider the UN- Declaration as some of the best possible demarcation of individual rights. The last was firstly aimed by the founder of the US-revolution Jefferson, Hamilton and Madison.
The UNICCO is some of the most important international Institutions in supporting and protecting the cultural rights and inheritances. Although one must admit, that the United Nations Institutions lack to some world widely demanded modification.
For some related News try the links below
September 2008, the holy Month of Ramadan. I used to defend the Freedom of the Muslim Women, considering the Anti- Scarf Rules at western Universities as an authoritarian Intervention in individual Affaires. My Position is not an Approval of the Scarf, but a call for open Discussion about, instead of Using the Power of Law, to enforce or Impose the individual liberal Values. When a Woman wears a Scarf for some Aesthetic Reasons, no one can say, that the Scarf in such a subjective Stance is restraining her Freedom. But when she Wears the Scarf , because she is convinced that it is God's Will, in such a Case we may consider the Scarf as a Restrain.
In both Cases we deal with an individual Matter. A matter that doesn't matter that much for the Others. So the Discussion about is not a matter of a democratic Decision. In so far Democracy is not a Decision about what to wear and what not. Even if consider an individual Behavioral Phenomena a kind of psychological Illness, we can not use the Force of Law to Stop it (though it doesn't harm the general Interest or Violate the social Freedom). Suppose we consider some religious Extremists psychologically defected- the Psychological Therapy can not function well, if Ill Persons don't agree to. So in My Opinion; There is no liberal Basis for allowing or forbidding some certain dresses or individual life Models. But taking the Phenomena as a Conflict or religious Challenge, we may reach some different Conclusions.
The Muslims don't usually champion individual Freedom, or advocate freedom of Behavior. In the holy Month of Ramadan, the Muslims try to subject the Others to their Rules. They don't want to see open Restaurants for Guests in Ramadan (the Muslim Fast Month). They combat those who eat on the Streets, and if they can't use Force , they insult or scorn at least. Even at night, Christian and Atheists are not allowed to drink Bear in the Restaurants. I went tonight to an Armenian Restaurant (in Latakia- March Street), the Christian Armenian didn't dare to offer Bear (Food only). He said: it is the Law of the Country !!! in according to which, those who eat or drink in public be arrested until the End of the holy Month.. Luckily , this last Paragraph is not practiced well by the Authority.
In Fact; every Religion bear in the Core, an Opposing Project. A subconscious will to Power, rather illegal Struggle rules toward Dominance and Control over the Others.
The loud Friday Speech, and the early Call Per a very loud Microphone upon the Muslims to stand up for the Prayer, or the Drums before the Doors at
It is of Course not the a Solution to treat Violence with Violence. In same Way, we can't Use Terrorism to combat Terrorism, if we possess legal and
International Organizations should boost liberal Education, and invest in intellectual Activities. Local governments and Statutes to give up helpless Populism. They should tolerate open Dialog and protect individual Freedom.