Contents
1. Introduction
2. The definition and essence of cultural imperialism
3. The inevitability of cultural imperialism
4. The resistance of cultural imperialism
5. Conclusion
6. Bibliography
Introduction
The contemporary world is characterised by unparalleled progress that affects
all spheres of life. Traditionally, economic development is considered to be
one of the moving forces that stimulates the development in other spheres of
life. However, nowadays some specialists underline that the cultural development
is not less significant than economic one and is also extremely important for
harmonic development of human society.
At the same time, the current process of globalisation that was initially a
purely economic process is threaten to involve all other spheres of human life,
including politics and culture. As a result the problem of not only economic
but also cultural expansion has become actual in recent years. Naturally, such
a development leads to the situation when one culture, notably American culture,
gets started to dominate all over the world influencing dramatically national
cultures of other countries. In response to such a combination of economic,
political and cultural expansion different states, national communities attempt
to sustain their own culture and traditions regardless the impact of the US
that often leads to the spread of nationalism and cultural imperialism from
the part of different countries.
Nonetheless, nowadays the role of the US in the world seems to be too significant
that makes the resistance of other nations and states weak, if not to say useless.
This is why it is necessary to trace the recent trends in the world cultural
development as well as economic one and to find out the extent, to which cultural
imperialism is spread in the world, define this phenomenon and find out whether
smaller nations and states can resist to the global hegemony of the US in all
spheres of life, including politics, economy and culture.
The definition and essence of cultural imperialism
Speaking about the recent trends in the socio-cultural and economic development
of the world, it is primarily necessary to underline that nowadays the world
has changed dramatically basically because of the development of new economic
system which is the result of the economic globalisation. This process leads
to the larger economic integration of different countries all over the world
and development some universal rules of the ‘game’.
Traditionally this process was considered to be typical for economic relations.
However, in recent years a growing number of specialists appeal to the increasingly
more important role of cultural changes that take place in the contemporary
world. Among them may be named John Tomlinson who develops the notion of cultural
imperialism as one of the key concepts of the modern culture and as the main
characteristics of the cultural development in global terms.
At the same time from the beginning, it is necessary to underline that there
are a number of terms that defines practically similar phenomenon that has been
just defined above as cultural imperialism. For instance, Boyd-Barrett (1977)
speaks about ‘media imperialism’, Galtung (1979) employs the term
‘structural imperialism’, also there are such terms as ‘cultural
dependency and domination’ (Link 1984, Mohammadi 1995), ‘cultural
synchronization’ (Hamelink 1983), and many others that are closely related
to one and the same notion of cultural imperialism.
On taking into consideration such a variety of terms it would be logical to
find out what cultural imperialism is and define its essence. At this respect
it is possible to say that one of the main implications of cultural imperialism
is that this concept proposes that “a society is brought into the modern
world system, when its dominating stratum is attracted, pressured, forced, and
sometimes bribed into shaping its social institutions to correspond to, or even
promote, the values and structures of the dominating center of the system”
(Schiller 1976, p.103). To put it more precisely, in cultural terms it means
that nowadays the cultural imperialism is expressed through the development
and spread of the influence of certain cultures worldwide. It is noteworthy
that nowadays, there is actually one hegemonic state, the US, which spread its
cultural impact all over the world and the problem of Americanisation of the
world culture is very important and in some countries it leads to internal conflict
between local historical traditions and modern impact of the American culture
on the local communities.
In this respect, it should be said that many specialists, including Tomlinson,
underline the role of media in the development of cultural imperialism that
nowadays practically results in cultural hegemony of the US. In fact, the role
of media in the contemporary society should not be underestimated because the
modern technologies, especially IT and computing, development of Internet, made
media very influential ideological and cultural tool. The main reason of such
increased role of media is the high level of informatization of human society
when people are getting information twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week,
and in the future this trend would be even stronger. As a result, people are
dramatically influenced by the information they receive from the media, and
very often they get acquainted with an absolutely new lifestyle that is brought
to them via media. Eventually, it leads to the situation when new generations,
especially in developing countries, are influenced by media, which are often
internationalised, to the extent that the lifestyle they learn from media comes
into clashes with their traditional culture.
Not surprisingly that in such a situation the local culture can also tend to
cultural imperialism that is basically expressed in the development of nationalist
ideas, which deliberately underline the difference of local culture from the
culture, which is nowadays considered to be predominant in the whole world,
i.e. American culture. In other words, cultural imperialism results in the enforcing
of nationalism and extremism.
Furthermore, John Tomlinson characterises such a situation as a ‘cultural
loss’ that is basically the result of ‘cultural weakness’
of capitalist modernity. He underlines that the spread of capitalism and modernity
contributes to a significant cultural shift and it results in cultural imperialism,
which aims at satisfaction cultural needs of people. For instance he estimates
that “people need something modernity has not properly provided. This
is the need not for material well-being, or political emancipation, but a specifically
cultural need: to be able to decide how we will live collectively in the widest
possible sense – what we will value, what we will believe in, what sense
we will make of our everyday lives” (Tomlinson 1991, p.169).
Actually, Tomlinsons explains the cultural loss basically by the lack of cultural
coherence and, moreover, the cultural loss is the result of globalisation that
leads to the situation when a constantly growing number of people share the
same ‘cultural fate’, i.e. they are influenced by the same cultural
trends that are typical for capitalist modernity. Notably he concludes that
“as global cultures fall into conditions of modernity through the spread
of the institutions of modernity, they all face the same problem of the failure
of a collective will to generate shared narratives of meaning and orientation”
(1991, p.165).
Thus, it is possible to speak about cultural imperialism as a consequence of
the impact of several factors, among which the most significant are the modernity,
spread of global capitalist system, development of media and increasing role
of information, and enforcement of cultural nationalism.
The inevitability of cultural imperialism
Nowadays the development of cultural imperialism seems to be so rapid and overwhelming
that often specialists speak about that this process is inevitable and the weak
local cultures are simply unable to resist to the influence of the hegemonic
culture of the US which is spread as fast as the globalisation involves more
and more countries into the new economic formation and new relations.
Even now it is possible to observe a significant impact of American culture
on national cultures in many developing countries of the world, as well as developed
ones. This impact is particularly obvious in the sphere of television, cinema
and music. In this respect, it is possible to refer to the experience of Asian
countries which are also susceptible to the impact of American culture and where
this impact is probably more obvious than anywhere else in the world because
many Asian countries are characterised by very particular cultures and traditions
that have made them unique in cultural sense and now they are gradually losing
their uniqueness as the role of American culture grows in the local communities.
For instance, Chen underlines that the impact of foreign culture, which may
be generally characterised as Western culture, but in fact it is basically the
impact of American culture, is extremely important and affects dramatically
local traditions. Notably he is rather concerned about Korean culture and he
states that “Korea’s newly enriched and the middle class could repeat
the same prejudice and discrimination demonstrated toward the poor as observed
among business managers and travellers in South East Asia and China, and they
would discriminate against and treat the North Koreans as an inferior class
of people, thereby amplifying the hostility the internal conflict” (Chen
1996, p.42). As a result he believes that the influence of foreign culture can
eventually lead to internal contradictions between Koreans that can naturally
prevent the possibility to unite North and South Korea into one nation because
of such cultural differences enforced by economic and political contradictions.
Despite the fact that in the above statement Chen appeals to South Asian and
Chinese impact, it is still obvious that the impact of the world hegemonic culture
of the US is very strong in Asia. For instance, returning to the impact of American
cinematography, television and music on Asian cultures, it is possible to remind
that one of the largest entertainment agent of American culture MTV “has
spawned over twenty networks specific to a certain geographical areas such as
Brazil and Japan” (Galeota 2004, p.23). The same processes may be observed
in other Asian countries, such as India. Naturally such a spread of MTV networks
contribute significantly to the spread of America music culture and deprivation
of local music traditions as well as the local lifestyle in general because
it is not a secret that MTV is a very influential cultural agent that produce
a great impact, especially on young people. It means that Asian youth is more
influenced by MTV, which naturally targets at younger audience, that leads to
the situation when local music and pop culture resembles American one while
local traditions are considered to be out of date and obviously lose to modern
and advanced culture promoted by MTV.
Another interesting example of the impact of American culture on Asian countries
may be found in India. To put it more precisely, the Indian Bollywood is traditionally
perceived as an analogue of the American Hollywood and this is a really powerful
cinematography producer but at the same time its products are extremely westernised
and adopted to the Western, or American culture, while national traditions are
extremely deprived. Not surprisingly that Bollywood is viewed by many very critically
as a ‘clone’ of Hollywood. By the way, even the lifestyle and professional
work of the local Indian stars resembles those of the US. For instance, commercials
in India in 2000 “featured Bollywood stars Hrithik Roshan promoting Coke
and Shahrukh Khan promoting Pepsi” (Galeota 2004, p.23).
In such a way, Asian cultures tend to be Americanised and it is very important
that music and cinema have become major means of cultural impact because they
primarily affects the youth, which is more susceptible to cultural changes than
older generations.
The resistance of cultural imperialism
Naturally the process of the global spread of American culture and its growing
impact on other cultures results in the growing resistance of local national
cultures to such a kind of expansion. As it has been already mentioned above
the increased role of American culture resulted in the development of nationalism
in local communities and spread of different extremist movements, which attempt
to resist to the overwhelming influence of American culture and Americanisation
at large.
In this respect it worth to note that some countries has started to lead isolationist
policy in order to prevent themselves from the impact of the US. For instance,
North Korea, or Iran are the states which, at first glance, are absolutely different
and have nothing in common but both resist to the impact of the US in all spheres
of life. Actually, it means that this states prefer isolation to their involvement
in the process of globalisation and cultural expansion.
Naturally, it should be pointed out that the real motives of North Korean and
Iranian governments are not only cultural, but basically political and economic.
Nonetheless, it is necessary to admit that the preservation of local culture
with its peculiarities in both North Korea and Iran are basically the result
of their international policy of isolation. As a result, the US attempts to
economically influence these countries and as soon as economic and politic influence
over this country is established than the cultural expansion as a part of cultural
imperialism will be inevitable.
Frankly speaking, such a perspective is highly probable because the example
of other country empirically supports this idea. To put it more precisely, it
is obvious that in the contemporary world the role of the US as the only superpower
is so significant that there is practically not a single country that could
resist to American expansion either economic or cultural. In this respect, it
is important to emphasise that economic reasons are even more significant than
cultural ones. In other words, other countries are too weak economically and
consequently politically to resist to the impact of the US and as soon as the
economic control of the US is established the cultural expansion naturally begins.
Actually, there are a lot of historical examples of such a scenario that may
be found in history and recent events. For instance, Japan, on losing the World
War II, this country turned to be under economic and political influence of
the US and soon the local culture has started to change under the influence
of the dominating US culture. Not surprisingly that nowadays there is MTV network
in Japan, and gradually traditional Japanese culture gives in American culture
that may be observed in lifestyle, fashion, music, etc.
As for more recent examples, it is possible to remind the increasing role of
the US and American culture in the Arab world when traditional Islamic countries
are gradually changing their traditional culture that becomes more Westernised,
more Americanised. For instance, the spread of cinema and television in Islamic
countries is considered to be absolutely unacceptable for local cultures, especially
in perception of Islamic extremists. And this influence may be observed in other
cultural domains.
In such a situation, attempts to respond to such cultural and economic expansion
are getting to be more often that results in the spread of extremist movements
which often aims at the resistance to the influence of the US.
However, such attempts to resist to the American cultural expansion as well
as economic one seems to be doomed to fail because, as it has been mentioned
above the US is currently the only superpower and, in actuality, all other countries,
especially developing ones, where local culture and traditions are still quite
strong, cannot really resist because of their economic weakness compared with
the US. As a result, they cannot really oppose to the growing impact of the
US and the American cultural imperialism.
Conclusion
Thus, taking into account all above mentioned, it is possible to conclude that
nowadays, cultural imperialism is a part of the process of globalisation. Naturally,
it may be viewed as the integral part of economic globalisation or as an independent
or even more important process but in all probability it is a complex of socio-economic,
political, and cultural processes that are closely interlinked and results in
the spread of the US influence worldwide in different spheres of life, including
cultural one. Obviously, the cultural imperialism has become possible because
of the recent achievements in science, technological development, spread of
media and the lack of countries really able to resist to the world economic
and cultural hegemony of the US. As a result, nowadays many countries are influenced
by the US culture while national cultures tend to be oppressed and naturally
it engenders certain resistance, which often has nationalistic and extremist
character but, unfortunately for national cultures, they are unable to resist
to the influence from abroad because of economic weakness of countries.
Bibliography:
1. Boyd-Barrett, J.O. (1977). "Media imperialism: Towards an international
framework for an analysis of media systems." In J. Curran, M. Gurevitch
and J. Woollacott (eds.), Mass communication and society, p. 116-135. London:
Edward Arnold.
2. Chen, Kuan-Hsing. (1996). “Not yet the colonial ear: The (super) nation-state
and transnationalism of cultural studies”. Cultural Studies 10, 37-70.
3. Downing, J., Mohammadi, A., and Sreberny-Mohammadi, A. (eds.). (1995). Questioning
the media: A critical introduction. London: Sage.
4. Galeota, J. (2004). “Cultural imperialism: An American Tradition”.
The Humanist, May/June, p. 22-46. Retrieved April 14 2006 from http://www.thehumanist.org/humanist/articles/essay3mayjune04.pdf
5. Galtung, J. (1979). "A structural theory of imperialism." In G.
Modelski (ed.), Transnational corporations and world order: Readings in international
political economy, p. 155-171. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.
6. Hamelink, C.J. (1983). Cultural autonomy in global communications. New York:
Longman.
7. Link, J.H. (1984). "Test of the cultural dependency hypothesis."
In R. Stevenson and D. Shaw (eds.), Foreign news and the new world information
order, p.186-199. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
8. Livingston A. White. Reconsidering cultural imperialism theory Retrieved
April 12 2006 from http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Spring01/white.phpl
9. Mohammadi, A. (1995). "Cultural imperialism and cultural identity."
In J.Downing, A. Mohammadi, and A. Sreberny-Mohammadi (eds.), Questioning the
media: A critical introduction, p. 362-378. London: Sage.
10. Schiller, H.I. (1976). Communication and cultural domination. New York:
International Arts and Sciences Press.
11. Tomlinson, J. (1991). Cultural imperialism: A critical introduction. Baltimore:
John Hopkins University Press.
