In today’s world, the advance
in technologies has led to an increase in the integration of culture across the
globe. However, it has also resulted in many social issues, one of them being
the loss of local culture when people over embrace American culture; thus,
developed nations around the world are trying to ameliorate the loss of local
culture which resulted from globalisation.
According to Murphy and
Ross-Larson (2004), more than 85 per cent of worldwide films were produced in
the United States; and certainly, globalisation has expanded the circulation of
cultures within and beyond nations. However, an excess of American cultural
codes such as McDonalds, Macintosh, Michael Jackson, and Mickey Mouse pose a
threat to the indigenous culture of various communities around the world.
Moreover, America’s cultural imperialism uses political, military and economic
capabilities to extend their ideologies and cultural codes at the disadvantage
of other nations’ local culture. (Weckert and Adeney, 1977; cited in Mishra,
2003)
One of the existing methods
to tackle the loss of heritage is the effort of governments to promote local
heritage. Governments have been introducing programmes at different levels of
local communities, from school to workplaces, to promote local culture. For
instance, the Singapore government promotes local and regional history and
culture through organising the “I Love Museums Campaign”. However, this
effort by the government has its limitations. The power of globalisation could
be difficult to resist, hence the mere efforts of governments to limit American
culture and promote native heritage is barely enough. Even after many attempts
by the government to encourage the embracing of local culture, S. R. Nathan,
the former president of Singapore, continues to regard Singapore as a nation
with no culture. (Yini, 2012) This clearly shows that an individual’s interest
in embracing local culture and not the government’s effort is the main factor
that determines whether a nation can withstand the influence of cultural
globalisation. Thus, individuals should participate more enthusiastically in
promoting local heritage. One possible solution is to reward individuals who
avidly promote and preserve their heritage. For instance, giving
acknowledgement to individuals who take the initiative to emphasise the need
and urgency to embrace and promote local culture to the populace. Only then
will it be possible for people to commit more time, money and effort to
conserve their “dying” heritage. Hence, governments should play a part in
confronting cultural colonisation; however, this effort should not be
restricted to the governments, individuals should also eagerly contribute to
the efforts of preserving of their culture.
The second method to
ameliorate cultural imperialism and the loss of local culture is the opposition
of foreign cultures. This strategy could be executed by setting a quota on
locally produced programmes on mass media to ensure that a minimum number of
native programmes are being viewed by the population and to assure the spread
of local culture and ideologies. For example, the Hungarian government has
insisted on a quota of 15 per cent of local programmes on public channels.
(Murphy & Ross-Larson, 2004) Nonetheless, this method could be
ineffective in today’s societies where the internet is highly accessible. Even
though the government may limit the number of foreign programmes on public
channels, people can still freely view or access foreign movies, programmes and
news through the internet. Moreover, aggressive quota-based policies can result
in concerns that restrictions on foreign programmes may constrict people’s rights
and freedom to choose. In place of quota-based policies, what could be done is
to allow individuals to participate in the process of producing television
programmes. For instance, television stations could organise plot writing
competitions, which require the populace to create storylines that promote
indigenous traditions, values and heritage sites; and the best plot chosen will
be made into a programme. Hence, countering cultural imperialism does not
imply the adopting of hostile attitudes towards foreign cultures. Furthermore,
when preserving native culture, a balance between local and American culture
should be maintained.
In conclusion, globalisation
has influenced people around the world to discard local cultures and
traditions, while American culture and values have been adopted. This
phenomenon has become so problematic that governments of developed nations are
trying to address this issue by introducing different schemes. After evaluating
two of these strategies, in reference to policies from Hungary and Singapore,
it is undeniable that each of these policies has its own limitations. The
inference drawn from this evaluation is that it is extremely important that
individuals play a part in resisting cultural imperialism, preserving local cultures
and safeguarding native values in an era of globalisation.
Reference
Mishra, G. (2003).
Globalization and Culture. Retrieved from http://www.stateofnature.org/?p=6292
Murphy, C. & Ross-Larson,
B. (2004). Human Development Report 2004, Cultural Liberty in Today’s Diverse
World. Chapter 5, pg 86-105. Retrieved from
http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr04_chapter_5.pdf
Nwegbu, M. U. Eze, C.C. &
Asogwa, B. E. (2011) Globalization of Cultural Heritage: Issues, Impacts, and
Inevitable Challenges for Nigeria. Retrieved from
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~mbolin/nwegbu-eze-azogwa.htm
Yini. (2012). Common S’pore identity has yet to develop:
former president Nathan. Yahoo!
Newsroom. Retrieved from
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/common-s%E2%80%99pore-identity-has-yet-to-develop--former-president-nathan.html
