Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

1|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

Study Period:

Lesson 1: Definition and Metaphors of Globalization

Intended Learning Outcome:

Define globalization encompassing the economy, politics, and culture.
Analyze the metaphors of Globalization.

Discussion:
Globalization.
A lots of connotation gained in defining the word “globalization”. It may pertain about progress,
development, and integration – a positive –phenomena. It signifies increasing ease with which
somebody on one sides of the world can interact, to mutual benefit with somebody on the other
side of the world. However, Swedish Journalist Thomas Larsson (2001) saw globalization as “the
process of world shrinkage, of distances getting shorter, things moving closer for some see it as
occurring through and with regression, colonialism, and destabilization.

A term that is closely related to globalization is transnationalism, or “processes that interconnect

individuals and social groups across specific geo-political borders.” A related concept is
transnationality, or “the rise of new communities and formation of new social identities and
relations that cannot be defined through the traditional reference point of nation-states”.

Globalization and transnationalism are often used interchangeably, but transnationalism is clearly a
more delimited process than globalization. Transnationalism is limited to interconnections that cross
geo-political borders, especially those associated with two or more nation-states. Globalization
includes such connections, but is not restricted to them and encompasses a far wider range of
transplanetary processes (e.g. direct relationships between people in many places in the world
networking via the Internet). Further, geo-political borders are only one of the barriers encountered,
and often overcome, by globalization.

The literature on the definitions of globalization revealed that definitions could be classified as either
broad and inclusive or narrow and exclusive.
Ohmae (1992). “…globalization means the onset of the borderless world.” An example
of broad and inclusive type of definition. Implicitly, it includes variety of issues that deal
with overcoming traditional boundaries.
Cox. “The characteristics of the globalization trend include the internationalizing of
production, the new international division of labor, new migratory movements from
South to North, the new competitive environment that accelerates these processes,

2|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

and the internationalizing of the state…making states into agencies of the

globalizing world.”
Ritzer (2015). “Globalization is a transplanetary process or set of processes involving
increasing liquidity and the growing multidirectional flows of people, objects, places,
and information as well as the structures they encounter and create that are barriers
to, or expedite, those flows…” This definition assumes that globalization could bring
either or both integration and/or fragmentation.
No matter how one classifies a definition of globalization, the concept is complex and multifaceted
as the definitions deal with economic, political, or social dimensions. Studying and understanding
globalization considered essential practice that must be enhanced because:
1. Defining globalization is shaped by the perspective of the person who defines
it. The overview of definitions implied that globalization is many things to many
different people. Appudurai (1996) stated that globalization is a word of things that
have different speeds, axes, points of origin and termination, and varied relationships
to institutional structures in different regions, nations or societies.” Then, Al-Rhodan
(2006) wrote that definitions suggest the perspective of the author on the origins and
the geopolitical implications of globalization. It is a starting point that will guide the
rest of any discussions. In effect, one’s definition and perspective could determine
concrete steps in addressing the issues of globalization.
2. Paraphrase the sociologist Cesare Poppi: globalization is the debate and the
debate is globalization. As Poppi (1997) wrote that the literature stemming from
the debate on globalization has grown in the last decade beyond any individual’s
capability of extracting a workable definition of the concept. In a sense, the meaning
of the concept is self-evident, in another, it is vague and obscure as its reaches are
wide and constantly shifting. Perhaps, more than any other concept, globalization is
the debate about it.
3. Globalization is reality. It is changing as human society develops. It has happened
before and is still happening today. We should expect it to continue to happen in the
future. The future of globalization is more difficult to predict.
Globalization is a concept that is not easy to define because in reality, defining globalization has a
shifting nature. It is complex, multifaceted, and can be influenced by the people who define it.
Moreover, the issues and concerns involving globalization have a wide range from the individual to
society; from small communities to nations and states; and from the benefits we can gain from it to
the costs it could carry. In his article, “The Globalization of Nothing”, George Ritzer (2003) said,
“attitudes toward globalization depend, among other things, on; whether one gains or losses. from
it.”

3|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

Metaphors of Globalization.
Metaphors make use of one term to help us better understand another term. It is designed to give
you a better and a more vivid sense of the global age and how it differs from prior epochs.

Solid and Liquid

Solidity refers to barriers that prevent or make difficult the movement of things. Solids can be
either be natural or man-made. Example of natural solids are landforms and bodies of water.

Prior to the current epoch of globalization (and to most observers there was a previous global
epoch), it could be argued that one of the things that characterized people, things, information,
places, and much else was their greater solidity. That is, all of them tended to be hard or to harden
(metaphorically, figuratively, not literally, of course) over time and therefore, among other things, to
remain largely in place (and having limited mobility).

As a result, people either did not go anywhere or they did not venture very far from where they were
born and raised; their social relationships were restricted to those who were nearby. Much the same
could be said of most objects (tools, food, and so on) which tended to be used where they were
produced. The solidity of most material manifestations of information – stone tablets, newspapers,
magazines, books, and so on – also made them at least somewhat difficult to move very far.

Places were not only quite solid and immoveable, but they tended to confront solid natural
(mountains, rivers, oceans) and humanly constructed (walls, gates) barriers that made it difficult for
people and things to exit or to enter.

Above all, solidity describes a world in which barriers exist and are erected to prevent the free
movement of all sorts of things. It was the nation-state that was most likely to create these “solid”
barriers. Man-made barriers include the Great Wall of China and the Berlin Wall. Imaginary lines
such as the Nine-Dash Line being used by the People’s Republic of China in their claim to the West
Philippine Sea is an example of modern man-made solid. This created limited access of Filipino
fishermen to the West Philippine Sea. However, they have the tendency to melt.

Thus, solidity is far from dead in the contemporary world. It is very often the case that
demands for new forms of solidity are the result of increased fluidity. However, a strong case can,
and will, be made that it is fluidity that is more characteristic of today’s world, especially in terms of
globalization.

People were never so solid that they were totally immobile or stuck completely in a given place, and
this was especially true of the elite members of any society. Elites were (and are) better able to move
about and that ability increased with advances in transportation technology. Commodities, especially
those created for elites, also could almost always be moved and they grew more moveable as
technologies advanced.

Information could always travel more easily than goods or people (it could be spread by word of
mouth over great distances even if the originator of the information could not move very far; it

4|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

moved even faster as more advanced communication technologies emerged [telegraph, telephone,
the Internet]).And as other technologies developed (ships, automobiles, airplanes), people, especially
those with the resources, were better able to leave places and get to others.

Liquid as a state of matter, takes the shape of its container. Liquids are not fixed. It refers to the
increasing ease of movement of people, things, information, and places in the contemporary world.
Bauman’s concepts about the characteristics of liquidity:
1. Today’s liquid phenomena change quickly and its aspects, spatial, and
temporal, are in continuous fluctuation. This means that space and time are
crucial elements of globalization. In global finance, for instance, changes in the stock
market are a matter of seconds.
2. Liquid phenomena is that their movement is difficult to stop. For example, the
videos being uploaded on YouTube or Facebook are to halt once they become viral.
The so-called internet sensations become famous not just in their homeland but to
the entire world as well.
3. The forces (the liquid ones) made political boundaries more permeable to the
flow of people and things (Cartier 2001)
Ritzer (2015) regarded the liquid tends to melt whatever stands in its path (especially
solids)” The clearest example is decline, if not death of the nation-state.
Solid material realities (people, cargo, newspapers) continue to exist, but because of a wide range of
technological developments (in transportation, communication, the Internet, and so on) they can
move across the globe far more readily. Everywhere we turn, more things, including ourselves, are
becoming increasingly liquefied. Furthermore, as the process continues, those liquids, as is the case
in the natural world (e.g. ice to water to water vapor), tend to turn into gases of various types.
To continue the imagery farther than Marx took it, they were ultimately transformed into gases that
diffused in the atmosphere. However, while Marx was describing a largely destructive process, the
point here is that the new liquids and gases that are being created are inherent parts of the new
world and are radically transforming it. In the process, they are having both constructive and
destructive effects.
Thus, the perspective on globalization presented here, is that it involves, above all else, increasing
liquidity (and gaseousness). Liquidity refers to the increasing ease of movement of people, things,
information, and places in the global age. Gaseousness is the hyper-mobility of people, things,
information, and places in the global age.
This is exemplified in many areas such as foreign trade, investment, and global financial transactions,
the globalization of transactions and interactions on the Internet, and the difficulty in halting the
global flow of drugs, pornography, the activities of organized crime, and illegal immigrants.
Flows
Flows are the movement of people, things, places, and information brought by the growing
“porosity” of global limitation. Closely related to the idea of liquidity, and integral to it, is another

5|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

key concept in thinking about globalization, the idea of flows; after all liquids flow easily, far more
easily than solids.
Because so much of the world has “melted’’ or is in the process of ‘‘melting’’ and has become
liquefied, globalization is increasingly characterized by great flows of increasingly liquid
phenomena of all types, including people, objects, information, decisions, places, and so on.
Undoubtedly because of their immateriality, ideas, images, and information, both legal and illegal,
flow everywhere through interpersonal contact and the media, especially now via the Internet.
Think of the different foreign cuisines being patronized and consumed by the Filipinos. Aside from
local dishes, many of us are fond of eating sushi, ramen, hamburger, and French fries – foods
introduced to us by foreign cultures. Foods are being globalized. Another example of flows are
global financial crises. In global financial system, national borders are porous. This means that a
financial crisis in a given country can bring ramifications to other regions of the world.

TYPES OF FLOWS
1. Multi-directional Flows. Globalization is not a one-way process as concepts like
Westernization and Americanization seem to imply. While all sorts of things do flow
out of the West and the United States to every part of the world, many more flow
into the West and the US from everywhere (e.g. Japanese automobiles, Chinese T-
shirts, I-phones manufactured in China, and so on). Furthermore, all sorts of things
flow in every conceivable direction among all other points in the world.
2. Interconnected Flows. The fact is that global flows do not occur in isolation from
one another; many different flows interconnect at various points and times. Take the
example of the global fish industry. That industry is now dominated by the flows of
huge industrial ships and the massive amount of frozen fish that they produce and
which is distributed throughout the world. In addition, these huge industrial ships are
putting many small fishers out of business and some are using their boats for other
kind of flows (e.g. transporting illegal immigrants from Africa to Europe).
3. Conflicting Flows. Transplanetary processes not only can complement one
another, but often also conflict with one another (and with much else).In fact, it is
usually these conflicting flows that attract the greatest attention.
4. Reverse flows. In some cases, processes flowing in one direction act back on their
source (and much else).This is what Ulrich Beck has called the boomerang effect. In
Beck’s work the boomerang effect takes the form of, for example, pollution that is
‘‘exported’’ to other parts of the world but then returns to affect the point of origin.

6|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

Assessment:
Activity 1. Formulate your own definitions of globalization using (a) broad and inclusive definitions
and (b) narrow and exclusive definitions. (One definition per category.)
Activity 2. Answer the following questions:
a. Enumerate at least three of the most recent songs you have listened to. Where did
they start? Identify the nationality of the creator and/or artist for each music.
b. What gadgets/devices do you usually use to listen to music?
c. Where are the gadgets/devices made? Where is the company based?
d. How did you access these music? Do you purchase them online or listen to them
through YouTube, Spotify, and other music channels.
e. Create your generalization about globalization.
Activity 3. Analyze the metaphors of globalization and formulate a sample situation in each
metaphor.

7|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

Study Period:

Lesson 2: Globalization Theories

Intended Learning Outcome:

Explain the Globalization Theories
Contrast the homogeneity and heterogeneity theories.
Cite scenarios that reflect the glocalization and grobalization.

Discussion:
Theories see globalization as a process that increases either homogeneity or heterogeneity.
Homogeneity. It refers to the increasing sameness in the world as cultural inputs, economic
factors, and political orientations of societies expand to create common practices, same economies,
and similar forms of government. It is the quality of being similar or uniform. Homogeneity in
culture is often linked to cultural imperialism. This means, a given culture is often linked to cultural
imperialism which a given culture influences other cultures. For example, the dominant religion in
our country is Christianity which was brought to us by the Spaniards. Another example is
Americanization which was defined by Kuisel as “the import by Non-Americans of products,
images, technologies, practices, and behavior that are closely associated with American/Americans.”
In terms of economy, there is recognition of the spread of neoliberalism, capitalism and the market
economy in the world. Global economic crises are also products of homogeneity in economic
globalization. Stiglitz (2002) blamed the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for its “one-size-fits-all”
approach that treats every country in the world as the same. In the end, rich countries become
advantageous in the world economy at the expense of poor countries; leading to increase inequality
among nations. The political realm also suffers homogenization if one takes into account the
emerging similar models of governance in the world.
Heterogeneity. It pertains to the creation of various cultural practices, new economies, and political
groups because of the interaction of elements from different societies in the world. It refers to the
differences because of either lasting differences or of the hybrids or combinations of cultures which
can be produced through the different transplanetary processes. Contrary to cultural imperialism,
heterogeneity in culture is associated with cultural hybridization.
Globalization theory has emerged, as a result of a series of developments internal to social theory,
notably the reaction against such earlier perspectives as modernization theory. Among the defining
characteristics of this theory were its orientation to issues that were of central concern in the West,
the preeminence it accorded to developments there, and the idea that the rest of the world had little
choice but to become increasingly like it (more democratic, more capitalistic, and so on). Other
theories (e.g., world system and dependency theory) emerged in reaction, at least in part, to such a

8|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

positive view of the West (as well as the Northern vs. the Southern Hemisphere) and offered global
perspectives that were critical of it for, among other things, its exploitation of many other parts of
the world. Nevertheless, they retained a focus on the West, albeit a highly critical orientation toward
it. While there are many different versions of globalization theory, there is a tendency in virtually all
of them to shift away from a focus on the West and to examine transnational processes that flow in
many different directions, as well as those that are independent of any single nation or area of the
world.
In his recent overview of globalization theory, Roland Robertson outlined what he considers to be
the key issues in globalization theory. While all are important, three of them lie at the center of this
essay and two of them are closely related to one another. The two interrelated issues are as follows:
“Does global change involve increasing homogeneity or increasing heterogeneity or a mixture of
both?” And “What is the relationship between the local and the global?” These two issues are
tightly linked since the predominance of the local would tend to be associated with heterogeneity
while the dominance of the global would be associated more with homogenization. Whatever the
mix of the local and the global, heterogeneity and homogeneity, the third issue raised by Robertson
remains of great importance: “What drives the globalization process? What is its motor force? The
answer to the last question(s) is highly complex since there is certainly no single driving force, nor is
there a single process of globalization. However, later in this essay, after we have specified our
approach to the globalization process, we will discuss several of the motor forces will concern us
here.
It is clear that to Robertson, and many other students of globalization, the central theoretical issue is
the relationship between the highly interrelated topics of homogeneity heterogeneity and the global-
local. Indeed, Robertson is not only known for his interest in these issues, but for his articulation of
a now-famous concept—glocalization—that emphasizes the integration of the global and the local.
While glocalization is an integrative concept, and Robertson is certainly interested in both sides of
the glocal-global, homogenization-heterogenization continua, his work tends to emphasize the
importance of the glocal and the existence of heterogeneity.
The concept of glocalization gets to the heart of not only Robertson’s views, but also what many
contemporary theorists interested in globalization think about the nature of transnational processes.
Glocalization can be defined as the interpenetration of the global and the local resulting in unique
outcomes in different geographic areas.
The concept of grobalization, a much-needed companion to the notion of glocalization, focuses on
the imperialistic ambitions of nations, corporations, organizations, and the like and their desire, to
impose themselves on various geographic areas. Their main interest is in seeing their power,
influence, and in some cases profits grow throughout the world. Grobalization involves a variety of
subprocesses, three of which—capitalism, Americanization, and McDonaldization—are central
driving forces in grobalization, but also are of particular interest to the authors and of great
significance in the worldwide spread of nothingness.
Glocalization and Grocabalization
Grobalization and glocalization are rooted in competing visions of the contemporary world.
Grobalization is a very modern view emphasizing the growing worldwide ability of,

9|P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

especially, largely capitalistic organizations and modern states to increase their power and
reach throughout the world. Two of the most preeminent modern theories—those of Karl Marx
and Max Weber undergird this perspective. While Marx focused on the capitalistic economic system,
Weber was concerned with the rationalization of not only the economy, but many other sectors of
society in the modern world.
While modern theories like those associated with the Marxian and Weberian traditions are closely
linked to the idea of grobalization, glocalization is more in tune with postmodern social theory and
its emphasis on diversity, hybridity, and independence. In conjunction with local realities, the
globalization of so many commodities and ideas gives communities, groups, and individuals in many
parts of the world an unprecedented capacity to fashion distinctive and ever-changing realities and
identities. Rather than increasing penetration by capitalist firms and the states that support them, or
by rationalized structures, this perspective sees a world of increasing diversity. Although all nations
are likely to be affected by the spread of capitalism and rationalization, they are likely to integrate
both with local realities to produce distinctively glocal phenomena.
Thus, it should come as no surprise that grobalization and glocalization offer very different images
of the impact of transnational processes. After all, they tend to stem from the antithetical bases of
modern and postmodern social theory. Globalization can be analyzed culturally, economically,
politically, or institutionally. At the extremes, in the realm of culture, grobalization can be seen as a
form of transnational expansion of common codes and practices (homogeneity) whereas
glocalization involves the interaction of many global and local cultural inputs to create a kind of
pastiche, or a blend, leading to a variety of cultural hybrids (heterogeneity). The trend toward
homogeneity is often associated with cultural imperialism or to put it another way, the growing
international influence of a particular culture (hence, an aspect of grobalization). There are many
varieties of cultural imperialism, including those that emphasize the role played by American culture,
the West, or core countries.
Theorists who focus on economic factors tend to emphasize their growing importance and
homogenizing effect throughout the world and are therefore in tune with the idea of grobalization.
They generally see globalization as the spread of the market economy throughout many different
regions of the world. While those who focus on economic issues tend to emphasize homogeneity,
some differentiation (heterogeneity) is acknowledged to exist at the margins of the global economy.
Examples include the commodification of local cultures and the existence of flexible specialization
that permits the tailoring of many products to the needs of various local specifications. More
generally, those who emphasize glocalization would argue that the interaction of the global market
with local markets would lead to the creation of unique glocal markets that integrate the demands of
the global market with the realities of the local market.
The following are the essential elements of glocalization:
1. The world is growing more pluralistic. Glocalization theory is exceptionally sensitive to
differences within and between areas of the world. In other words, it emphasizes heterogeneity.
2. Individuals and local groups have great power to adapt, innovate, and maneuver within a
glocalized world. Glocalization theory sees individuals and groups as important and creative agents
who have a great deal of power to shape their own lives.

10 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

3. Social processes are relational and contingent. Globalization provokes a variety of reactions—
ranging from nationalist entrenchment to cosmopolitan embrace—that feedback on and transform
grobalization that produce glocalization.
4. Commodities and the media, arenas, and key forces in cultural change in the late 20th and early
21st centuries are not seen as totally coercive, but rather as providing material to be used in
individual and group creation throughout the glocalized areas of the world. Again, this emphasizes
the power of the agent to use available resources to shape their own unique destinies.
Contrary to the above, grobalization leads to a corresponding set of largely antithetical ideas:
1. The world is growing increasingly similar. Grobalization theory tends to minimize differences
within and between areas of the world. In other words, it emphasizes homogeneity.
2. Individuals and groups have relatively little ability to adapt, innovate, and maneuver within a
grobalized world. Grobalization theory sees larger structures and forces tending to overwhelm the
ability of individuals and groups to create themselves and their worlds. Thus, the agent is not seen as
a strong force.
3. Social processes are largely one-directional and deterministic. Grobalization tends to overpower
the local and limits its ability to act and react, let alone act back on the grobal.
4. Commodities and the media are the key forces and areas of cultural change and they are seen as
largely determining the self and groups throughout the grobalized areas of the world. Again, this
emphasizes their power over the agent whose destiny is largely constricted by the power exerted by
these key forces.
Glocalization
One such concept, is heterogenization, a term that emphasizes the diversity that is characteristic of
glocalization and that stands in stark contrast to the homogenization that can be seen as
accompanying grobalization. Another is hybridization, which emphasizes the mixtures of the global
and the local as opposed to the uniformity associated with grobalization. A hybrid would involve the
combination of two or more elements from different cultures or parts of the world. Among the
examples of hybridization are Brazilian tourists visiting Tokyo to watch Turkish women engage in
Thai boxing, Canadians watching Asian rap performed by a South African band at a London club
owned by a North Korean, and the more mundane experiences of Americans eating such
concoctions as Irish bagels, Chinese tacos, Kosher pizza, and so on. Obviously, the list of such
hybrids is long and growing rapidly with increasing glocalization.
Yet another synonym for glocalization is creolization. The term creole generally refers to people of
mixed race, but it has been extended to the idea of the “creolization of language” involving a
combination of languages that were previously unintelligible to one another. The opposite of
creolization might be conceived of as purification, whereby alternative languages and peoples are
prevented from entering, or driven out if they succeed in gaining entree, in order to maintain the
purity of a language or a race. At its extreme, grobalization involves purification as indigenous
elements are driven out and replaced by purely grobal alternatives. Creolization is often used
interchangeably with hybridization so that the following example could be used to illustrate both

11 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

concepts: “sitting in a [Starbucks] coffee shop in London [they are now ubiquitous there] drinking
Italian espresso served by an Algerian waiter to the strains of the Beach Boys singing.” All of the
above-hybridization, heterogenization, and creolization should give the emphasis on what is meant
by glocalization.
Grobalization
The concept of grobalization, as well as the subprocesses of capitalism, McDonaldization, and
Americanization, are at odds, to some degree, with the thrust of globalization theory-especially
glocalization-that have the greatest cache today. There is a gulf between those who emphasize the
increasing grobal influence of capitalistic, Americanized, and McDonaldized interests and those who
see the world growing increasingly pluralistic and indeterminate. At the risk of being reductive, this
divide amounts to a difference in vision between those who see a world that is becoming
increasingly grobalized—more capitalistic, Americanized, rationalized, codified, and restricted—and
those who view it as growing increasingly glocalized-more diverse, effervescent, and free.
Furthermore, even though each of these will be discussed separately, it is clear that while they are
not reducible to one another, they are highly interrelated.

• Capitalism. No force has contributed more to globalization in general, and grobalization in

particular, both historically and present-day, than capitalism. As Marx fully understood over
a century ago, capitalist firms must continue to expand or they will die, and when
possibilities for high profits within a given nation decline, capitalistic businesses are forced to
seek profits in other nations. Such firms are led to explore and exploit possibilities for profit
in increasingly remote and lesser developed regions of the world. Thus, except perhaps for
the earliest forms, capitalistic businesses have always had global ambitions; they have always
been interested in grobalization and contributed to glocalization.
• McDonalization. This is the process by which the principles of the fast-food restaurant are
coming to dominate more and more sectors of American society and an increasing number
of other societies throughout the world. It fits under the heading of grobalization because it
involves the growing power of this model and its increasing influence throughout the world.
The model’s basic principles are efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control,
particularly through the substitution of nonhuman for human technology, as well as the
seemingly inevitable irrationalities of rationality that accompany those process. Thus, the
process of McDonaldization, or at least its forerunner (increasing formal rationality and
bureaucratization), obviously predates McDonald’s as an institution. However, that franchise
is seen as an exemplar (the bureaucracy was the model in Weber’s approach) of the
contemporary phase of rationalization. While the fast-food restaurant is the paradigm of this
process, the process has by now affected most, if not all, social structures and institutions in
the United States, as well as most nations (at least those that are reasonably developed
economically) in the world. Thus, McDonaldization is restricted neither to the fast-food
industry nor to the United States. Rather, it is a wide-ranging and far-reaching process of
global (even grobal) change.
• Americanization. Americanization can be defined as the propagation of American ideas,
customs, social patterns, industry, and capital around the world. It is a powerful
unidirectional process stemming from the United States that tends to overwhelm competing

12 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

processes (e.g., Japanization) as well as the strength of local (and glocal) forces that might
resist, modify, or transform American models into hybrid forms. Moreover, the notion of
Americanization is tied to a particular nation—the United States—but it has a differential
impact on many specific nations. It can be subsumed under the heading of grobalization
because it envisions a growth in American influence in all realms throughout the world.

Assessment:
Activity 1. Explain comprehensively the following:
1. Are societies in the world becoming more similar (homogenous) or more different
(heterogeneous)? Why?
2. Why do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of homogenization of culture? How
about heterogenization?
3. Does global change involve increasing homogeneity or increasing heterogeneity or a mixture
of both?”
4. Cite two scenarios in each concept reflecting the glocalization and grobalization.
5. In your own perspective, what drives the globalization process?

13 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

Study Period:

Lesson 3: Origins and History of Globalization

Intended Learning Outcome:

Describe the origins and history of Globalization.
Survey the changes along the years in globalization.

Discussion:
Hardwired.
According to Chanda(2007), it is our basic human need to make our lives better that made
globalization possible. One can trace the beginning of globalization from our Ancestors in Africa
who walked out from the said continent in the late Ice Age. This long journey finally led them to all-
known continents today, roughly after 50,000 years.

He mentioned that commerce, religion, politics, and warfare are the “urges” of people toward a
better life. These are respectively connected to four aspects of globalization and they can be traced
all throughout history: trade, missionary work, adventures, and conquest.

He argued that “globalization stems, among other things, from a basic human urge to seek a better
and more fulfilling life”. This leads him to trace “ the initial globalization of the human species, [to]
when in the late Ice Age, a tiny group of our ancestors walked out of Africa in search of better food
and security. In fifty thousand years of wandering along ocean coasts and chasing game across
Central Asia, they finally settled on all the continents. ”

He focused on four specific aspects of globalization that relate to a basic “urge” for a better life –
trade (or commerce), missionary work (religion), adventures and conquest (politics and warfare). All
of these are key aspects of globalization, all can be traced to early human history, and all, as well as
much else, will be dealt with in this volume. However, Chanda’s view that globalization is hardwired
into humans is not the one accepted here since we argue that we are now living in a distinctive
global age.
Cycles.
The second perspective is that globalization is a long - term cyclical process. It is not only difficult in
this view to find a single point of origin, but the effort is largely irrelevant since there have long been
cycles of globalization and it is those cycles that are of utmost importance, not any particular phase
or point of origin (Scholte 2005 ). This view, like Chanda’s, tends to contradict the idea that we live
today in a new “global age.” Rather, this suggests that there have been other global ages in the past
and that what now appears to be a new global age, or the high point of such an age, is destined to
contract and disappear in the future. Eventually, it will be replaced by a new cycle in the
globalization process.

14 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

Globalization is a long-term cyclical process and thus, finding its origin will be a daunting task
(Scholte 2005). What is important, are the cycles globalization has gone through.
Epoch.
Therborn’s (2000) six great epochs of globalization. These are called “waves” and each has its own
origin. Today’s globalization is not unique if this is that case. The difference of this view from the
second view (cycles) is that it does not treat epochs as returning. The following are the sequential
occurrence of the epochs:
1. Globalization of religion (4th-7th Centuries)
2. European colonial conquests (late 15th century)
3. Intra-European wars (late 18th – early 19th centuries)
4. Heyday of European imperialism (mid-19th Century to 1918)
5. Post-World II period
6. Post-Cold War Period
From this, Therborn concludes that globalization today is not unique. However, his historical or
epochal view also rejects the cyclical view of globalization. Past epochs are not returning, at least in
their earlier form, at some point in the future.
Events
A fourth view is that instead of cycles or great epochs, one can point to much more specific events
that can be seen as the origin of globalization and give us a good sense of its history. In fact, there
are many such possible points of origin of globalization, some of which are:

• The Romans and their far - ranging conquests in the centuries before Christ (Gibbon 1998).
• The rise and spread of Christianity in the centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire. •
The spread of Islam in the seventh century and beyond.
• The travels of the Vikings from Europe to Iceland, Greenland, and briefly to North
America in the ninth through the eleventh centuries as examples of, and landmarks in,
globalization.
• Trade in the Middle Ages throughout the Mediterranean.
• The activities of the banks of the twelfth - century Italian city - states.
• The rampage of the armies of Ghengis Khan into Eastern Europe in the thirteenth century.
• European traders like Marco Polo and his travels later in the thirteenth century along the
Silk Road to China. (Interestingly, there is now discussion of the development of an “ iron
silk road ” involving a linked railroad network through a variety of Asian countries that at
least evokes the image of the lure of Marco Polo ’ s Silk Road.)
• The “discovery of America” by Christopher Columbus in 1492. Other important voyages
of discovery during this time involved Vasco Da Gama rounding the Cape of Good Hope
in 1498 and the circumnavigation of the globe completed in 1522 by one of Ferdinand
Magellan ’ s ships (Rosenthal 2007 : 1237 – 41).
• European colonialism, especially in the nineteenth century.
• The early twentieth - century global Spanish flu pandemic.

15 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

• The two World Wars in the first half of the twentieth century. It is also possible to get even
more specific about the origins of globalization, especially in recent years. A few rather
eclectic recent examples include:
• 1956 – The first transatlantic telephone cable.
• 1958 – While it was possible to fly across the Atlantic in the 1930s on seaplanes that made
several stops along the way, the big revolution in this area was the arrival of transatlantic
passenger jet travel, with the first flight being Pan Am ’ s flight from New York to London
(with a stopover for refueling required in Newfoundland).
• 1962 – The launch of the satellite Telstar and soon thereafter the first transatlantic
television broadcasts.
• 1966 – The transmission from a satellite of the picture of the earth as a single location, not
only leading to a greater sense of the world as one place (increased global consciousness, but
also of great importance to the development of the global environmental movement.
• 1970 – The creation of the Clearing House Interbank Payment System (CHIPS), making
global electronic (wire) transfers of funds (now $2 trillion a day) possible among fi nancial
institutions.
• 1977 – The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) came
into being, making more global transfers of funds possible by individuals.
• 1988 – The founding of the modern Internet based on Arpanet (which was created in
1969). While it took the Internet several years to take off, this was a turning point in global
interconnection for billions of people.
• 2001 – The terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers in New York and on the Pentagon in
Washington, as well as later terrorist attacks on trains in Madrid (March 11, 2004) and
London (July 7, 2005), among others. The following is a specific example in support of the
idea that 9/11 can be taken as a point of origin for globalization (at least of higher
education): “Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, internationalization has
moved high on the agenda at most universities, to prepare students for a globalized world,
and to help faculty members stay up - to - date in their disciplines”.
This, of course, brings us very close to the present day and it is possible that other specific events
(especially the Great Recession which began in late 2007) will almost certainly come to be associated
by future observers with the birth, or further development, of globalization.
Broader, More Recent Changes
The fifth view focuses on broader, but still recent, changes. There is a sense in this view that a sea
change occurred in the last half of the twentieth century. Three of these momentous changes have
been identified by scholars as the point of origin of globalization as it exists today:

• The emergence of the United States as the global power in the years following WW
II. The US not only projected its military power throughout the world (Korea in the early
1950s; disastrously in Vietnam in the 1960s and early 1970s), it extended its reach in the
economic realm as it became the dominant industrial power when WW II decimated most of
its competitors militarily (Germany, Japan) and/or economically (the Axis powers as well as
Allies such as France and Great Britain). Many other aspects of America’s global reach either

16 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

accompanied these changes or soon followed. Among them were the diplomatic clout of the
US government, the reach of the US media, the power of Hollywood, and so on. Such a
view closely aligns globalization with the idea of Americanization.
• The emergence of multinational corporations (MNCs). While the world’s great
corporations can be traced back to the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries in, for
example, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States, they were initially largely associated
with their nations of origin and did the vast majority of their business within those countries.
However, over time, those corporations did more and more business internationally. In so
doing, they were following Marx and Engels’ dictum that because of stagnant or declining
profits capitalism had to expand into international markets or die. For example, the once
great American automobile companies – Ford and General Motors – not only originated in
the US, but focused, at least initially, on selling into the American market and most, if not all,
of the component parts were produced by them or sub - contractors in the US. Of course,
they did import raw materials of various kinds (and they did sell their automobiles overseas,
especially in Europe), but in the main, the bulk of their business was done in the US.
Furthermore, the vast majority of top executives, employees, and investors was American.
However, that began to change over the course of the twentieth century as these
corporations exported more of their automobiles to other parts of the world, opened
factories in other countries to sell cars under their brand names (or others), targeted their
products to the distinctive needs (e.g. for smaller, more fuel - efficient cars) of those
countries, and more recently began to move more of their automobile production aimed at
the US market to other countries, either in factories of their own or in the factories of sub -
contractors in those countries. In these and other ways, Ford and General Motors have
become multinational corporations and MNCs are, because of their very nature, inherently
part of globalization. Indeed, MNCS are not only involved in globalization but this process
is internalized into the organization as all sorts of global flows (parts, people, money) occur
within the corporation. The case of the other of the one - time “Big Three” American
automobile companies – Chrysler – is even more striking in this regard. Initially, Chrysler
followed the same course as Ford and GM and became increasingly multi - national.
However, Chrysler has long been the most marginal of the Big Three and, famously, had to
be bailed out in 1979 by a controversial loan from the US government. However, that was
only of short - term help and in 1998 Chrysler was taken over by the German manufacturer
of Mercedes - Benz automobiles which changed Chrysler ’ s name to DaimlerChrysler AG.
This clearly represented the formation of an MNC, although Daimler - Benz itself (as well as
Chrysler) was a multinational corporation before that, since, among other things, it actively
sold its automobiles in the US as well as in many other parts of the world. However, this
marriage was short - lived and Daimler sold off its interest in Chrysler in 2007. In order to
survive, Chrysler has been forced into a multinational merger with Fiat, the Italian
automobile manufacturer. Of course, American and German automobile companies are no
longer the world leaders in that industry. Rather, the leaders are Japanese companies,
especially Toyota (although it has been diminished by recent problems with quality, resulting,
at times, in fatal accidents), Nissan, and Honda (with Korean companies [e.g. Hyundai - Kia]
showing global strength, as well). However, these companies are today themselves MNCs as
they not only sell cars in the US (and in many other nations), but also produce in factories

17 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

built in various parts of North America. The case of today’s automobile manufacturers is just
one example of national corporations that have become MNCs and therefore much more
clearly and importantly integral parts of globalization.
• The demise of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. It could be argued that
globalization is even more recent and did not truly begin until the fall of the “Iron Curtain”
and the Soviet Union in 1991. With those events, the division of the world into mainly
“capitalist” and “communist” spheres rapidly eroded as did all sorts of barriers that existed
between them. Major parts of the world were opened for the first time since the early
twentieth century to all sorts of global flows – immigration, tourism, media, diplomacy, and
especially the capitalistic economic transactions of MNCs and other businesses. The global
processes that had spread throughout most of the “free” world before 1991 flooded into the
now independent states of the old Soviet Union, especially Russia, and most of its allies.
Vestiges of communism exist as of this writing, especially in Cuba, North Korea, and, at
least nominally, in China. Cuba remains, in the main, outside of global capitalism, largely
because of the US embargo against trading with Cuba, in force since 1962 and expanded and
codified several times since then. However, the embargo itself is a manifestation of
globalization – the US setting up barriers in order to limit or halt the fl ow of trade with
Cuba and to inhibit or prevent other nations from around the world from trading with Cuba.
China, of course, is becoming a, if not soon the, major force in global capitalism even
though the government remains communist, at least in name (Fishman 2006). In any case,
China is actively involved in globalization not only economically, but in many other realms
as well (the 2008 Olympics in Beijing is a good example). The perspective adopted in this
book on the current global age is most in accord with this focus on broader changes that
began in the last half of the twentieth century. While all of the other perspectives deal with
global processes, they were far more limited in geographic scope and far less extensive and
intensive than the global processes that took off in the late twentieth century. Thus the
perspective adopted here is that globalization is a relatively recent development with its
major points of origin occurring after the close of WW II.

Assessment:
Activity 1: Answer each item completely and comprehensively. (10 points each item)
1. How was the progress of globalization over the years?
2. For instance, if the Philippines is part of the United States, are there any changes in terms of
influence in our living and economic status? Why?
3. Make a slogan about globalization and explain it.

18 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3

 Module 1: Concepts of Globalization

Lesson 4
Study period:
Follow the instructions accordingly.
1. Cite an article that emphasizes issues, debates, and controversies about globalization.
2. Read and analyze the article.
3. Make a summary and implication.
4. Upon completion, attached the article cited with the formulated summary and implication.

Note:
Summary [The summary should fit a letter size paper (8.5 x11) in a double spaced format.]
Implication [The implication should fit a letter size paper (8.5 x11) in a double spaced format.]
Font Style and Size: Cambria, 12.

19 | P a g e THE CONTEMPORARY WORLDWITH ASEAN INTEGRATION-BSED 3