Cultural Diversity Faces No Threat From Globalisation By Finaz Daniel

Bandar Seri Begawan - The history and concept of the term culture and the question of how it will be transformed by globalisation were comprehensively explored in a session conducted by Frank Fanselow during the National Training Session on the Use of Information Technologies in the Preservation of Cultural Diversity held recently at Seameo Voctech.

In his presentation, Fanselow, a lecturer at the Department of Sociology-Anthropology at UBD, traced the origin of the word culture through as far back as the 1500s, when it was referred to as the cultivation of human potential. According to Fanselow, until the 19th century, the term culture was restricted to what we would refer to today as high culture, namely the fine arts of aristocracy.

During this time, cultural differences were conceived as steps leading from a primitive state to civilisation, from backwardness to progress. Although this view would be perceived as backward thinking today, there are many people who would not hesitate to make similar value judgments about entire cultures, said Fanselow.

The moderator gave the example of the lack of concern for the survival of the Penan or Dayak cultures which in turn show the lack of realisation that the disappearance of even the most remote culture is not only a loss for the bearers of that culture but also for humanity as a whole as it deprives us of one way of knowing the world.

The presentation continued with the growth of nationalism, when the concept of culture became appropriated by the nation state and became more or less identical with national identity.

From here, Fanselow showed that it was developed by anthropologists who fashioned a new concept of culture as a universal human characteristic which asserted the uniqueness of each culture and its right to be respected on equal status with any other culture.

The second half of the session focused on globalisation and its challenges.

Fanselow goes on to explain that in the globalised world, everything is on the move: capital, commodities, people and ideas. In light of this, governments become bystanders whose control over these flows becomes tenous.

Globalisation challenges established institutions, identities and ideologies. Governments are in a much weaker position now than 50 years ago to regulate their economies, said Fanselow.

Global currency markets, not governments determine the value of the currencies issued by the governments. Global capital markets, not governments determine investment flows in and out of national economies. Global commodity markets, not the governments determine the price of raw materials and manufactured products countries trade.

However, globalisation is not just an economic phenomenon, it is also a social and cultural one, and he reminded the participants.

As the means of communication evolve from oral culture, to the written and then printed word, and now to electronic means of communication, culture too becomes transformed. Anthropologists no longer talk about folk culture and high culture but about consumer culture, popular culture and cyber culture.

In a globalised world, the nation-state seems too small to solve humanity's big problems, such as global warming, environmental destruction and international crime, and too big to solve the small problems at a community level, Fanselow continued.

With the result of this, it is increasingly challenged internally by localising forces and externally by globalising forces.

In conclusion to his presentation, Fanselow reassured the listeners that we don't have to fear a future world where cultural diversity will disappear and we all will become the same.

Cultural globalisation does not mean the convergence of all cultures and the emergence of a single global culture, he said. The conditions of human existence on earth are simply too diverse and complex to allow for the emergence of a single culture to fit all conditions, he added. He further reminded the participants that the preservation of culturally diversity is not only a moral issue but a pragmatic one in that it helps societies to more successfully interact with each other.

Preserving cultural diversity by conserving them in a museum or as a form of folklore is to condemn them to irrelevance, said the lecturer. No human culture has ever existed in isolation from external influences, he said. To survive, a culture needs to be given the opportunity to respond creatively to challenges. -- Courtesy of The Brunei Times

Click Here To Have Your Say On This Story

Brudirect.com News

Brunei's Fastest Growing Website with