Globalization: The Myth of Cultural Imperialism

This is 2014. There is technological progress every day. The world is connected through the Internet. Countries that were previously protected can see what is going on elsewhere in the world. Other countries in the world can see what is going on in these countries. The idea bounces off on a needle machine. People such as India, Pakistan, Israel and Germany know which movie stars and fashion are in the United States, Britain, France, and Japan. But they are not just movies and fashion.

New colonialism or new imperialism is not a direct military control (imperialism) or indirect political control (hegemony) but capitalism, globalization and cultural empire to influence developing countries It is use of principle. These issues were discussed by Jean-Paul Sartre (1964) and Noam Chomsky (1979). Dependency theory is the theoretical account of economic new colonialism. It proposes that the world economic system will include rich countries with the core and poor countries in the vicinity. Economic new colonialism attracts human resources and natural resources of poor countries to the economies of rich countries. Poverty in neighboring countries is claiming to be the result of how they are integrated into the global economic system. Since the theory of dependence is derived from the analysis of economic inequality of Marxism by the world economic system, undeveloped marginal areas are a direct result of the development of the center.

When discussing the topic of globalization, the term "cultural imperialism" is often created. This popular 'debate on cultural imperialism' is concerned with the view that mainstream culture (usually American and Western culture) refuses other culturally weak culture (80). People can specifically recognize the concept of imperialism, including global consumer goods such as food, clothing, music. It also reflects how several major Western institutions such as industrialism and urbanism are widespread globally (91). Tomlinson's article focuses on the concept of cultural imperialism, but the use of this term is important. He made two general observations. First, he talks about "cultural non-localization" to explain how modern globalization culture (western superiority) is experienced as their own (regional) culture. This pointed out the modernity of the world as "no land" and "eccentricity" (95). It seems like a culture without people; it is out of territory