Globalisation as Westernisation

As such, globalisation is seen as a specific kind of universalization in which the social structures of modernity (such as capitalism, industrialism, rationalism, urbanism, etc.) are dispersed over the world, eradicating pre-existing cultures and local self-determination in the process.

This approach of globalisation is frequently used to describe colonisation, Americanization, “westoxification,” and the imperialism of McDonald’s and CNN.

However, claiming that globalisation and westernisation have interacted is one thing, and equating the two trends is quite another.

Because, aside from the current state of globalisation, modernity and western civilization have taken many other forms. Moreover, globalisation might theoretically go in nonWestern directions (such as Buddhist, Islamic, or potential post-modern globalizations).

Furthermore, it is far from certain that globalisation is inherently imperialist given the existence of both emancipatory and exploitative transworld actors and processes as well as social movements.

In any event, the histories of colonisation, modernisation, and westernisation are considerably older than those of current globalisation. It is possible to study current forms of globality as a specific facet, stage, and subset of modernity.

According to this interpretation, a definition of globalisation would have to outline the unique characteristics of global modernity.

However, westernisation and globalisation are not synonymous in this perspective.

In conclusion, much of the discussion about globalisation has been analytically redundant. In fact, a well-crafted understanding of globalisation could provide important insight on these issues in the context of today.

However, treating globalisation as the same as internationalisation, liberalisation, universalization, or westernisation is not practical. Although internationalisation, liberalisation, universalization, and westernisation are related to and overlap with globalisation, they are not the same as any of these earlier ideas or movements.

But what these comparisons essentially open us to are the various ways in which globalisation is supposedly mis-perceived today.

Rather than using it as atool to blur boundaries, through these “alternative” approaches, globalisation is perceived as a generic way of development. What globalisation could essentially mean is an approach that stands for a more conscious, holistic growth as we inhabit this planet Earth as one large enclosed arena.

By doing this, we not only merely repeat previously known information, but we also miss a significant opportunity to understand and respond to certain important contemporary circumstances.