Synthesis Of Nations: Does Globalization Affect Our Identity?

The Synthesis of Nations

Views on how globalization affects our identity range from, good to bad. Globalization is described as the process by which businesses or other organizations develop international influence or start operating on an international scale. To elaborate, globalization results from the removal of barriers between national economies to encourage the flow of goods, services, capital, and labor. Globalization has both a positive and a negative impact on identity. It can either promote aspects of identity, but it can also diminish them. Language can either be encouraged and promoted, or it can be stopped and destroyed by globalization. The central theme illustrated in sources I, II, and III, is how globalization affects everyone

differently, people have differents points of view on globalization. Furthermore, globalization can be good or bad, but we can impact it, by supporting small companies, speaking different languages, and making our own opinions.

Based on the findings in source one, it can be argued that, globalization demolishes national, and small companies.

Then again, it does not affect the international companies once so ever. The author is proposing to us, the readers, that depending on your place in the world, you will have a different opinion on globalization, also it will impact your identity differently. For instance, workers of “apple” would agree with globalization and their identities would be affected positively. On the contrary, workers of “home vegetables” would not agree with globalization, their identities would be affected negatively. Almost every business has been affected by globalization during the last few decades. However small companies are highly affected by globalization, in ways such as, the way they make money and the way they produce their products. Bigger companies have cheaper work, so individuals usually choose them when starting a new job. Big companies are now moving into third world countries, small businesses are targeted by this. Perhaps the big companies are trying to wipe out the smaller ones, so they can make more money. Considering marginalization, it can be concluded that that us, the consumers have placed national businesses in a place of less importance. It has been shown that, globalization negatively affects small companies. The author is proving that, by having a globalization represented by a huge foot, walk all over and demolish the small companies, and yet the

bigger companies are safe in the sky, flying over top everything else.
Gwynne Dyer, the author of source II focuses on the issue of the way languages are disappearing rapidly.

As well as, how globalization is changing us one culture at a time, “one culture after another, we are all being fed into an industrial strength blender”. Each culture affirms their identity by speaking their languages, and doing culture practices. What Gwynne is trying to prove is how can individuals affirm their identity, and culture, but also avoid being thrown into what he calls the industrial strength blender. Often the way people affirm identity, is by reclaiming what has been lost. Such as the Haisla peoples totem pole, it was taken from them in 1927, and they reclaimed it to promote their culture. Our world's linguistic identity rate is dropping enormously, and more languages are becoming endangered. We, as a group need to focus on this issue and give awareness to people who don not know what is going on. We are forgetting about the hundreds of little languages and only have our attention on the major fifty or so. Gwynne Dyer, more than likely does not agree with what globalization is doing to culture identity, he wants a change, and we are the people who need to change it. Cultural revitalization is the process of promoting people's individuals, collective, and cultural identity, if people knew how to do this, we, as a team can bring back many forgotten traditions, identities, and

languages.

The author of source III, President Jimmy Carter, is agreeing with globalization for us, the rich people. On the other hand, he is disagreeing with it for the un wealthy people. Jimmy Carter’s quote on globalization highlights its effect on both the majority and minority. It talks about how the often stated positive aspects of globalization only affects a small proportion of the world, only one-third. He says that globalization is usually defined as a good thing by “rich people” who have access to things like “cellphones” and “Internet”. Basically, the problems of the majority of the world’s population is being marginalized and not being taken seriously. In our world, technological globalization is yet to truly globalize due to many reasons including poverty and lack of education. The term “digital divide” is defined as the division between those with access to up to date technology and those who do not, and that is what Carter is talking about in his quote. Communication affects the quality of globalization enormously, because us, the rich can afford all these new technologies, so or identities will be superior compared to the un wealthy individuals in third world countries.The path that globalization takes is usually determined by the influential and wealth who are disconnected from the true state of the world. Therefore it can be concluded that, the quantity and quality of media and technology affect how we perceive the quality of globalization and identity.

To sum up source I,II, and III, they all have a connection based on that, globalization is good for one group of people, but then again bad for the other group, the sources prove that it is harming certain people in specific ways. Considering, all three sources, it can be concluded that, the ideas coalesce. The authors are neither saying that globalization is good nor bad, they just state that people with different backgrounds, and different identities will be affected in a various number of ways. In these three sources there has been evidence of, identity, language, marginalization, endangered languages, affirm identity, promoting identity, cultural revitalization, digital divide, and plenty more. Furthermore, globalization can be good or bad, but we can impact it, by supporting small companies, speaking different languages, and making our own opinions. Also globalization affects everyone differently, all people have differents points of view on globalization.