Hi folks – for Monday, November 23rd, please read the following:
- Davis, Mike. Planet of the Slums, Chapters 1 & 2 (I’m having scanner problems, so you’ll have to view/read on google books – and there are a few pages missing, but most of it is there; I’m most interested in you getting the overall picture of poverty that Davis paints for us (particularly in relation to globalization trends, outsourcing, economics, etc.). For those presenting this material, there is more than enough to work with, still – (I think only like 6 pages total are missing from the 50 pages in these two chapters). And you don’t have to cover all the material, but rather focus in on a few salient points.
- Thomlinson, John. Globalization and Culture, Chapters 1 & 3—available on Blackboard.
Advertisement
November 23, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Blog response on human trafficking:
While the world is trying to unify for a cause, globalization, the internationally applied process, had actually facilitated the growth of child pornography, sex tourism, and even the spreading of myths in curing HIV/AIDS by having sex with virgin, all targeting children. Millions of tourist are drawn to Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand etc partially is due to the curiosity advocated by globalization. Sex, violence, culture, and people are commodified as objects and promoted through the channel of the global network, the internet. Globalization is actually not doing such a good job in this aspect.
The problem is the lack of political involvement and social protecting for the weaks (women and children). Not just in Nepal and India that human trafficking is taking a toll on the population, the rest of the world, including the US is also part of the system. The difference is whether one would or would not use drastic measures in preventing the crime from reoccuring.
Up to this point in time, I think the only solution to the problem is the direct intervention of the UN through UN military and officials. An agreement between nations should be made, in which the terms must allow the UN / UNICEF to carry out their mission in international sovereignty without the interference of the local government. Countries involved with child trafficking must make a revision in their political policy, placing child trafficking at the top of priority agenda. Corruption must be review and hopefully eradicate to avoid infiltration of criminals of child trafficking into the administrative force. Education for the public is necessary in raising public awareness about the issue, facing the sexual context of the problem and approaching it with direct measures. A lot more funding is needed for the project, the $1million grant offered to Cambodia during Bush administration is helping, but so little compare to the number of people in need. At the bottom line, poverty is still the deeply rooted cause which require international attention. Drastic action should be in the forms of food security, shelter, and guarantee of protection from the government. Otherwise, one brothel could be captured, but another one will soon replacing it place.
November 23, 2009 at 2:10 pm
While reading The Planet of the Slums, it was hard to really track down the author’s main thesis in the first two chapters. The account seems more informative and provides us with facts to shock and question. I think he mostly wants the rest of the world, probably western parts, to see how others live. He does take shots at the IMF and their restructuring programs imposed on developing countries, which push the citizens too hard and lead them to more poverty. Throughout the various statistics on the growth of cities and by consequence slums all over the third world, good points are brought up. It seemed like an extension of Harvey’s book at times, but more on the social and cultural effects neoliberalism can have. At one point in history towns used to undergo industrialization and would become urban as a result. Now, cities are enlarged and slums are created overnight through migrations of people from the rural to the urban. Instead of arriving in great cities with job opportunities for all, people are arriving to already existing run-down “shantytowns” that have an unsustainable population. And increasingly it’s becoming that people do not have to make a move. Their own villages are slowly becoming urbanized as well. People who have grown up farming can wake up one day to see a highway being built through their town and they are forced to adjust without any voice against the action. In addition wars across the world leave countries with more and more displaced people. Davis says these people don’t have homes or skills and are easily swayed into forms of violence such as gang activities. This ties back to the documentary, The Day my God Died. Girls from Nepal and India are sometimes sold into the sex slave industry by regular people like their neighbors who want to make money. Sex trafficking is not limited to these two countries, its happening everywhere in the world. Mostly the film depicts the ways people can turn to cruel means just to make money and profits off the expense of others. This is analogous to some practices of neoliberalism. Though it’s not the same extent, factory workers are forced into their jobs and can feel tied as if they have no other choice. In the age of capitalism, everything is commodified and in turn dehumanized.
As Davis mentions at one point, though we usually expect cities to be made of glass and steel with skyscrapers lining the streets, the reality shows huts and rundown tenement housing. This further demonstrates one of the contradictions of neoliberalism. Though it promises economic prosperity and a way to elevate one’s status in life, it is very difficult if not impossible for better living conditions when slums are where you’re born into. Another point that is brought up is the possibility of the world being taken over by cities. He talks about megacities of over 8 million people and now hypercities of more than 20 million and just the sheer growth of it all. Are these “gigantic concentrations of poverty” sustainable he questions? It is unlikely that cities will completely take over the world, and not an inch of rural space will be left? But before even considering this possibility, it seems more pressing to deal with the already existing problems. Even government officials of certain countries were unsure of poverty levels in their nation when questioned. There are many serious problems at stake and many are unprepared to deal with them.
As for Tomlinson, the way the concepts of connectivity and proximity were explained through the story of air travel made a lot of sense. He says the achievements of globalization are realized through how easily the adjustment is made from point A to point B. If people feel at ease in a new environment its probably because the culture is very similar to their own culture. However, he makes a point to state that airports are created to have a feel of uniformity to make adjustments easier. Yet most tourist don’t enter into the real culture outside the terminal and see how the local live, they mostly stay in areas they are familiar with. However, I think cultural shocks can be experienced anywhere, once you enter into a new territory. You can arrive in a foreign country and eat McDonalds for the whole trip but this does not mean the local culture is ignored. There are still language barriers and there are sure to be cultural experiences at every turn. Even when I crossed the border to go to Canada, a country many jokingly say to be the 51st state of the U.S. because of its proximity, there are still changes to be seen. The usage of the metric system is one of them. It’s pretty strange to see signs telling you the speed limit in kilometers, which is a system most Americans would not be familiar with. Even when traveling within the borders of the U.S., there are numerous cultural changes to be seen, which proves that culture is far from being homogenized.
Though Tomlinson writes a lot about this supposed connectivity that is taking the world by a storm, he makes it clear that this does not mean the world is becoming one. I liked how he made sure to make this point. It reminded me of the very first reading for this class by Friedman who was all about the playing field being leveled and the world being flat. Obviously this can’t be true because the same opportunities don’t exist everywhere and they probably never will in my lifetime. (Davis did note something along the lines of Africa not fully beginning to overcome poverty until the late 2100s). Tomlinson’s main objective seems to be exploring how cultures can start to become similar but he tries not to make generalizations about it all. I do agree about the concept of peoples’ fates being bound to a single global frame. Culture matters for globalization because of the consequences of ordinary actions. Anyone’s decision to consume something or not consume another has definite results on the people who produce products abroad. As all the other readings for this class, from Steingart to Klein point out, we are all connected in a way like never before and consequently have a bigger global responsibility to uphold.
November 23, 2009 at 3:18 pm
A Brief/Cliché/Tree-Hugging Rant on Tomlinson
I appreciated the humanitarian tone in this work by Tomlinson. He brings up commonly shared environmental issues such as global warming, and puts great emphasis on the individual experience and the impact of that single individual. “ Local experience has to be raised to the horizon of a ‘single word’ of we are to understand it, and local practices and lifestyles increasingly need to be examined and evaluated in terms of their global consequences.” (pg,12) He points out that the most commonly used definitions of globalization, those based on economic terms, are too narrow, suggesting that the majority of people do not factor themselves and their personal lives into their objective observation of globalization. The example of the airplane as a time capsule is a beautiful analogy of this:
“When we board them we enter a self contained and independent time regime designed to remove almost entirely our experience of ultra-high speed movement through the air. It is only when we occasionally look out the window and catch a glimpse of the coastline that we may fleetingly grasp the vast tracts of distance we are actually passing over. The sense of enormity of this space, linking quickly to discomforting thoughts of our vulnerability, probably discourages us from dwelling on this external reality.” (pg. 4)
Most worldly problems are enormously vast, seemingly impossible for one person so influence. Other issues we CAN influence within our own sphere of existence. I am so tired of meeting Global Affairs students who bitch and preach and bitch about what is going on in the rest of the world, when taking a look into their personal/educated flights, they too are hypocritical, INACTIVE pawns in this mess. Even though they have a good idea of what’s happening out the window and on the ground, they’re still flying around in the air. I am personally disgusted by my own ignorance/laziness on certain areas of my life which I should hold a more prominent sense of social responsibility. I challenge everyone to make, even the very smallest, significant and altruistic change in their lives. Get out your time capsule.
November 23, 2009 at 5:15 pm
The documentary we watched last week in class was extremely shocking. Sex/human trafficking is not something we think of on a daily basis. We know it goes on but don’t realize to what extent or that it even happens in the United States on the level that it does. The movie showed only one brothel, which was the world’s largest, in India. It was disturbing to know that young girls get pulled into this life and live in the horrible conditions that were described. Girls and women are raped and beaten with poor living conditions and little food to live off of. The pimps or madams have no sympathy for the girls because they are trying to make a profit for themselves. Not only do the women suffer from the rapes and beatings but also from STDs and HIV/AIDS. The documentary focused a lot on this issue and how most of the women will contract this sickness and that for those women there is no way for themselves to protect themselves.
I don’t believe that enough attention is put on this issue and through the technology and influence of globalization this issue should be more present and be brought to the public’s attention on a regular basis. Doing this might even bring people to take action and bring justice to what occurs in these brothels.
The video mentioned that some of the sex trafficked refugees are trying to educate others about what happened to them and to try to prevent others from having the same fate that they did. This is a start but more needs to be done by the government and police. Though this also causes another problem because there is a lot of corruption within the police force and as long as they get paid they pretend it doesn’t go on. This is one thing that really bothers me, that in developing countries there is no trust with the police, the people who are supposed to be protecting citizens. When raids are made many of the women and girls won’t go with real police officers because they believe that it is a trick. This was heart breaking to watch as girls denied the treatment they went through on a daily basis, when in reality they wanted to escape the hell that they were in but were too scared. It was nice to know that there are people out there who take action and try to stop and prevent human and sex trafficking but more needs to be done.
Though the documentary only focused on one brothel in India it would have been interesting to see a more global perspective on it and how much really goes on around the world. I realize that the conditions are more or less the same, horrible, but to see what steps other countries are taking to prevent this type of human rights violation. Also, I would like to know more also about what goes on in the U.S. since it isn’t something we think too much about. Before watching the documentary I never thought of human trafficking going on in the states we live in and that is kind of a scary thought to think about. I’m glad we watched this video as it opened up my eyes to what happens around the world and to the extent that bad happens. For the girls and women that were able to escape, it was nice to see that they were trying to make a difference and help out others but it was also very sad to see that so many are left behind and forgotten as they are trapped in a horrific life.
November 23, 2009 at 6:12 pm
testing
November 23, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Planet of the Slums bought out so many emotions for me: angry, frustration, disbelief, and specifically a burst of clarity when the name of Malthus was mentioned. While studying philosophy and debate, Malthus always fascinated me. Without any regard for socio-economic class, the individual, or the implications on society, he was able to write about the death of masses as “needed”. Many arguments have been made for population control, but none have addressed WHO is going to fall prey to famine, disease, and death.
What this piece suggests through a plethora of of statistics is that social darwinism will be the deciding factor in this “natural” population control. The poor from the underdeveloped, non-industrialized world seem to be the ones who are going to have to fight against those in upper socio-economic classes, almost as Marx predicted, but Malthus believes they will lose and ultimately die.
Another book about population control, Ishmael, also points to the poor and underprivileged in Africa, Asia, and South America as the casualties to this purported need to control population. I
I have MAJOR liberal, “bleeding-heart” problems with this idea. I believe in population control, but even more, I question whether the real issue is not unequal distribution of wealth, resources, and opportunities.
November 23, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Only having read the first two chapters of Planet of the Slums by Mike Davis, it is hard to discern the main agenda of his book, however it definitely seems he shares some of the pessimistic views on both globalism and neoliberalism as other authors’ works we have covered. In the first chapter he seems to blame the ceaseless growth of slums and poverty on commercialized development, but later in chapter two he points out several interesting practices among the low-income, slum-dwellers which both perpetuates their own condition as well as their own resilience to maintain despite attempts by authorities to remove them.
Urban development certainly is not a new process in any form of the world’s societies. But, the point of his opening paragraph is to highlight the fact that for the first time in the history of human civilization, the urban population outnumbers the rural population. Again, urbanization is not un-precedented, but the increasingly exponential pace at which it is growing is alarming. Among the litany of figures, charts and statistics Davis throws the readers way, the growing numbers in population size of cities is not a balanced, planned process but a daily/nightly incremental increase in the number of slum dwellers.
Oddly enough, almost as quickly as he incriminates the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, among other neoliberal practices, for the predicament that is city-periphery slums, Davis then says “…rural people no longer have to migrate to the city, it migrates to them,” and he goes on to list several third world metropolises. Now, this is an interesting point, and as I have spent a considerable amount of time in Bamako Mali, Nouakchott Mauritania, Ndjamena Chad, Ouagadougu Burkina Faso, Kabul Afghanistan, and even Bangkok Thailand, I am intimately familiar with the slow but sure urban sprawl of development which as it further extends to less and less remote villages, increases the size of less well-to-do populations. As he mentions, villages become markets, small cities bigger, and so on. Instead of just being a small, remote village, once incorporated, it becomes so and so market, or neighborhood. His point though, I think is that as this happens to the villages, the identity and lifestyle of the residents is changed. More or less forcibly, they have to adapt and modify their own lives to meet the requirements or effective changes caused by urbanization, but not necessarily the public services and infrastructure to support it. Once inhabitants of a distant village, they acquire this periphery, shanty label.
What the first world, global North either does not know or chooses to ignore is the effects this slum development is having on the millions and millions involved. As Davis points out, biologically, and ecologically, can any environment feasibly support the megalopolis he describes? This rapid and sudden over urbanization often occurs with little to no consideration for infrastructure, or basic public services like sanitation, education or zoning. These shanty towns as they are called, are in such conditions of disrepair and retrograde that the inhabitants often resort to extremes in order to sustain. And whether illegally and forcibly kidnapped, such as the girls in The Day my God Died, or “voluntarily” girls or even their parents are forced to resort to prostitution to make a way of life. Crime is rampant and practices go unmoderated. Such as private property piracy and squatting. And concern for ecology is thrown out the window.
As seemingly horrendous as these conditions are, Davis also points out that squatters have the resilience to rebuild their shanty homes as a nightly routine only to outlast the local authorities who tire of tearing them down daily. They willingly live in locations which suffer from such terrible circumstances that nobody else would realistically place value or property on the land. They in turn, then “privatize”and rent to even poorer and poorer inhabitants, thus perpetuating the cycle.
As much as I would like to place responsibility for this plight squarely on the shoulders of commercial corporations for displacement and forced migration resulting from industry change, this is a process that has been occurring for a millennium. The responsibility invariably lies with the government and local authorities, for as much talk of the state having less and less importance and significance in a deregulated, globalized world, they are the ones who ultimately allow this to happen and turn a blind eye. Certainly urbanization facilitates this slum process, but it’s local police and authorities who receive kickbacks and bribes to avoid these eyesore shanties.
November 23, 2009 at 6:53 pm
One idea that really jumped out to me in this week’s reading is the comment made by Tomlinson about the drastically different way that we think about food today compared to 20 years ago. It is said that globalization has changed our idea of being ‘at home’ because of constant international media and news. I agree with this concept and think that it has changed the way that we approach the way we eat. Especially in such a diverse area as Washington, D.C., an immigrant has access to traditional food from their homeland. On average, an item in the grocery store has traveled 1500 miles from farm to supermarket. This also means that there is a much larger proximity within a region. This distance contributes to the amount of energy that is needed to supply a community, i.e. oil, manpower, etc. Aside from a globalization perspective, this is severely affecting food within the United States as well. People are much more removed from their food and this is shown in the amount of products that are found in the average grocery store. Although there is a recent shift in the demand for organic and natural foods, the desire to know where your food comes from and how it is produced is not prevalent.
Physical and representational distance is also an excellent point that Tomlinson brings up. Representation has been broadened exponentially by email and much shorter travel times across the globe. Not only can a decision be made to fire someone from thousands of miles away, but entire factories can be run executively by that distance. This greatly depersonalizes the workforce from management and often leads to declining working conditions. I also can empathize with her description of the desensitization that many people have when they travel great distances. Tomlinson mentions that we are ‘deposited into a different culture wearing the same clothes we boarded in’ and attributes this as a metaphor for our ‘not-so distant home’. This makes me wonder how much this supports cultural intolerance. If the feeling of traveling a long distance is faint, what makes a person feel as if they are far from home? Far enough to adhere to the host country’s customs? Or would a traveler still act is if they are home? Tomlinson addresses this and compares the different behaviors of those who are traveling for business reasons or travelers on a low-budget. I think that travelers on a low budget are more likely to immerse themselves into the culture for two reasons. One, because their motivation for traveling probably includes some desire to experience an environment that is different from their home. Two, because of their lower budget, they are forced to seek out more easily accessible accommodations that stray from high class hotels and restaurants.
RESPONSE TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING VIDEO: “The Day My God Died”
This video was incredibly eye-opening and shocking. It was very difficult to hear testimonies from women who had spent years working as a sex slave. It is shocking that this concept is probably very common for many people who live in the major cities in India. It’s also very scary that these women were tricked and drugged by people whom they trusted. The police and people who run the brothels have made is dangerous to challenge their authority and make a change. The power of the police is obviously being abused and seems as if there is no one above them that is making a big effort to stop these heinous practices. It really makes me question the integrity of the human race when human trafficking and the sex trade are happening all over the world, including in the United States. I think that many people see the United States as a place where the government and authorities are able to be trusted and such atrocious practices do not happen here. I remember hearing a statistic that somewhere around 100,000 women are brought into the US every year for such intentions. How can this issue be so prevalent that all these women can slip through the cracks? How are they able to get into the United States and then ‘disappear’ so that no one is asking questions? Or is it that questions are being asked but being ignored? This is just one of the aspects of globalization that is negative on all counts. There is nothing good about the support of human trafficking and the prevalence of HIV/AIDS that follows. It seems as if this is a violent cycle that cannot be stopped by small groups that are compelled to take action, like the Safe House shown in the film. This problem needs global attention from authorities with integrity and not just from the people who have become customers. I am surprised that international agreements and/or police have not been able to have a more successful intervention. Is it a question of logistical lack of manpower or is it the lack of awareness? Either way, the quality of life that is being seriously compromised is much more serious problem that the attention it is being given.
November 23, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Chapter 1and 2 “The Planet of Slums” talks about how did places such as China, India and Latin America become urbanized in the past decades due to globalization and its effects on global affairs such as governance. The author gives statistics on how these places changed from rural to urban areas. When more and more inanimate sources of energy were used to enhance human productivity (industrialization), surpluses increased in both agriculture and industry. Larger and larger proportions of a population could live in cities. Economic forces were such that cities became the ideal places to locate factories and their workers. For example, the growth in China’s urbanization was a function of the surpluses produced from the agricultural sector: The handicraft sector never challenged agricultural dominance in the economy despite a symbiotic relationship between them. At at the end of 2008, total population was 1.33 billion, with 723 million (54%) and 607 million (46%) residing in the rural and urban areas.
Now the very big question related to Third World urbanization which should be ask that will it prove beneficial for people’s lives? Much of Third World urbanization is the result of over population in the countryside. In villages babies have been living and not dying. A husband and wife who farm 15 acres might have three sons and three daughters. All now live and grow up. But there is not land enough for them to have the farms they need to marry and raise a family. This lack of land for burgeoning rural populations forced them to leave the village and migrate to cities. They find a place to live in the shantytowns but often times they don’t find productive employment. Therefore, I believe that the Third World urbanization will be a beneficial social trend only if enough good jobs can be found for the rapidly growing population of Third World cities.
Another fact should also be mentioned that as large cities grow and development that is need for their populations for ordinary services such as drinking water, sanitary services like trash collection, roads, and housing becomes very insistent. Satisfying these needs must be understood in the context of two major trends in the development urban life. One is the increase tendency towards becoming inequality and the other trend involves the centralization of the key powers.
In general there are advantages and disadvantages some are as follows:
More efficient use of land, less land use per person and housing is more efficiently
used to house more people.Concentration of resources-people come up with more ideas and resources are readily available. A larger variety of resources are found in urban areas. Public transportation is easily found, cutting down for the need of private transportation, which in turns
cut down on pollution. Economy wise jobs are found more easily than rural areas.
With Urbanization, there are also disadvantages as well. Here we find problems that are not as common as in rural areas. Areas where populations of extremely poor live in sub-standard conditions: Poor Living conditions, high rates of employment, high rates of Crime.
Accelerated Population Growth due to lack of education, family planning (lack of education of family planning as well as tradition of those coming from rural areas).
On the other hand, Chapter 1 and 3 Globalization and culture, by J.Tomlinson talks about the relation between globalization and culture. A global culture can be seen in one of two ways. One
suggests that today’s communications and technologies allow a more open spread of culture
around the world people in far corners of the globe are able to be aware of and share each other’s culture. It is a view that sees global culture as generally positive something that encourages diversity and a mixing of culture and has enabled people around the world to overcome national
boundaries to embrace common causes.
Transnational companies have become economic superpowers as globalization has spread and the development of a global culture is seen to benefit them economically. Certainly the potential
wealth that the transnational can offer to indigenous populations can take precedence over the upholding of local tradition and culture. The basic human desire to accumulate wealth can often override cultural, ethnic and religious factors when transnational companies set their sights on
economic expansion in a particular area.
A global culture involves the spread of popular cultural icons around the globe, often diluting and overriding local cultures with the threat that the vast cultural diversity that the world offers
will one day be submerged beneath a dull uniformity. Advances in technology and
comunications have helped propagate cultural globalization.
November 23, 2009 at 7:30 pm
Davis Marks captures main points about population growth all over the world, but his main focus in this term is on the countries such as third world nations, India, china and many South American countries. He indicates the dramatic increase in the population growth in couple graphs. This is a commons estimate that as the number of years increases so will the number of population all over the world. I think that is a point to be noticed, which I thought has not much to do with any sort of urbanization or globalization as Marks states to be the cause of it. However when I researched other sources, thus Mark’s conclusion that urbanization have caused environment issues for the rural areas, and it has taken their space of living. Many sources agree to this dilemma. “Cities have absorbed nearly two-thirds of the global population explosion since 1950, and are currently adding a million babies and migrants each week. Dhaka, Bangladesh; Lagos, Nigeria; and Kinshasa, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, today are each approximately 40 times larger than they were in 1950”. This should be considered as growing international issue, and it should be only the job of UN to fix. In-fact the problem is complicated, every day the demand rate goes higher and higher, the need to urbanize rural cities where the nature is more beautiful and valuable doesn’t seem to be beneficent to anyone. Therefore it’s changed to industrialized areas where they can make money off of it. Of course, globalization has the biggest impact and is the main cause of growing slums, and growing population mainly in the third world nations. The need for more industries to produce goods for developed nations such as US, UK, and Europe, has increased dramatically since 1920 or so. With the launch of call centers in India and elsewhere shows how much we need space in the third world countries. Before there were only factories for machines and vehicles, but today we even have transferred our local companies to developing nations, taking their space, and being the cause of urbanization for them, which is challenging their health and environmental issues. One might think how would a call center can be a challenge to the health of people. Aside from all other form of gases or such, being released from the main head quarter of call centers, the other very dangerous issue that is probably unnoticed, are those mini buses that transport employees back and forth, run by the cheapest and the most unfiltered gases that leave behind a tremendous amount of smoke in the air as they drive through the villages and rural areas of India.
The movie about the human trafficking was extremely tragic, and relates with the conditions of slum citizens in those areas a lot. In the movie we say the girls were being sold for money for money no from middle class citizens living in the city, but those who are living in the poor slums under bad conditions of life. I have seen many Indian movies which portrays the brothel system in different forms. Some of these brothels are actually very high inn. I don’t think anyone can make any documentary of those, because they have high officials to back them up. Many of those less affordable brothels are for rich people only, and the locations, the environment are very nice, unlike the ones we saw in class, girls in these brothels build a good relationship with their owners, they are not treated as bad at all, and usually most of them are professional dancer or thought how to dance, they perform classical Indian dances in-front of men. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=265MmBcFPQM, you should check this link to see a high class brothel; this movie was based on a true story. It is one of the songs in the movie, you will see the girl is dancing and singing for the “Raja” which is the Indian word for very rich guy in town,
So as you can see the different of these brothels as appose to those we saw in class about India, which are for the slum people themselves, I am sure no rich or even middle class Indian men would go to those cheap brothels we saw in class. India in reality is very big on their local brothels since very long time ago, they have produced many movies fictions and non-fictions movies based on girls’ stories in brothels. In 2007, they made another huge hit based on a true story of a brothel, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0rK7b-yJ1o&feature=related. You will see a lot of glamour and color that is depicting the high inn brothels in India, and as mentioned before these brothels are for very rich guys.
November 23, 2009 at 7:40 pm
It seems that the focus in this week’s reading is poverty. This also ties to the video we watched last week on human trafficking. I have always had the idea that globalization was a good thing; you could say that I was on the Friedman train… Do notice that I am using past tense in those statements! Not to say that I was oblivious to the negative side effects of globalization, but I didn’t think that they were that bad…
With family in law enforcement with direct connection to human trafficking, I understand very well the immense net cast over the world. How is human trafficking connected to globalization? It could be argued that human trafficking (prostitution) has always been around even before the term globalization was coined. But it makes one wonder how big this issue has become. In “The Day My God Died”, the brothels were in slums in the trade of sex slavery. Mike Davis only confirmed to me what was already believed in “Planet of Slums”. The gap between the rich and the poor is ever growing. It was mentioned in an economics class that in several years most people (worldwide) would be millionaires, but relative to what? We don’t have to look far to see that what you could buy for fifty dollars ten years ago, you can’t even find for one hundred dollars. It wasn’t so long ago when I could fill up my car for less than ten dollars!
If we, Americans, are already feeling the effects of poverty, one can only imagine what under-developed countries are going through. I mean there are slums EVERYWHERE! Davis’s title is point on, we live on a planet of slums! Slums that are now turning to something less… Some of the conditions people live in are inhumane! They are considered and treated as less than human with no proper sanitation, education, and no rights! Globalization in regards to agriculture has had a direct impact in poverty. By globalizing the production of food, farmers in under-developed countries have had to buy back their food at ridiculous prices which lead them more and more into poverty. It seems that the only ones who really believe in the enrichment globalization are the one who are already rich! Friedman’s flat world has become lumpy…
After reading Tomlinson, I could not stop thinking about how we purchase and consume our food. I recently watched “Food Inc” and many points in the movie were in accordance to Tomlinson’s statements. Globalization has enabled for faster, bigger, cheaper food production, but at what cost? There are many hidden costs that we do not think of such as the transportation cost, and most recently health/medical cost. It is not a coincidence that since this globalized mass production of food has started, we have seen more and more food born illnesses and many food recalls. The food issue was most striking for me. We have seen a great “green” movement, so much so that Wal-Mart has gotten onto the green train. I think it’s safe to say that Wal-Mart’s decision was base on economics and not for its care of the environment! As consumers, we can affect how globalization affects the production of our food. Money fuels globalization, and with money, we can gear globalization in any way possible; whether we want it to slow down or speed up, it can be decided with how we spend our money. Yes, organic foods can be very expensive (Whole Pay Check). But a trip to the hospital when you do not have health insurance is not cheaper! Don’t forget, H1N1 was called swine flu and was traced to a pig farm in North Carolina (Eating Animals). We can’t look at globalization as the problem, instead we should view it as a vehicle and as with all vehicles, we can steer it any way we want to.
November 23, 2009 at 8:15 pm
The idea that globalization connects different parts of the world takes on more of a literal meaning with every reading or documentary this class introduces me to. The argument at first presented in Friedman’s work “The World is Flat,” in which Friedman argues that we are becoming a more homogenized and linear culture, does not stand as a convincing theory with the more literature and sources I am presented. I begin this blog by referring back to Friedman’s work because, at first, I had been a believer in Friedman’s thesis and points of view. After reading Tomlinson this weekend and thinking back to the documentary we watched lass class, “The Day My God Died,” I have found inconsistencies with the notion that globalization is having a unilateral and numbing effect on the world and all that makes different parts of the world just that- different.
While globalization has a way of connecting different people in different locals, I find this connection to be a very literal, technological and communicative connection. The ability of people to email, facebook, or instant message one another from different parts of the world is a new symptom of the age of interconnectedness, and the side-effects (to unintentionally keep the terminology in accordance with the description of illness) are, as Tomlinson discusses, the increased awareness of what’s going on in the world that used to seem so far, far away from your abode.
This increased speed with which one can converse with people (whether they be relatives, customers, friends, or attractive strangers) becomes the real definition of globalization. These eye-opening discussions or new experiences that occur due to increased communication are not necessarily bad things, and do not serve as a cause for this homogenized culture that we seem to be irrationally fearful of. According to Tomlinson, globalization refers to “the rapidly developing and ever-densening network of interconnections and interdependencies that characterize modern social life.” Tomlinson does not argue that this increased ability to communicate means the automatic absorption of one culture into another, but rather that globalization and culture are related as much as local lifestyles can be accepted into global habits.
This idea draws me back into some of the thoughts I was having when watching “The Day My God Died.” Brothels and sex slavery is able to occur in nations like India because the government and its ability to have adequate oversight of its people is inferior to that of the United States. Also, the culture of brothels as a part of the local community in many impoverished, developing nations is seemingly, nonetheless unfortunately, common. My question is, if globalization creates a homogeonization of culture as Friedman argues, and the American culture has allowed for us to uphold different standards of living and providing adequate safeguards for our people (in this case the general prevention of brothels on a large scale), then as a nation very heavily participating in the process known as globalization, how has our culture of not having brothels and upholding the Declaration of Human Rights within our borders not been absorbed by that of other nations, if, as Friedman would argue, as well as those who advocate that the McDonaldization of the world is underway, culture is spreading from the West to the “non-West?” Is not human rights and the treatment of citizens an aspect of a nation’s culture? I believe it is. How can we so selectively imply that globalization effects only certain, very narrow portions of culture? Culture is such a broad and encompassing term, that to suggest globalization is homogenizing culture is to say that everyone in the world has the same area code.
To finish, Tomlinson’s discussion as globalization being, in some ways, a means of mixing local and global culture and not truly a conquest of one culture by another, has been the most accurate explanation of globalization that I’ve seen thus far. Tomlinson’s statement that “culture doesn’t always transfer in a unilateral way…it always involves interpretation, translation, mutation, adaptation, and indigenization as the receiving culture brings its own cultural resources to bear” really captures what, in essence, globalization actually entails in our modern-day world. While we may have many people in India who work at call centers to answer questions from American customers, a very “western” profession, we also have many women in India working in brothels, a very “non-western” idea of acceptable work. Globalization is a process that translates from the global into each locality it reaches very differently, and I imagine this is the way it will remain for quite a while.
November 23, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Mike Davis delves into the ever-increasing dilemma of overpopulation and urban expansion with frightening and depressing facts that make it difficult to hold out hope for the immensely poor citizens of any developing nation. It appears that a vicious cycle is set in place for those that have found themselves at the epicenter of an urban sprawl that continues to consume and consume without any repatriation. Although megacities are not unique to this day and age, what is unique is the rate at which these cities have been churning out in third world countries. Since 2007, more than half of the world’s population has become assimilated with urban livelihood. For these developing countries that are trying to gain progress and step up their economic standing to western countries, these countries attempt to draw attraction to sectors that positively influence their GDP. And apparently it is near impossible to do that with most of the population living out in the countryside, producing strictly for oneself. So they attract people to the cities where the few and only jobs are located. Unfortunately, once these people migrate to the cities (or the cities migrate to them), most find little work that is efficient enough to support themselves and their family. What the people do find are “dilapidated housing, overcrowding, disease, and poverty, and vice”. The poor then often live in shantytowns or unauthorized tenant housing and do what they need to do to get by (which can be incredibly degrading and dangerous as proven by the film The Day My God Dies). My insight into this book is that poverty is something that is not going to be resolved by continuing to cram people on top of each other in overcrowded cities or by population control as described by Thomas Malthus. Poverty is going to continue until people can spread out again and support themselves.