Mahmoud Aghiorly

Planning & Scheduling Engineer, suadi arabian chevron


This conversation is closed.

Is globalization the biggest danger to third world cultures and their heritage or is that just an overstatement ?

While the world become more effected by each other than ever .. big questions face us like ..

How can we modernize without being westernized?
How can we manage to keep the balance between our cultures and the economic cultures?
How can we Use the benefit of Modernizations without compromising our thoughts and beliefs?
Are we heading into one culture world? Is that better or worse ?


بينما غدت اليوم كل اطراف الكوكب متأثرةً ومؤثرةً فيما بينها تتولد عدة اسئلة في هذا الخصوص اهمها
كيف يمكننا ان نتطور دون ان ننوصم بالوصمة الغربية؟
كيف يمكننا ان نوازن بين ثقافتنا المحلية وبين الثقافة الاقتصادية ؟
كيف يمكننا الاستفادة من الادوات والوسائل المتطورة دون المساومة على القناعات والافكار المحلية ؟
وهل العالم اليوم يتجه نحو عالم احادي الثقافة ؟ وهل هذا يعد امراً جيداً ام انه ليس كذلك ؟

  • thumb
    Mar 3 2011: As a Chinese, I don't think it's really a danger. If you believe there are some pervasive value for all mankind, we should admit there are better way of action which exceeds all the national difference. We actively choose to be westernized in certain areas, as well as westerners sometimes hope to learn the wisdom of oriental culture. In a word, people are seeking a blessed life, and they don't mind where it is coming from.
    • thumb
      Jul 13 2011: What you mean is that the globalization helps people to exchange their knowledge to other countries from around the word. It did help people have chance to open their mind and taught them the way to develop/explore the world. Your idea might be appreciated. However, I don’t get along with it. When the foreign countries came to a country to exchange knowledge, they also sent their teachers into the school over there as the language teachers. That was the way that they took our money away. Besides that, while they were teaching the students, they would notice some talented students to give them the chance to study abroad in their countries. For example, the Vietnamese students were studying in the United State. We thought that those were good opportunities for our students to study and came back to help/develop Vietnam, but it was the brain drain for our country. After the Vietnamese students graduated and if they were smart, the government would pay a good price to keep them to stay and work. How could they refuse that valuable invitation? Especially, when these students studied some subjects that didn’t develop in Vietnam, did you think that they would come back to develop their country or not. If yes, could they earn the salary as much as the US gave them or even just enough to live?
      In conclusion, even though the globalization did obviously help people exchange knowledge, they also took our invaluable investments such as talented students. Therefore, I thought that the globalization caused really bad effects on many countries.
  • thumb
    Mar 21 2011: what do you mean by globalization? for me, globalization means freedom to trade, freedom to travel, freedom to access information. this can not be possibly a threat to anything, except dogmatism, lies, dictatorships and such.

    for example if the youth in, say, lybia decides that drinking alcohol is good (purely theoretical), then it is the result of globalization, or it is their decision, which is made possible by globalization? i say it is the latter. and the answer is education and not suppression.

    if a culture can only be maintained by suppression, that culture is not worth having.

    for me, the biggest hope of the next decade is a free, united and developed arab world, and that they will show us an alternative to western consumerism. let me say, another alternative, as i hope for the same in india, africa, south america, china.
  • thumb
    Mar 7 2011: Mahmoud: I acknowledge and respect your fear, but if anything, the "West" has just as much to fear from globalization. Simple demographics indicate the western countries will eventually be over-run (population wise) by non-western countries. And with that will be a merging of cultures with the non-western peoples dominating.

    It seems that globalization, in the sense of greater and greater freedom of individuals to move around, is inevitable. And in the long run is good. But the fear of too rapid change which we are unable to adapt to is in us all.

    Maybe we do need, at times, to moderate the speed of change. What do you think?
    • Jul 13 2011: I totally agree with you. In my opinion globalization could effect our lives in negative ways. On the other hand, most countries got so many benefits from globalization. For example, some poor countrier such as Indonisia, which contains the most spectacular views created by nature, became one of the biggest places for tourism. Moreover, Indonisia's economy depends on travellers' money...
    • Jul 13 2011: I’m agree with you And I understand your concern. In addition to what you mentioned before, in my opinion the globalization is the main reason behind how many countries and people are losing their identity, unfortunately.
      In the globalized world, all the countries and cities are becoming very close to each other. Then the cultures are converging in to the same attitude and melted in the same pot. The unique cities that carry much history and culture in every place lost their cultural differences that make a society uniquely. for example: London looks like Paris which looks like Madrid, all restaurant serving the same dishes and the traditional food are drowned out by huge fast food chains. Moreover, traditional clothing is lost between the new fashions and trends created by the big brands. All people look, food, and dress alike whether they are in New York, Paris, and Cairo. The globalization influences destroy our identity which makes us special and allows us to stand out from the crowd. On other hand, I’m totally for globalization, economically and industrially speaking, but we can’t neglect the negative effects it has on culture and society. Globalization is like a malignant disease which gradually destroy the entire structure of any society without any visible sing
  • Feb 26 2011: Free trade (mainly free) is the most important thing to do. Trade was the major factor for East Asian states that pulled hundrets of million people out of poverty within only a a couple of decades. The problem today is that trade is NOT free. While tariffs on industrial products were falling and falling, tariffs on agricultural products were falling too, but much much slower. Still agriculture is the relativ advantage of the developing countries. This single minded, ideological war against globalization makes me sick.
  • Feb 26 2011: How can free market capitalism create the jobs required in the contemporary Arab World?
    It cannot. Finding an alternative to free market or state capitalism in next few years is greatest challenge.

    Globalization: Challenging free trade is the most important thing to do. People need jobs - not cheap stuff.

    Libya, very high unemployment amongst under 25's. So, why so many foreign workers doing all kinds of work? Free movement of labor is not good. There is neo-slavery everywhere generated by this ''free movement.''

    When ''globalization'' means capitalism, there is going to be trouble. If post-revolution Arab countries embrace free market capitalism they will have further revolutions because the masses are not prepared to endure poverty and unemployment to satisfy a system which benefits the few.
    • thumb
      Mar 21 2011: will you bother to give any explanation why the free market can not create jobs? or it is a dogma?

      (side notes: people don't need jobs. they want goods. jobs are necessary to create the goods that people want.)
  • thumb
    Jul 11 2011: Globalization, hhmmn, if by that you mean the mass-marketing of addictive and useless or harmful ideas, music, foods, fashions by soulless corporations and the continuing exploitation of of the natural resources of relatively less powerful cultures by these same corporations then I am against it. However it is mostly not really a organized conspiracy but a natural process a bit like evolution. The primary dynamic that powers it is the Profit curve coupled by Greed. You could also say that Colombia and Mexico are exploiting the weakness for drugs of so many Americans. Why do so many Americans use drugs? A well balanced happy person sees no attraction. Only those with emotional pain of some sort feel the drive to self medicate. The war on Drugs was lost years ago and no surge in narcotic agents, jails or suppression will win it now. The only solution for any culture is to find a healthy balance and unity so that people do not become mindless consumers of whatever negative product is advertized as a cure all for their dissatisfactions. We must create an effective form of education that instead of idiotic slogans such as "just say no" gets people, young and old, to ask deeply WHY? and For What? So that few if any will trade their health and future and the positive aspects of their cultural heritage for a quick high or a moments fleeting fashionable illusion.
  • Jul 13 2011: Chad, I disagree that any corporation does not have a soul. many corporations give jobs to people in many countries. As for me, I feel globalization means communication between people. It means trade and sharing culture, food, ideas, products, services. Globalization has had many benefits. Today, more and more people in developing countries like India, Brazil and others are able to get jobs to manufacture automobile parts, rubber products, textiles, software. Due to globalization many companies have offices in different parts of the world, these offices employ local people. Due to this the local economy can also be improved. Governments do not create products and sell them in other countries. The flow of goods and services is supported not by governments, but by businesses - large and small. Globalization allows businesses to sell their products in other countries more easily that before. so corporations are good.
  • thumb
    Mar 1 2011: Someone sometimes somewhere told / wrote which echos something like as follows
    "Culture is like river, it flows through it's natural course, if necessary changes course of its own if something blocks its route in natural way. So it can change , evolve ..... ".
    I think, it even can die if it can't cope with chaged demand of the time or civilization. But definitely deliberate attack can make any culture to perish quickly which is not desireable or acceptable at all. Scientific advancement, modernization, economic & political development all definitely impacts culture so can be catalyst of change but can't kill it overnight.