Wikipedia

Cultural imperialism

Cultural imperialism(alsocultural colonialism) comprises theculturaldimensions ofimperialism.The word "imperialism" describes practices in which a country engages culture (language,tradition,andritual,politics,economics) to create and maintain unequal social and economic relationships among social groups. Cultural imperialism often useswealth,media power and violence to implement the system ofcultural hegemonythat legitimizes imperialism.

A jaguar hunter and his son, natives of theChaco Boreal.The father continues to wear the traditional clothing of his region while the son has already adopted Western clothing.

Cultural imperialism may take various forms, such as an attitude, a formal policy, or military action—insofar as each of these reinforces the empire's cultural hegemony. Research on the topic occurs in scholarly disciplines, and is especially prevalent in communication and media studies,[1][2][3]education,[4]foreign policy,[5]history,[6]international relations,[7]linguistics,[8]literature,[9]post-colonialism,[10][11]science,[12]sociology,[13]social theory,[14]environmentalism,[15]and sports.[16]

Cultural imperialism may be distinguished from the natural process ofcultural diffusion.The spread of culture around the world is referred to ascultural globalization.

Background and definitions

edit
Indigenous children who have been taken from their parents and placed in a Western-styleresidential school,which aimed to eliminate Indigenous language and culture and replace it with English language and Christian beliefs

Although theOxford English Dictionaryhas a 1921 reference to the "cultural imperialism of the Russians",[17]John Tomlinson, in his book on the subject, writes that the term emerged in the 1960s[18]and has been a focus of research since at least the 1970s.[19]Terms such as "media imperialism","structural imperialism "," cultural dependency and domination "," cultural synchronization ","electronic colonialism","ideological imperialism ", and"economic imperialism"have all been used to describe the same basic notion of cultural imperialism.[20]

The term refers largely to the exercise of power in a cultural relationship in which theprinciples,ideas,practices, and values of a powerful, invading society are imposed upon indigenous cultures in the occupied areas. The process is often used to describe examples of when the compulsory practices of the cultural traditions of the imperial social group are implemented upon a conquered social group. The process is also present when powerful nations are able to flood the information and media space with their ideas, limiting countries and communities ability to compete and expose people to locally created content.

Cultural imperialism has been called a process that intends to transition the "cultural symbols of the invading communities from 'foreign' to 'natural,''domestic,'"comments Jeffrey Herlihy-Mera.[21]He described the process as being carried out in three phases by merchants, then the military, then politicians. While the third phase continues "in perpetuity", cultural imperialism tends to be "gradual, contested (and continues to be contested), and is by nature incomplete. The partial and imperfect configuration of this ontology takes an implicit conceptualization of reality and attempts—and often fails—to elide other forms of collective existence."[22]In order to achieve that end, cultural engineering projects strive to "isolate residents within constructed spheres of symbols" such that they (eventually, in some cases after several generations) abandon other cultures and identify with the new symbols. "The broader intended outcome of these interventions might be described as a common recognition ofpossessionof the land itself (on behalf of the organizations publishing and financing the images). "[22]

ForHerbert Schiller,cultural imperialism refers to the American Empire's "coercive and persuasive agencies, and their capacity to promote and universalize an American 'way of life' in other countries without any reciprocation of influence."[23]According to Schiller, cultural imperialism "pressured, forced and bribed" societies to integrate with the U.S.'s expansive capitalist model but also incorporated them with attraction and persuasion by winning "the mutual consent, even solicitation of the indigenous rulers." He continues remarks that it is:

the sum processes by which a society is brought into the modern [U.S.-centered] world system and how its dominating stratum is attracted, pressured, forced, and sometimes bribed into shaping social institutions to correspond to, or even promote, the values and structures of the dominating centres of the system. The public media are the foremost example of operating enterprises that are used in the penetrative process. For penetration on a significant scale the media themselves must be captured by the dominating/penetrating power. This occurs largely through the commercialization of broadcasting.[24]

The historical contexts, iterations, complexities, and politics of Schiller's foundational and substantive theorization of cultural imperialism in international communication and media studies are discussed in detail bypolitical economy of communicationresearchers Richard Maxwell,[25]Vincent Mosco,[26]Graham Murdock,[27]and Tanner Mirrlees.[28]

Downing and Sreberny-Mohammadi state: "Cultural imperialism signifies the dimensions of the process that go beyond economic exploitation or military force. In the history ofcolonialism,(i.e., the form of imperialism in which the government of the colony is run directly by foreigners), the educational and media systems of many Third World countries have been set up as replicas of those in Britain, France, or the United States and carry their values. Western advertising has made further inroads, as have architectural and fashion styles. Subtly but powerfully, the message has often been insinuated that Western cultures are superior to the cultures of the Third World. "

Poststructuralism

edit

In poststructuralist and postcolonial theory,cultural imperialismis often understood as the cultural legacy of Western colonialism, or forms of social action contributing to the continuation of Westernhegemony.To some outside of the realm of this discourse, the term is critiqued as being unclear, unfocused, and/or contradictory in nature.[20]

The work of French philosopher andsocial theoristMichel Foucaulthas heavily influenced use of the termcultural imperialism,particularly his philosophical interpretation ofpowerand his concept ofgovernmentality.Following an interpretation of power similar to that ofMachiavelli,Foucault defines power as immaterial, as a "certain type of relation between individuals" that has to do with complex strategic social positions that relate to the subject's ability to control its environment and influence those around itself.[29]According to Foucault, power is intimately tied with his conception oftruth."Truth", as he defines it, is a "system of ordered procedures for the production, regulation, distribution, circulation, and operation of statements" which has a "circular relation" with systems of power.[30]Therefore, inherent in systems of power, is always "truth", which is culturally specific, inseparable fromideologywhich often coincides with various forms ofhegemony.Cultural imperialismmay be an example of this.

Foucault's interpretation of governance is also very important in constructing theories of transnational power structure. In his lectures at theCollège de France,Foucault often defines governmentality as the broad art of "governing", which goes beyond the traditional conception of governance in terms of state mandates, and into other realms such as governing "a household, souls, children, a province, a convent, a religious order, a family".[31]This relates directly back to Machiavelli's treatise on how to retain political power at any cost,The Prince,and Foucault's aforementioned conceptions oftruthandpower.(i.e. varioussubjectivitiesare created through power relations that are culturally specific, which lead to various forms of culturally specific governmentality such asneoliberalgovernmentality.)

Post-colonialism

edit

Edward Saïdis a founding figure of postcolonialism, established with the bookOrientalism(1978), ahumanistcritique ofThe Enlightenment,which criticises Western knowledge of "The East" —specifically the English and the Frenchconstructionsof what is and what is not "Oriental".[32][33]Whereby said "knowledge" then led to cultural tendencies towards abinary oppositionof the Orient vs. the Occident, wherein one concept is defined in opposition to the other concept, and from which they emerge as of unequal value.[33]InCulture and Imperialism(1993), the sequel toOrientalism,Saïd proposes that, despite the formal end of the "age of empire" after theSecond World War(1939–1945), colonial imperialism left a cultural legacy to the (previously) colonised peoples, which remains in their contemporary civilisations; and that said Americancultural imperialismis very influential in the international systems ofpower.[34]

In "Can the Subaltern Speak?"Gayatri Chakravorty Spivakcritiques common representations in the West of theSati,as being controlled by authors other than the participants (specifically English colonizers and Hindu leaders). Because of this, Spivak argues that thesubaltern,referring to the communities that participate in the Sati, are not able to represent themselves through their own voice. Spivak says that cultural imperialism has the power to disqualify or erase the knowledge and mode of education of certain populations that are low on the social and economic hierarchy.[35]

InA Critique of Postcolonial Reason,Spivak argues that Western philosophy has a history of not only exclusion of the subaltern from discourse, but also does not allow them to occupy the space of a fully human subject.

Contemporary ideas and debate

edit

Cultural imperialismcan refer to either the forced acculturation of a subject population, or to the voluntary embracing of a foreign culture by individuals who do so of their own free will. Since these are two very different referents, the validity of the term has been called into question.

Cultural influence can be seen by the "receiving" culture as either a threat to or an enrichment of itscultural identity.It seems therefore useful to distinguish between cultural imperialism as an (active or passive) attitude of superiority, and the position of a culture or group that seeks to complement its own cultural production, considered partly deficient, with imported products.

The imported products or services can themselves represent, or be associated with, certain values (such asconsumerism). According to one argument, the "receiving"culturedoes not necessarily perceive this link, but instead absorbs the foreign culture passively through the use of the foreign goods and services. Due to its somewhat concealed, but very potent nature, this hypothetical idea is described by some experts as "banal imperialism".For example, it is argued that while" American companies are accused of wanting to control 95 percent of the world's consumers "," cultural imperialism involves much more than simple consumer goods; it involved the dissemination of American principles such as freedom and democracy ", a process which" may sound appealing "but which" masks a frightening truth: many cultures around the world are disappearing due to the overwhelming influence of corporate and cultural America ".[36]

Some believe that the newly globalised economy of the late 20th and early 21st century has facilitated this process through the use of new information technology. This kind of cultural imperialism is derived from what is called "soft power".The theory of electronic colonialism extends the issue to global cultural issues and the impact of major multi-media conglomerates, ranging fromParamount,WarnerMedia,AT&T,Disney,News Corp,toGoogleandMicrosoftwith the focus on the hegemonic power of these mainly United States–based communication giants.

Cultural diversity

edit

One of the reasons often given for opposing any form of cultural imperialism, voluntary or otherwise, is the preservation ofcultural diversity,a goal seen by some as analogous to the preservation ofecological diversity.Proponents of this idea argue either that such diversity is valuable in itself, to preserve human historical heritage and knowledge, or instrumentally valuable because it makes available more ways of solving problems and responding to catastrophes, natural or otherwise.

African colonisation

edit

Of all the areas of the world that scholars have claimed to be adversely affected by imperialism, Africa is probably the most notable. In the expansive "age of imperialism" of the nineteenth century, scholars have argued that European colonisation in Africa has led to the elimination of many various cultures, worldviews, andepistemologies,particularly throughneocolonisationof public education.[37][38][39]This, arguably has led to uneven development, and further informal forms of social control having to do with culture and imperialism.[40]A variety of factors, scholars argue, lead to the elimination of cultures, worldviews, and epistemologies, such as "de-linguicization" (replacing native African languages with European ones), devaluingontologiesthat are not explicitly individualistic,[40]and at times going as far as to not only define Western culture itself as science, but that non-Western approaches to science, the Arts, indigenous culture, etc. are not even knowledge.[37]One scholar,Ali A. Abdi,claims that imperialism inherently "involve[s] extensively interactive regimes and heavy contexts of identity deformation, misrecognition, loss of self-esteem, and individual and social doubt inself-efficacy."[40]Therefore, all imperialism would always, already be cultural.

Neoliberalism

edit

Neoliberalismis often critiqued by sociologists, anthropologists, and cultural studies scholars as being culturally imperialistic. Critics of neoliberalism, at times, claim that it is the newly predominant form of imperialism.[40]Other scholars, such as Elizabeth Dunn and Julia Elyachar have claimed that neoliberalism requires and creates its own form ofgovernmentality.[41][42]

In Dunn's work,Privatizing Poland,she argues that the expansion of themultinational corporation,Gerber, into Poland in the 1990s imposed Western, neoliberal governmentality,ideologies,andepistemologiesupon the post-soviet persons hired.[41]Cultural conflicts occurred most notably the company's inherentindividualisticpolicies, such as promoting competition among workers rather than cooperation, and in its strong opposition to what the company owners claimed wasbribery.[41]

In Elyachar's work,Markets of Dispossession,she focuses on ways in which, inCairo,NGOsalong withINGOsand the state promoted neoliberal governmentality through schemas of economic development that relied upon "youth microentrepreneurs".[42]Youth microentrepreneurs would receive small loans to build their own businesses, similar to the way thatmicrofinancesupposedly operates.[42]Elyachar argues though, that these programs not only were a failure, but that they shifted cultural opinions ofvalue (personal and cultural)in a way that favoured Western ways of thinking and being.[42]

Development studies

edit

Often, methods of promoting development and social justice are critiqued as being imperialistic in a cultural sense. For example, Chandra Mohanty has critiqued Westernfeminism,claiming that it has created a misrepresentation of the "third world woman" as being completely powerless, unable to resist male dominance.[43]Thus, this leads to the often critiqued narrative of the "white man" saving the "brown woman" from the "brown man". Other, more radical critiques ofdevelopment studies,have to do with the field of study itself. Some scholars even question the intentions of those developing the field of study, claiming that efforts to "develop" theGlobal Southwere never about the South itself. Instead, these efforts, it is argued, were made in order to advance Western development and reinforce Western hegemony.[44]

Media effects studies

edit

The core of cultural imperialism thesis is integrated with the political-economy traditional approach in media effects research. Critics of cultural imperialism commonly claim that non-Western cultures, particularly from the Third World, will forsake their traditional values and lose their cultural identities when they are solely exposed to Western media. Nonetheless, Michael B. Salwen, in his bookCritical Studies in Mass Communication(1991),[45]claims that cross-consideration and integration of empirical findings on cultural imperialist influences is very critical in terms of understanding mass media in the international sphere. He recognises both of contradictory contexts on cultural imperialist impacts. The first context is where cultural imperialism imposes socio-political disruptions on developing nations. Western media can distort images of foreign cultures and provoke personal and social conflicts to developing nations in some cases.[46] Another context is that peoples in developing nations resist to foreign media and preserve their cultural attitudes. Although he admits that outward manifestations of Western culture may be adopted, but the fundamental values and behaviours remain still. Furthermore, positive effects might occur when male-dominated cultures adopt the "liberation" of women with exposure to Western media[47]and it stimulates ample exchange of cultural exchange.[48]

Criticisms of "cultural imperialism theory"

edit

Critics of scholars who discuss cultural imperialism have a number of critiques.Cultural imperialismis a term that is only used in discussions wherecultural relativismandconstructivismare generally taken as true. (One cannot critique promoting Western values if one believes that said values are good. Similarly, one cannot argue that Western epistemology is unjustly promoted in non-Western societies if one believes that those epistemologies are good.[20]) Therefore, those who disagree with cultural relativism and/or constructivism may critique the employment of the term,cultural imperialismon those terms.

John Tomlinson provides a critique of cultural imperialism theory and reveals major problems in the way in which the idea of cultural, as opposed to economic or political, imperialism is formulated. In his bookCultural Imperialism: A Critical Introduction,he delves into the much debated "media imperialism"theory. Summarizing research on the Third World's reception of American television shows, he challenges the cultural imperialism argument, conveying his doubts about the degree to which US shows in developing nations actually carry US values and improve the profits of US companies. Tomlinson suggests that cultural imperialism is growing in some respects, but local transformation and interpretations of imported media products propose that cultural diversification is not at an end in global society.[49]He explains that one of the fundamental conceptual mistakes of cultural imperialism is to take for granted that the distribution of cultural goods can be considered as cultural dominance. He thus supports his argument highly criticising the concept thatAmericanizationis occurring through global overflow of American television products. He points to a myriad of examples of television networks who have managed to dominate their domestic markets and that domestic programs generally top the ratings. He also doubts the concept that cultural agents are passive receivers of information. He states that movement between cultural/geographical areas always involves translation, mutation, adaptation, and the creation of hybridity.

Other key critiques are that the term is not defined well, and employs further terms that are not defined well, and therefore lacks explanatory power, thatcultural imperialismis hard to measure, and that the theory of a legacy ofcolonialismis not always true.[20]

Dealing with cultural dominance

edit

David Rothkopf,managing director ofKissinger Associatesand an adjunct professor ofinternational affairsatColumbia University(who also served as a seniorU.S. Commerce Departmentofficial in theClinton Administration), wrote about cultural imperialism in his provocatively titledIn Praise of Cultural Imperialism?in the summer 1997 issue ofForeign Policymagazine. Rothkopf says that the United States should embrace "cultural imperialism" as in its self-interest. But his definition of cultural imperialism stresses spreading the values oftoleranceand openness to cultural change in order to avoid war and conflict between cultures as well as expanding accepted technological and legal standards to provide free traders with enough security to do business with more countries. Rothkopf's definition almost exclusively involves allowing individuals in other nations to accept or reject foreign cultural influences. He also mentions, but only in passing, the use of theEnglish languageand consumption of news and popular music and film as cultural dominance that he supports. Rothkopf additionally makes the point thatglobalisationand theInternetare accelerating the process of cultural influence.[50]

Culture is sometimes used by the organisers of society—politicians, theologians, academics, and families—to impose and ensure order, the rudiments of which change over time as need dictates. One need only look at the 20th century'sgenocides.In each one, leaders used culture as a political front to fuel the passions of their armies and other minions and to justify their actions among their people.

Rothkopf then cites genocide andmassacresinArmenia,Russia, theHolocaust,Cambodia,Bosnia and Herzegovina,RwandaandEast Timoras examples of culture (in some cases expressed in the ideology of "political culture" or religion) being misused to justify violence. He also acknowledges that cultural imperialism in the past has been guilty of forcefully eliminating the cultures of natives in the Americas and in Africa, or through use of theInquisition,"and during the expansion of virtually everyempire."The most important way to deal with cultural influence in any nation, according to Rothkopf, is to promote tolerance and allow, or even promote, cultural diversities that are compatible with tolerance and to eliminate those cultural differences that cause violent conflict:

Successful multicultural societies, be they nations, federations, or other conglomerations of closely interrelated states, discern those aspects of culture that do not threaten union, stability, or prosperity (such as food, holidays, rituals, and music) and allow them to flourish. But they counteract or eradicate the more subversive elements of culture (exclusionary aspects of religion, language, and political/ideological beliefs). History shows that bridging cultural gaps successfully and serving as a home to diverse peoples requires certain social structures, laws, and institutions that transcend culture. Furthermore, the history of a number of ongoing experiments inmulticulturalism,such as in the European Union, India, South Africa, Canada and the United States, suggests that workable, if not perfected, integrative models exist. Each is built on the idea that tolerance is crucial to social well-being, and each at times has been threatened by both intolerance and a heightened emphasis on cultural distinctions. The greater public good warrants eliminating those cultural characteristics that promote conflict or prevent harmony, even as less-divisive, more personally observed cultural distinctions are celebrated and preserved.[51]

Cultural dominance can also be seen in the 1930s in Australia where the Aboriginal Assimilation Policy acted as an attempt to wipe out the Native Australian people. The British settlers tried to biologically alter the skin colour of the Australian Aboriginal people through mixed breeding with white people. The policy also made attempts to forcefully conform the Aborigines to western ideas of dress and education.[52]

In history

edit

Although the term was popularised in the 1960s, and was used by its original proponents to refer to cultural hegemonies in a post-colonial world, cultural imperialism has also been used to refer to times further in the past.

Antiquity

edit

TheAncient Greeksare known for spreading their culture around the Mediterranean and Near East through trade and conquest. During theArchaic Period,the burgeoning Greek city-states established settlements and colonies across theMediterranean Sea,especially inSicilyand southernItaly,influencing theEtruscanandRomanpeoples of the region. In the late fourth century BC,Alexander the Greatconquered Persian and Indian territories all the way to theIndus River ValleyandPunjab,spreadingGreek religion,art, and science along the way. This resulted in the rise ofHellenistickingdoms and cities across Egypt, the Near East, Central Asia, and Northwest India where Greek culture fused with the cultures of the indigenous peoples. The Greek influence prevailed even longer in science and literature, where medieval Muslim scholars in the Middle East studied the writings ofAristotlefor scientific learning.

TheRoman Empirewas also an early example of cultural imperialism. Early Rome, in its conquest of Italy, assimilated the people ofEtruriaby replacing theEtruscan languagewith Latin, which led to the demise of that language and many aspects ofEtruscan civilisation.[53]CulturalRomanizationwas imposed on many parts of Rome's empire by "many regions receiving Roman culture unwillingly, as a form of cultural imperialism."[54]For example, when Greece was conquered by the Roman armies, Rome set about altering the culture of Greece to conform with Roman ideals. For instance, the Greek habit of stripping naked, in public, for exercise, was looked on askance by Roman writers, who considered the practice to be a cause of the Greeks' effeminacy and enslavement.[55]The Roman example has been linked to modern instances of European imperialism in African countries, bridging the two instances with Slavoj Zizek's discussions of 'empty signifiers'.[37]ThePax Romanawas secured in the empire, in part, by the "forced acculturation of the culturally diverse populations that Rome had conquered."[53]

British Empire

edit

British worldwide expansion in the 18th and 19th centuries was an economic and political phenomenon. However, "there was also a strong social and cultural dimension to it, whichRudyard Kiplingtermed the 'white man's burden'. "One of the ways this was carried out was by religious proselytising, by, amongst others, theLondon Missionary Society,which was "an agent of British cultural imperialism."[56]Another way, was by the imposition of educational material on the colonies for an "imperial curriculum". Robin A. Butlin writes, "The promotion of empire through books, illustrative materials, and educational syllabuses was widespread, part of an education policy geared to cultural imperialism".[57]This was also true of science and technology in the empire. Douglas M. Peers and Nandini Gooptu note that "Most scholars of colonial science in India now prefer to stress the ways in which science and technology worked in the service of colonialism, as both a 'tool of empire' in the practical sense and as a vehicle for cultural imperialism. In other words, science developed in India in ways that reflected colonial priorities, tending to benefit Europeans at the expense of Indians, while remaining dependent on and subservient to scientific authorities in the colonial metropolis."[58]British sports were spread across the Empire partially as a way of encouraging British values and cultural uniformity, though this was tempered by the fact that colonised peoples gained a sense of nationalistic pride by defeating the British in their own sports.[59][60][61][62]

The analysis of cultural imperialism carried out by Edward Said drew principally from a study of theBritish Empire.[63]According to Danilo Raponi, the cultural imperialism of the British in the 19th century had a much wider effect than only in the British Empire. He writes, "To paraphrase Said, I see cultural imperialism as a complex cultural hegemony of a country, Great Britain, that in the 19th century had no rivals in terms of its ability to project its power across the world and to influence the cultural, political and commercial affairs of most countries. It is the 'cultural hegemony' of a country whose power to export the most fundamental ideas and concepts at the basis of its understanding of 'civilisation' knew practically no bounds." In this, for example, Raponi includes Italy.[64]

Other pre-Second World War examples

edit

TheNew Cambridge Modern Historywrites about the cultural imperialism ofNapoleonic France.Napoleon used theInstitut de France"as an instrument for transmuting French universalism into cultural imperialism." Members of the institute (who included Napoleon), descended upon Egypt in 1798. "Upon arrival they organised themselves into an Institute of Cairo. The Rosetta Stone is their most famous find. The science of Egyptology is their legacy."[65]

After theFirst World War,Germans were worried about the extent of French influence in theoccupied Rhineland,which under the terms of theTreaty of Versailleswas underAlliedcontrol from 1918 to 1930.[66]An early use of the term appeared in an essay by Paul Ruhlmann (as "Peter Hartmann" ) at that date, entitledFrench Cultural Imperialism on the Rhine.[67]

North American colonisation

edit

Keeping in line with the trends of international imperialistic endeavours, the expansion of Canadian and American territory in the 19th century saw cultural imperialism employed as a means of control overindigenouspopulations. This, when used in conjunction of more traditional forms of ethnic cleansing and genocide in the United States, saw devastating, lasting effects on indigenous communities.

In 2017 Canada celebrated its 150-year anniversary of the confederating of three British colonies. As Catherine Murton Stoehr points out inOrigins,a publication organised by the history departments ofOhio State UniversityandMiami University,the occasion came with remembrance of Canada's treatment of First Nations people.

A mere 9 years after the 1867 signing of confederation Canada passed "The Indian Act", a separate and not equal form of government especially for First Nations. The Indian Act remains in place today, confining and constraining Indigenous jurisdiction in every area of life, in direct contravention of the nation's founding treaties with indigenous nations.

Numerous policies focused on indigenous persons came into effect shortly thereafter. Most notable is the use of residential schools across Canada as a means to remove indigenous persons from their culture and instill in them the beliefs and values of the majorised colonial hegemony. The policies of these schools, as described byWard Churchillin his bookKill the Indian, Save the Man,were to forcefully assimilate students who were often removed with force from their families. These schools forbid students from using their native languages and participating in their own cultural practices. Residential schools were largely run byChristianchurches, operating in conjunction with Christian missions with minimal government oversight. The book,Stolen Lives: The Indigenous peoples of Canada and the Indian Residentials Schools,[68]describes this form of operation: "The government provided little leadership, and the clergy in charge were left to decide what to teach and how to teach it. Their priority was to impart the teachings of their church or order—not to provide a good education that could help students in their post-graduation lives." In aNew York Timesop-ed, Gabrielle Scrimshaw describes her grandparents being forced to send her mother to one of these schools or risk imprisonment. After hiding her mother on "school pick up day" so as to avoid sending their daughter to institutions whose abuse was well known at the time (mid-20th century). Scrimshaw's mother was left with limited options for further education she says and is today illiterate as a result. Scrimshaw explains, "Seven generations of my ancestors went through these schools. Each new family member enrolled meant a compounding of abuse and a steady loss of identity, culture and hope. My mother was the last generation. the experience left her broken, and like so many, she turned to substances to numb these pains."[69]A report, republished byCBC News,[70]estimates nearly 6,000 children died in the care of these schools.

The colonisation of native peoples in North America remains active today despite the closing of the majority of residential schools. This form of cultural imperialism continues in the use of Native Americans asmascotsfor schools and athletic teams. Jason Edward Black, a professor and chair in the Department of Communication Studies at theUniversity of North Carolina at Charlotte,describes how the use of Native Americans as mascots furthers the colonial attitudes of the 18th and 19th centuries.[71]

Indigenous groups, along with cultural studies scholars, view the Native mascots as hegemonic devices–commodification tools–that advance a contemporary manifest destiny by marketing Native culture as Euromerican identity.

InDeciphering Pocahontas,[72]Kent Ono and Derek Buescher wrote: "Euro-American culture has made a habit of appropriating, and redefining what is 'distinctive' and constitutive of Native Americans."

Nazi colonialism

edit

Cultural imperialismhas also been used in connection with the expansion of German influence under theNazisin the middle of the twentieth century. Alan Steinweis and Daniel Rogers note that even before the Nazis came to power, "Already in the Weimar Republic, German academic specialists on eastern Europe had contributed through their publications and teaching to the legitimization of German territorialrevanchismand cultural imperialism. These scholars operated primarily in the disciplines of history, economics, geography, and literature. "[73]In the area of music, Michael Kater writes that during the WWII German occupation of France,Hans Rosbaud,a German conductor based by the Nazi regime inStrasbourg,became "at least nominally, a servant of Nazi cultural imperialism directed against the French."[74]

In Italy during the war, Germany pursued "a European cultural front that gravitates around German culture". The Nazi propaganda ministerJoseph Goebbelsset up the European Union of Writers, "one of Goebbels's most ambitious projects for Nazi cultural hegemony. Presumably a means of gathering authors from Germany, Italy, and the occupied countries to plan the literary life of the new Europe, the union soon emerged as a vehicle of German cultural imperialism."[75]For other parts of Europe,Robert Gerwarth,writing about cultural imperialism andReinhard Heydrich,states that the "Nazis' Germanization project was based on a historically unprecedented programme of racial stock-taking, theft, expulsion and murder." Also, "The full integration of the [Czech]Protectorateinto this New Order required the complete Germanization of the Protectorate's cultural life and the eradication of indigenous Czech and Jewish culture. "[76]

The actions byNazi Germanyreflect on the notion of race and culture playing a significant role in imperialism. The idea that there is a distinction between the Germans and the Jews has created the illusion of Germans believing they were superior to the Jewish inferiors, the notion of us/them and self/others.[77][relevant?]

Western imperialism

edit

Cultural imperialism manifests in theWestern worldin the form legal system to include commodification and marketing of indigenous resources (example medicinal, spiritual or artistic) and genetic resources (example humanDNA).[78]

Americanization

edit
Main article:Americanization
Further information:American imperialism

The terms "McDonaldization",[79]"Disneyization"and"Cocacolonization"[80]have been coined to describe the spread of Western cultural influence, especially after theend of the Cold War.

There are many countries affected by the US and their pop-culture. For example, the film industry in Nigeria referred to as "Nollywood" being the second largest as it produces more films annually than the United States, their films are shown across Africa.[81]Another term that describes the spread of Western cultural influence is "Hollywoodization" it is when American culture is promoted through Hollywood films which can culturally affect the viewers of Hollywood films.[1]

See also

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ^abSchiller, Herbert I. (1992).Mass communications and American empire(2nd ed., updated ed.). Boulder: Westview Press.ISBN0-8133-1439-9.OCLC25874095.
  2. ^Media imperialism: continuity and change.Oliver Boyd-Barrett, Tanner Mirrlees. Lanham, Maryland. 2020.ISBN978-1-5381-2154-2.OCLC1112788649.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: others (link)
  3. ^Mirrlees, Tanner (2016).Hearts and mines: the US empire's culture industry.Vancouver.ISBN978-0-7748-3014-0.OCLC907657359.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  4. ^Carnoy, Martin (1974).Education as cultural imperialism.New York: D. McKay Co.ISBN0-679-30246-8.OCLC934515.
  5. ^Wagnleitner, Reinhold (1994).Coca-colonization and the Cold War: the cultural mission of the United States in Austria after the Second World War.Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.ISBN0-585-02898-2.OCLC42329416.
  6. ^Rydell, Robert W. (2013).Buffalo Bill in Bologna: the Americanization of the world, 1869-1922.Rob Kroes (Pbk. ed.). Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.ISBN978-0-226-00712-0.OCLC806198432.
  7. ^Davis, G. Doug (2019).Cultural imperialism and the decline of the liberal order: Russian and Western soft power in Eastern Europe.Michael O. Slobodchikoff. Lanham, Maryland.ISBN978-1-4985-8586-6.OCLC1050960744.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  8. ^Phillipson, Robert (1992).Linguistic imperialism.Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press.ISBN0-19-437146-8.OCLC30978070.
  9. ^Cultures of United States imperialism.Amy Kaplan, Donald E. Pease. Durham: Duke University Press. 1993.ISBN0-8223-1413-4.OCLC28113815.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: others (link)
  10. ^Said, Edward W. (1994).Culture and imperialism(1st Vintage books ed.). New York.ISBN0-679-75054-1.OCLC29600508.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  11. ^Young, Robert (2003).Postcolonialism: a very short introduction.Oxford: Oxford University Press.ISBN0-19-280182-1.OCLC51001171.
  12. ^Teresa A. Meade;Mark Walker, eds. (January 1991).Science, Medicine and Cultural Imperialism.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN978-1-349-12447-3.OCLC1017909068.
  13. ^Cultural imperialism: essays on the political economy of cultural domination.Bernd Hamm, Russell Smandych. Peterborough, Ontario. 2005.ISBN978-1-4426-0209-0.OCLC180772881.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: others (link)
  14. ^Tomlinson, John (1991).Cultural imperialism: a critical introduction.Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.ISBN0-8018-4249-2.OCLC24142273.
  15. ^Shah, Parth; Maitra, Vidisha (2005).Terracotta Reader: A Market Approach to the Environment.Academic Foundation.ISBN978-81-7188-426-1.
  16. ^Besnier, Niko; Brownell, Susan; Carter, Thomas F. (8 December 2017).Two. Sport, Colonialism, and Imperialism.University of California Press.doi:10.1525/9780520963818-005.ISBN978-0-520-96381-8.S2CID226765698.
  17. ^Oxford English Dictionary,within "cultural"
  18. ^Tomlinson (1991),p. 2
  19. ^Hamm, (2005), p. 4
  20. ^abcdWhite, Livingston A. "Reconsidering Cultural Imperialism Theory"Transnational Broadcasting Studiesno.6 Spring/Summer 2001.
  21. ^Herlihy-Mera, Jeffrey (2018)."After American Studies: Rethinking the Legacies of Transnational Exceptionalism |".Routledge. p. 23.Retrieved21 August2019.
  22. ^abHerlihy-Mera, Jeffrey (2018)."After American Studies: Rethinking the Legacies of Transnational Exceptionalism |".Routledge. p. 24.Retrieved2 August2020.
  23. ^Mirrlees, Tanner (2015)."U.S. Empire and Communications Today: Revisiting Herbert I. Schiller".The Political Economy of Communication.3(2): 6.
  24. ^Schiller, Herbert I. (1976).Communication and cultural domination.White Plains, N.Y.: International Arts and Sciences Press.ISBN0-87332-079-4.OCLC2615596.
  25. ^Maxwell, Richard (2003).Herbert Schiller.Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.ISBN0-7425-1847-7.OCLC52134906.
  26. ^Mosco, Vincent (21 June 2010),"Schiller, Herbert I.",in Donsbach, Wolfgang (ed.),The International Encyclopedia of Communication,Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp. wbiecs131,doi:10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecs131,ISBN978-1-4051-8640-7,retrieved12 June2022
  27. ^Murdock, Graham (1 July 2006)."Notes from the Number One Country".International Journal of Cultural Policy.12(2): 209–227.doi:10.1080/10286630600813727.ISSN1028-6632.S2CID142100032.
  28. ^Mirrlees, Tanner (14 January 2016)."U.S. Empire and Communications Today: Revisiting Herbert I. Schiller".The Political Economy of Communication.3(2).ISSN2357-1705.
  29. ^Foucault, Michel. 1979. "Omnes et Singulatim:Towards a Criticism of Political Reason "in Faubion, James D. (ed.)Essential Works of Foucault, Volume 3: PowerNew York: The New Press
  30. ^Foucault, Michel. 1979. "Truth and Power" in Faubion, James D. (ed.)Essential Works of Foucault, Volume 3: PowerNew York: The New Press
  31. ^Foucault, Michel. 1978. "Governmentality" in Faubion, James D. (ed.)Essential Works of Foucault, Volume 3: PowerNew York: The New Press
  32. ^Robert Young,White Mythologies: Writing History and the West,New York & London: Routledge, 1990.
  33. ^abSaïd, Edward. 1978.Orientalism.New York: Pantheon Books
  34. ^Saïd, Edward. 1993.Culture and ImperialismNew York: Pantheon Books
  35. ^Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1988. "Can the Subaltern Speak"Archived5 January 2012 at theWayback Machine
  36. ^Sayre, Shay; Cynthia King (2010).Entertainment and Society: Influences, Impacts, and Innovations(2nd ed.). Oxon, New York: Routledge. p. 31.ISBN978-0-415-99806-2.
  37. ^abcSabrin, Mohammed (2013)."Exploring the intellectual foundations of Egyptian national education"(PDF).hdl:10724/28885.Archived(PDF)from the original on 1 April 2018.
  38. ^Monga, C. 1996.Anthropology of Anger: Civil Society and Democracy in Africa.Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner
  39. ^wa Thiongo, N. 1986.Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature.London: James Curry.
  40. ^abcdAbdi, Ali A (2000). "Globalization, Culture, and Development: Perspectives on Africa".Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences.2(1): 1–26.CiteSeerX10.1.1.474.5351.
  41. ^abcDunn, Elizabeth C. 2004.Privatizing Poland: Baby Food, Big Business, and the Remaking of LaborIthaca, NY: Cornell University Press
  42. ^abcdElyachar, Julia. 2005.Markets of Dispossession: NGOs, Economic Development, and the State in CairoUS: Duke University Press
  43. ^Mohanty, Chandra Talpade (1988)."Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses".Feminist Review.30(30): 61–88.doi:10.1057/fr.1988.42.JSTOR1395054.
  44. ^Dossa, Shiraz (2007). "Slicing Up 'Development': Colonialism, political theory, ethics".Third World Quarterly.28(5): 887–899.doi:10.1080/01436590701371595.S2CID144101973.
  45. ^Salwen, Michael B. (March 1991). "Cultural imperialism: A media effects approach".Critical Studies in Media Communication.8(1): 29–38.doi:10.1080/15295039109366778.
  46. ^Tan, Alexis S.; Tan, Gerdean K.; Tan, Alma S. (1987). "American TV in the Philippines: A Test of Cultural Impact".Journalism Quarterly.64:65–144.doi:10.1177/107769908706400108.S2CID145405598.
  47. ^Kang, Jong Geun; Morgan, Michael (1988). "Culture Clash: Impact of U.S. Television in Korea".Journalism Quarterly.65(2): 431–438.doi:10.1177/107769908806500225.S2CID144463700.
  48. ^Sparkes, Verone (1977). "TV across the Canadian Border: Does It Matter?".Journal of Communication.27(4): 40–47.doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1977.tb01854.x.
  49. ^Lechner, Frank J. and Boli, John (2009).The Globalization Reader(4th ed), Wiley-Blackwell. p.341
  50. ^Rothkopf, David,"In Praise of Cultural Imperialism",Foreign Affairs,Summer 1997, Volume 107, pp. 38–53; all descriptions of Rothkopf's points and his quotes are from this articleArchived17 November 2008 at theWayback Machine
  51. ^O'Meara, Patrick.; Mehlinger, Howard D.; Krain, Matthew. (2000).Globalization and the challenges of a new century: a reader.Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press. pp.445–446.ISBN978-0-253-21355-6.445 chinese.
  52. ^Caruso, Jennifer (2012). "Turn This Water into Wine".Australian Feminist Studies.27(73): 279–287.doi:10.1080/08164649.2012.705575.S2CID146125147.
  53. ^abKolb, RW. (2007).Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society.SAGE Publications. p. 537.ISBN9781452265698.
  54. ^Ermatinger, JW. (2004).The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 1.ISBN9780313326929.
  55. ^Goldhill, S. (2006).Being Greek Under Rome: Cultural Identity, the Second Sophistic and the Development of Empire.Cambridge University Press. pp. 2 & 114.ISBN9780521030878.
  56. ^Olson, JS.; Shadle, R.,Historical Dictionary of the British Empire, Volume 2,Greenwood Publishing Group, 1996, p. 682.
  57. ^Bell, M.,Geography and Imperialism, 1820–1940,Manchester University Press, 1995, p. 182.
  58. ^Peers, DM.; Gooptu, N.,India and the British Empire,OUP Oxford, 2012. p. 192.
  59. ^"Batting for the British Empire: how Victorian cricket was more than just a game".HistoryExtra.Retrieved30 September2023.
  60. ^Love, Adam; Dzikus, Lars (26 February 2020)."How India came to love cricket, favored sport of its colonial British rulers".The Conversation.Retrieved30 September2023.
  61. ^Sen, Ronojoy (27 October 2015).Nation at Play: A History of Sport in India.Columbia University Press.ISBN978-0-231-53993-7.
  62. ^"'The Revenge of Plassey': Football in the British Raj ".LSE International History.20 July 2020.Retrieved30 September2023.
  63. ^Webster, A.,The Debate on the Rise of British Imperialism,Manchester University Press, 2006, p. 7.
  64. ^Raponi, D.,Religion and Politics in the Risorgimento: Britain and the New Italy, 1861–1875,Palgrave Macmillan, 2014, pp. 56–58.
  65. ^Crawley, CW. (ed.),The New Cambridge Modern History: Volume 9, War and Peace in an Age of Upheaval, 1793–1830.Cambridge University Press, 1965, p. 126.
  66. ^"Rhineland Occupation".Encyclopedia.Encyclopedia of Modern Europe: Europe Since 1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of War and Reconstruction. 18 October 2023.Retrieved24 June2024.
  67. ^Poley, J.,Decolonisation in Germany: Weimar Narratives of Colonial Loss and Foreign Occupation,Peter Lang, 2007, pp. 165 & 216.
  68. ^"Stolen Lives: The Indigenous Peoples of Canada and the Indian Residential Schools".Facing History and Ourselves.23 June 2017.Retrieved3 March2020.
  69. ^Scrimshaw, Gabrielle (30 June 2017)."Opinion | Canada's Hidden History, My Mother and Me".The New York Times.ISSN0362-4331.Archived fromthe originalon 1 January 2022.Retrieved3 March2020.
  70. ^Schwartz, Daniel."Residential School Students Had Same Odds of Dying as Soldiers in WW II".CBC News.Retrieved3 March2020.
  71. ^Black, Jason Edward (2002). "The" Mascotting "of Native America: Construction, Commodity, and Assimilation".American Indian Quarterly.26(4): 605–622.doi:10.1353/aiq.2004.0003.ISSN0095-182X.JSTOR4128504.S2CID162211313.
  72. ^Ono, Kent A.; Buescher, Derek T. (2001). "Deciphering Pocahontas: Unpackaging the commodification of a native American woman".Critical Studies in Media Communication.18:23–43.doi:10.1080/15295030109367122.S2CID143685050.
  73. ^Steinweis, AE; Rogers, DE.,The Impact of Nazism: New Perspectives on the Third Reich and Its Legacy,U of Nebraska Press, 2003, p.72.
  74. ^Kater, MH.,Composers of the Nazi Era: Eight Portraits,Oxford University Press, USA, 1999, p.275.
  75. ^Ben-Ghiat, R.,Fascist Modernities: Italy, 1922–1945,University of California Press, 2001, p.17.
  76. ^Gerwarth, R.,Hitler's Hangman: The Life of Heydrich,Yale University Press, 2011, p. 263.
  77. ^Gregory, Derek, Johnston, Ron, and Pratt, Geraldine, eds. Dictionary of Human Geography (5th Edition). Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 1 February 2015.
  78. ^"western cultural imperialism: Topics by WorldWideScience.org".worldwidescience.org.Retrieved9 December2022.
  79. ^George Ritzer (2009).The McDonaldization of Society.Los Angeles, USA: Pine Forge Press.
  80. ^Mark Pendergrast (15 August 1993)."Viewpoints; A Brief History of Coca-Colonization".The New York Times.Retrieved25 November2014.
  81. ^Martin, Judith N.; Nakayama, Thomas K. (19 April 2011),"Intercultural Communication and Dialectics Revisited",The Handbook of Critical Intercultural Communication,Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 59–83,doi:10.1002/9781444390681.ch5,ISBN978-1-4443-9068-1,retrieved26 October2020

References

edit
  • Dunch, Ryan (2002). "Beyond Cultural Imperialism: Cultural Theory, Christian Missions, and Global Modernity".History and Theory.41(3): 301–325.doi:10.1111/1468-2303.00208.JSTOR3590688.S2CID143267711.
  • Hamm, Bernd; Russell Charles Smandych (2005).Cultural imperialism: essays on the political economy of cultural domination.Reference, Information and Interdisciplinary Subjects Series. University of Toronto Press.ISBN978-1-55111-707-2.
  • Lechner, Frank; John Boli (2009).The Globalization Reader.Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Lechner, Frank; John Boli (2012).The Globalization Reader.John Wiley & Sons.ISBN978-0-470-65563-4.
  • Tomlinson, John (1991).Cultural imperialism: a critical introduction(illustrated, reprint ed.). Continuum International Publishing Group.ISBN978-0-8264-5013-5.
  • White, Livingston A. (Spring–Summer 2001). "Reconsidering cultural imperialism theory".Transnational Broadcasting Studies(6). The Center for Electronic Journalism at the American University in Cairo and the Centre for Middle East Studies, St. Antony’s College, Oxford.
edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cultural_imperialism&oldid=1250465442"