More than ever, examples of cultural globalization can be seen in our everyday lives. As June Johnson, author of Global Issues, Local Arguments, states, “The idea of the world’s cultures drawn together in a global village raises questions about equal representation, reciprocal sharing, enriched diversity, and mutual understanding” (192). When McLuhan presented his idea of a “global village” however, his concept raised several distinct social problems. The issue of cultural identity is certainly not a new one.
![negative impacts of globalization on culture negative impacts of globalization on culture](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-B8EMRsGNxcs/WpIx6m0j_BI/AAAAAAAAE6E/rP4xz4Hu0vouBI_wYhESZR3ZzNjC4XRxACLcBGAs/s1600/Reasons%2Bto%2BGive%2Bto%2BCharity%2BInfographic%2B%25282%2529.png)
If we cannot agree on the implications of these cultural shifts, perhaps we cannot identify ourselves as members of a global village after all. Understanding what these changes will mean for each existing culture individually, and being careful to consider all sides of the discussion with equal relevance is essential to forming a universal understanding of what globalization means. Assuming Marshall McLuhan’s analogy of the world as a global village is an accurate prediction of the effect of cultural globalization, what consequences and benefits will emerge from this compression of culture? This essay will consider the implications of conflicting arguments addressing this question. On the other hand, people are afraid that the evolution of a global village will raise conflicts between cultures, cause a fragmentation of culture, or lead to cultural domination by more developed countries and possibly create hybrid cultures (Johnson 191-96). On one hand,people believe that if it continues, cultural globalization will lead to a dazzling marketplace where countries of all economic opportunities are represented and where more fortunate countries come to the aid of less fortunate ones with humanitarian efforts. The assertion that it is possible for all the cultures of the world to become one global village is controversial, though. The late Marshall McLuhan, a media and communication theorist, coined the term “global village” in 1964 to describe the phenomenon of the world’s culture shrinking and expanding at the same time due to pervasive technological advances that allow for instantaneous sharing of culture (Johnson 192). How would we deal with that? In light of rapidly accelerating globalization and expansion of technology, it becomes relevant to discuss the implications of a potential overarching culture with respect to the potential clashing of cultures.
![negative impacts of globalization on culture negative impacts of globalization on culture](https://i1.rgstatic.net/publication/312146733_Impact_of_Globalization_on_World_Culture/links/5871d28408ae8fce491f0725/largepreview.png)
Muslims and Christians live by the same religious standards. Communists follow the same rules as those previously under a democracy. All the countries in the world are united under one government and one religion. The individually savory flavors are a muddled sludge. The individually unique music is now a raucous cacophony. Now imagine that all these cultures are compressed into one super-culture. Taste the curry from India, the coconut milk from Thailand, the cheeseburger from the United States. Listen to the music-from the gentle drum beats of Africa, to the melodic didgeridoo of Australia, to the scream of the electric guitar. Imagine the vast spectrum of all the cultures in the world.