ONCE MORE ABOUT GLOBALIZATION:

Rasul Jumaly

Term “globalization” is quite popular today and everybody got used to it. But many people continue perceiving this as something distracted; let’s say on the level of abstract theory. In reality this is quite the opposite.

In the globalization century problems occurring in any country, for example in Nigeria, could affect citizens in Brazil or Uzbekistan. World has changed – today it is highly interrelated and interdependent. For example let’s remind ourselves how explosions in the part of the planet Earth in USA affected military-political conditions in Central Asia.
Of course globalization as such has many positive aspects. This is first of all increasing communication opportunities, fast information and goods mainstream, increase in investments and many others. Negatives are related with tendencies for standardization, deletion of national and ethical differences, washing out of traditional national countries’ borders.
As the result world has divided into two hostile groups – globalists and antiglobalists. First is represented by establishment of western countries, mass media, large multinational corporations, magnates, oligarchs, engaged international organizations that stand up for globalization. Second fights against this phenomenon. Antiglobalists do not accept any idea of incubator producing unified models of behavior. Secondly they are sure that those leading the globalization are rich and care only about their pockets robbing the poor. Thirdly there is hurtful reaction on interchange of nationally – cultural originality of the nations.  
However here we have another paradox.
In general in public opinion American and western civilizations are built up on individual basis. In other words most important for them is uniqueness and originality of every individual. From the long past East is considered as system of cultures oriented towards collectivism, principle of masses in various aspects of societies vital functions. In this case it is strange that West rather than East is supporter and main locomotive of construction massive culture deprived of personal characteristics. Explanation of such phenomenon is on the surface. The problem is in misunderstanding of conceptions: in attractive wrapper of homebred “human values” we receive western behavioral models. Today line between them is unnoticeable. Paraphrasing dolefully known USSR slogan we get “Say common to all mankind but mean western”.       
However ideologists of massive culture in XXI century forget that after “Crusade” European who were having miserable existence accepted many things from the East: started to cultivate rise, lemons, use sugar, built windmills, manufacture silk cloth and mirrors, learned to used forks and knifes, wash in bath-house, accepted progressive scientific thoughts, play chess, etc. But times are changing and renaissance of some countries is changing by rise of others, which quite often happens through enrichment from other civilizations. That is why we should not forget that forwarding “outdated” nations under standards of “progressive” European standards could largely hurt Europeans themselves.              
There is formation of ideological communicative transparency, new social place for human kind is being established – in the center of interweaving informational mainstream that does not know any borders. How does this affect ethno – cultural identity of Kazakhstan? How could values of western society could be combined with values of traditional culture?   
Even if it would be possible to fence off from globalization it would be definitely counter productive. As it is seen on practice isolation installations, requiring closed monoculture lead to extreme and basically agonizing forms of “originality for any costs”. From the other side acceptance of globalization leads to lost of in part of sovereignty and national values. Society loses spiritually moral reference points. In exchange countries receive pseudo cultures in western understanding which is guided by market criteria, imposes norms and stereotypes of consumption society, cult of force and brutality, striving for superiority and supremacy for any costs.  
Resistance to such force is natural reaction because national culture could not be pragmatic or reactionary coming from its definitions; it is fundamental principle, figurative DNA of any nation. In other words if culture and language would be lost there will not be nation anymore.  
Fight against unification of spiritually – moral norms coincides with religious points in various nations. One cannot discuss possibility of culture and religion confluence and formation of world religion. The only solution is dialogue to tolerate different religions and spiritual agreement. Discussing an idea of absorption of one ideology by the other is not logical and also destructive. That is why there should be definite limitation for globalization.  
Globalization itself has economically – financial motives, there is year by year increase in consumption. But there is demand not only for goods and services, spiritual food is also under high demand – music, literature, theater, movies, painting, dances, etc. If there is a demand for satisfaction which could be profitable then this niche is covered by entrepreneurs. In analogues with any other business in international trade they support globalization and unification bringing up their standards. Today massive culture is well developed industry which forms supply and demand financial billions dollar projects. National cultures cannot withstand under pressure of this neo culture. People did even notice how fast they and their children started to copy western lifestyle which quite often is not even similar to traditional cultural, mental and religious beliefs.   
For example how “St. Valentine’s Day” is related to Orthodoxy and Islam – two most popular religions in Kazakhstan or such pagan holidays as American “Halloween”? However these days they are very popular, it is just another way for globalists to collect a lot of money from attributes and ideology of these dates.   
In other words collective consciousness if graded by single standards – this way it is much easier to sell goods and services when all you need is modules and several million copies. Imposed values program demand for introduced culture destroying national identity. This is especially true about young generation. Forming individuals easily absorb everything they read and hear from TV, newspapers, advertisement booklets, banners and other megaphones of massive culture. As the result we have young generation brought up on alien ideals. We observe destruction of generation succession, washing off national spiritual base. 
Developed countries in Europe and Asia consider this problem since long ago, they started the alarm. Serious financial expenditures are made are spent for support of originality of the culture, educating young generation in accordance with traditions and this all is done on governmental level. 
Now we have tensions between national traditions and general standards, this leads to tensions in society. Protests are turning into banal boycott of “Coca-Cola” and “MacDonald’s” or violence on the street such as massacres of antiglobalists in the capitals of Western world. Part of protesting group is attracted by extremism ideologists and they recruit young generation. They start to ensure that originality of every nation is considered as hostility this leads to jealousy, rivalry and jaundice in relations. Today we can observe dangerous tendencies in societies when one civilization is glorified by humiliating the others this leads to phobias. There are many examples: cartoons’ scandal in Europe, destruction of western embassies in Muslim world, jaundice, humiliating treatment of Asians and Africans which turns out into protest movements, etc.     
Human values as such are not put under doubt: right for life, freedom, honor and dignity, supremacy of law, social justice, etc. But human cultures cannot be same for everybody. Every nation has their own identification which forms succession of past and future. Originality, culture, spiritual base and traditions in Central Asian republics are very rich that is why they have something to protect and lose.   
It is obvious that Central Asian countries are not able to withstand destructive process of cultural alone because investments into this sphere are too high in order to fight it with small budget of cultural development. Of course there is possibility of iron curtain like in Soviet times but in these days it would be absolute nonsense.    
That is why at the peak times of cultural globalization there should be support for idea of regional cultural and spiritual development. For example same idea of Eurasia introduced by outstanding Russian scientists of XX century and these days supported by President Nazarbayev. It is well adapted for local environment, quite flexible and most important passed several ages historical exam. Eurasia offers wide integration in the frame of largest continent and carries out not only economical aspects. Eurasia includes all post Soviet countries which are interrelated with history and culture. This is more than 350 million people – compact and attractive market for produced goods and services including creation of general cultural platform. That is why it would be possible to produce competitive cultural products in the frame of Eurasia and push out everything alien.  
Otherwise further cultural assimilation in Western manner will be grave digger for originality. Faceless society will definitely turn into “mankurts” organisms described by Kyrgyz classic Chingiz Aitmatov, they will lose their roots and like cattle are easy to manipulate with. 
That is why central idea of survival in globalization “jungles” is in substantiation of model itself in accordance with harmonic correlation with such understandings as general – special – united. 
Globalization being human mind potential is valuable if it serves in the interests of everybody rather than of selected ones. What is important that globalization carries high potential for new social identity – citizen of the world – but it should give a right to have national lifestyle and independent national development; this is needed in order to ensure that only through national differences it would be possible to enter home to all humankinds.
This way new form of world order can be exclusively formed from constructive dialogue between East and West without ego and superiority. Both parts of the world have different and “ideal” world view: active and contemplation, rational and poetic, actively progressive and reservedly conservative. In Kazakhstan this problem is even more complicated because of strong influence of both types of culture.

• 42
• 41