CMM3115 Global Communications​ ​Assessment 1 Semester 2, 2011
September.
CLASH OF CULTURES

Globalisation is now entrenched in this current era of Australian, Western life. Globalisation already profoundly alters, in countless ways, this democratic society and the lives of many individuals in it. Globalisation carries many good factors, and is often referred to as the age of information, or technological advances. Yet this multi-faceted, now-inevitable way of life is a conflicted age with substantial potential for clashes of culture. That pitential  is directly related to communication difficulties between different components of Australian society – differing groupings of existing inhabitants, and those who are newly-permanent parts of the Australian community. These factors significantly change the Australian society and disturb, for good or bad, the established Australian culture.  Major factors in this clash are the high levels of anxiety and the collapse in communication occurring at various fundamental levels in Australian society today.

Globalisation has for some time been upon the ‘democratic nation’, aka monarchy’s-colony, of Australia, and can now be perceived. Manuel Castells says, beginning in the 1990s, a global construction of “wealth, information and power” became identifiable. Not simply another facet of traditional “domination… [this is] “a new global social structure” (2004, p. xv). Castells says because its structure contains two principal and contradictory characteristics, globalisation is invariably conflicted (2004).
The first characteristic is a multi-faceted “cultural identity” which provides fleeting avenues of protection against the second characteristic of “programmed networks” (Castells, 2004, p. xv). In addition as,  Panizza Allmark explains, a further dimension in this diverse era carries a “time-space compression that… creates cultural tensions and pressures” (CMM3115 lecture notes, 2011).

Also, Johnathan Pickering says “globalisation and culture are multi-centred and heterogeneous in nature” ((2001, p. 47) and Eric Aarons more specifically describes this era as “a profound crisis of sustainability for a planet with seven billion people and growing” (cited by McKnight, 2010, p. 54).

Upon finding themselves in this confusion which is termed globalisation, people naturally seek protection. They search for solutions in their own, known culture – “Australia”.

The existing Australian culture is quite unique and while  Pickering argues “the diversity and vitality …are as great as they have ever been” (p. 56), Jon Stratton talks about the “structural organisation of Australian society” (2009, p. 1). He calls Australian society a “race-based class system where the middle-class has remained predominantly white” (p.1). He classifies Australia as a nation where “Anglo-Celtics… [are] the source of ‘Australian values… and the hegemonic Australian culture’ “(2009, p. 16). These two differing views of Australian society and culture are probably a good representation of its diversity.

In addition, Australia’s populace, and culture continue to diversify ever more rapidly, causing an enormous amount of important factors to impact ever more strongly. For example, Stratton describes “Australian[s’]… history of intense dislike of migration” (2009, p. 2).

He  is interested in why the arrival of modest numbers of “asylum seekers arriving by boat” creates such inordinate levels of community anxiety, and why there is such an emphasis on assimilation (p.1). Stratton seems to consider assimilation as a one-way process yet the arrival of new comers, into any established society, automatically involves numerous, often two-way  processes of assimilation. Broadly: assimilation allows an existing culture to continue to function and  is an imperative if a culture is to dynamically evolve.

On the personal scale, assimilation requires good communication. Stephen Matchett reveals the UN protects the rights of everyone to “seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, either orally, in writing or in print… or though any other media” (p. 20).  Unfortunately, Stratton (2002) does not, in this information age, discuss how a notable lack of effective communication hinders many debates, including migration, in many societies. Including Australia.
Australia is a democracy, but it is a capitalist society. In the now-globalised Australian environment communication has been segmented and shredded by the power of the economic sector. For example, George Megalogenis says “the difference for Australia [now] is the quarry is generating national income while also continuing to hollow out large parts of our economy, and society” (2011, August 27-28, p. 1).

This hollowing out means today in Australia the protection culture can offer its people is limited and uncertain. This is because of globalisation’s economically-driven, or capitalist “programmed networks” (Castells, 2004, p. xv). In Australia these programmed networks include those of communication.

The enormity of these influences, exerted by economic interests, is a major concern to huge sectors of the community, both working and middle-class (Megalogenis, 2011, August 27-28). This, and other concerns, are directly related to the ‘boat-people’ cincerns (above) and how the visa entry system to Australia which is now “employer-driven” (Stratton, 2009, p. 4). The existing community perceive these matters to contain several direct threats to their “cultural identity” and to their associated quality of life.
These concerns directly position “Australian skilled workers within a global market… [which] drives down Australian wages” (Stratton, 2009, p.4). Today “nine-tenths of the local economy is already on the edge of recession” (Megalogenis, 2011, August 27-28).

The average Australian can understand clearly what is happening to his bargaining power; there is only one direction in which his lifestyle is going – and that is down. These are key changes to modern Australian culture, and to the ( industrialised) Australian way of life.

These factors create unremitting pressure throughout the existing Autralian culture, and yet these huge changes are also part of the entire world’s globalisation process, where, Castells says, the governing structures of [all] societ[ies are] undergoing dramatic change (2004). Megalogenis says, in Australia it is a “restructure as profound as the Hawke-Keating-Howard deregulation project of the 80s and 90s” (2011, August 27-28, p. 1).

The Australian image is closely tied to one of strong self-sufficiency. Any reduction in something as fundamental as wages immediately reduces the level of protection Australian “cultural identity” (Castells, 2004) may offer the masses. Little wonder this is making the average Australian so very anxious.
There are many anxieties occurring in Western society now. This is time, according to Eric Aarons, for “every society to reverse the priority capitalism gives to individual betterment and gain and give that priority instead to social needs” (cited by McKnight, 2010, p. 54).

. Globalisation may hold out that promise, but right now, globalisation is causing chaos. Just when social stability is vitally important, many major institutions, previously fundamental cornerstones of democracy, have almost entirely lost credibility with the public (Castells, 2004).
These institutions include government, banks, stock exchange, the housing market, health, education systems and the judiciary (Castells, 2004). Castells’ view is that the conflict identified in globalisation forces culture at all levels to undergo dramatic change (2004).

Pickering calls this a “mixed harvest” for Australia (2001, p. 48). Megalogenis says institutions such as the Australian government do not properly understand the communications problems they are having, and the furore they are creating within the society (2011, August 27-28, p. 1).

Communication dysfunction now in Australia has been examined in other recent media articles. Dennis Shanahan describes as the profound the government “disconnect. [in relation to] the depth of feeling in the electorate” (2011, August 27-28, p. 11). Megalogenis says “this change is bewildering for the community because it is being imposed without our national leadership owning it, let alone explaining where it will take us” (2011, August 27-28, p. 2).

Australian community is reeling because it is currently at the mercy of what Stratton calls “the primacy of the market” (2009, p. 4). During these turbulent changes of globalisation those governing have lost contact, possibly forever, with the governed.
Effective communication between established levels within any society is essential, yet today, regardless of party politics, Australian politicians seem to have lost the art of communicating or “the nature of cultural transmission” (Pickering, 2001, p. 48) with those they are (supposedly) elected to govern.

Megalogenis describes the current situation.
​​A mining boom is an opportunity only if government
understands its role is: to ensure the nine-tenths of the
economy not directly connected to it can still function.
(2011, August 27-28, p. 1).

Substantial further clashes within the culture are possible as nine-tenths of the economy is also nine-tenths of the Australian people – badly hurt by economic globalisation. Individuals now must find and accommodate themselves to, “new ways of living” (Castells, 2004).

Globalisation has the potential to create an Australia “full of confrontations between people, groups, and nations who think, feel and act differently” (Geert Hofstede & Gert JanHofstede, 2005, p. 2). Globalised Australia is changing so rapidly, “the pace… has undoubtedly intensified” (Pickering, 2001, p. 49). If globalisation is “compression of the world… into a ‘single place’” (Robertson cited by Pickering, 2001, p. 48), it is difficult to see how to overcome the substantial levels of individual communication difficulty that will exist.

One example is discussed in a recent article by philosopher Tim Soutphommasane. His subject is virtue, and he investigates whether a common view of this key universal human value is possible. Soutphommansane says “there remains minimal shared understanding… in a society that contains citizens with diverse moral beliefs and practices” (2011, August 27-28, p. 8). Tomlinson says:

​​Cultural transmission involves an interactive
process of negotiation, incorporation and
resistance.. Furthermore, there are many other
aspects of culture that remain highly resistant…
such as language, personal relationships and
religious, ethnic and political affiliations.
(cited by Pickering 2001, p. 51).
Given all these separate stresses and strains, it seems Australians need to quickly become aware of the complications globalisation is imposing and work at developing effective communication methods, and in his analysis there are a number of factors which Stratton does not address.On the street it is evident forces of globalisation now operating within Australia are deeply, quickly and economically negatively affecting many in the the existing society. Pickering says these forces of globalisation “operate… at many levels, including the economic, political, environmental and cultural” (2001, p. 48). This is change with a huge problem – and with such a profound failure of communication comes substantial potential for clashes of culture. Anxiety is heightened today in Australia when the community attempt to express themselves because a large majority of this democracy are either not heard, or not understood.

Reference

Castells, M. (2009). The Information Age: Economy, Society & Culture. Vol.II. The
power of identity. (2nd. Ed). Maldon, USA: Blackwell Publishing.

Hofstede, G. & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and Organisations: Software of the
mind. Intercultural Cooperation and its importance for survival. New York: McGraw Hill.

James, J. D. (2010). McDonaldisation, Masala McGospel and Om Economics:
Televangelism in Contemporary India. New Delhi: SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.

Pickering, J. (2001). Globalisation: A threat to Australian culture? Globalisation and
Australian culture. pp. 46-59. Journal of Australian Political Economy No. 48

Matchett, S. (2011, Monday, June 27). Feel free to feast at UN’s internet buffet. The
wry side. A Plus. p. 20. The Australian.

Megalogenis, G. (2011, August 27-28). Changing Gear. Inquirer 1. The Weekend
Australian.

McKnight, D. (2010, Spring) Rethinking Marx, the market and Hayek. pp. 53, 54.
Dissent

McPhail, T. L. (1987). Electronic Colonialism: The future of international
broadcasting and communication. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications, Inc.

McPhail, T. L. (2002). Global Communications: Theories, stakeholders and trends.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Shanahan, D. (2011, August 27-28). Labor loses on the left and right. Focus. p. 11.
The Weekend Australian.
​​Page 1 of 8
Susanneharford student no 10043898 Tutor: