E-Reserves

“The Local Trap” argues that just because food is local doesn’t mean it is better. People often associate local food with small farms, healthier products, and ethical practices, but none of that is guaranteed. Local systems can still have inequality depending on who runs them. This shows that it’s not about where food comes from, but how it is produced and distributed. When the focus becomes just keeping things local instead of making them fair or sustainable, the original purpose is lost.

The food miles reading makes a similar point by showing that distance isn’t the best way to measure environmental impact. While people often say food travels thousands of miles, those numbers are oversimplified. Production usually creates more environmental harm than transportation. Focusing only on distance ignores how food is grown and processed. The CSA interviews also show that “local” is more about connection and trust than actual distance, highlighting the difference between space (distance) and place (relationships).

The biopiracy reading about the neem tree shows how global systems can exploit local knowledge. Neem had been used in India for centuries, but corporations patented methods related to it and made profits from it. This forced local farmers to pay for something that was already part of their culture. While companies argue they improved the process, it still shows how power imbalances allow global systems to take advantage of smaller communities. and distributed. 

Post 15: E Reserves

         “Piracy by Patient” is about how patent law allows for the corporate ownership over traditional knowledge as well as natural resources. Many of this knowledge and resources comes from developing nations as well. The author refers to this as bio-piracy. This is the idea that what was once shared knowledge is now being privatized by Western corporations and being used for profit. This undermines local farming communities and exploits poorer countries. I agree with the author that this is exploitative and is to the detriment of local communities who have developed and shared this knowledge. I also believe that what corporations often call their own innovations are rarely their own, whether it is in tech, medicine or even farming. Innovation is the vast majority of time done in public institutions or local communities, while the profits of innovation are privatized. 

        The “Local Trap” describes how people will blindly assume that the scale of a farming operation is indicative of its efficiency, sustainability, or morality. The author is asserting that there are plenty of examples of small scale operations which are not as ethical or environmentally conscious as larger operations. They think what is more important in assessing those social responsibility factors, is who owns the farms, and what their goals are. I think to a certain extent, this may be correct, except in the case of Piracy by Patient, where large scale corporations, due to their scale, are able to inflict more harm.

        In the “CSA” article, the author talks about how “food miles” is an insufficient way of measuring the environmental impact of producing food. They also talked about how the idea of eating local is about having a connection between the food you eat and community, environment, and the understanding of the sources of what you’re consuming. It is not as much, as many people assume, about food miles and only consuming what is in your immediate physical environment. I think that understanding where your food is coming from, and having a personal connection to what you eat is important, and probably leads to a healthier lifestyle generally. Most food you buy in a grocery store gives you no way of knowing where that food came from, and that probably leads to a disconnect between people and their food.

E-Reserves

 "Avoiding the Local Trap" offers the assumption that local food is, by default, better than food chains and cuisines from places that aren't based nearby.  Local people see their food as healthier, more ecologically sustainable, and more beneficial to the global food system overall.  Often people don't want their food to be grown on large local farms.  I can agree with this usually, as living near farmers markets has provided me with the perspective that locally grown agriculture tastes better then corporately manufactured agriculture.  Large corporations constantly are selling their produce as a commodity instead of a basic food need, differing generally from many local farmers around the world.  While food being "good" is subjective, many people, such as the people in the article, are starting to prefer their local agricultural movements more and more over corporate-based ones.  They believe its not only better tasting, but added chemicals into international produce can be deterring for some when thinking about purchasing them.

   The "Food Miles" article also discusses how impacted food can become after it travels an incredibly long distance.  The author discusses the oversimplification of local vs international food, saying that there are advantages and disadvantages to both. It's good that both perspectives are offered in this article, because I do agree that there are advantages and disadvantages to both shipping produce internationally and growing food locally.

    The Piracy article about the Neem Tree is also interesting.  It discusses the idea of biodiversity, and how there's a dividing line between allowing people to use your resources for the benefit of the community, and companies using your resources purely for their profit.  It explains that companies coming in and patenting your products is piracy, and isn't a new concept in India.  While I don't want this to be true, the reality is that this happens more often then most people think.  I think people should be able to have the confidence that the government isn't going to simply come in and steal your ideas without at least giving the proper credit for it.

E-Reserve Chapters -- Local Trap, Food Miles, Piracy by Patent

 "Avoiding the Local Trap" is an article that goes over, as the title states, the "Local Trap." What the article means by the Local Trap is that activists and researchers assume that local food is automatically better than other, larger foods, such as chains. These individuals see the local food as innately healthier, ecologically sustainable, and overall a higher quality in comparison to the "global-scale-food-system." I think that the assumption doesn't go over everything. There are so little factors that go into what makes food "good," apart from being an entirely subjective topic already; for example what goes into the production of the food itself, like pesticides or entirely other contaminants that may impact appeal. The author then goes over how those individuals have conflated two entirely separate topics into one thing that had created this issue: capitalism and globalism. The author says how "they" [the activists] are trying to resist the globalizing of food, and that it should be left to the localities. This is wrong, and they're actually against the capitalization of agriculture and its practices. The monetization of farming and locally produced foods are what caused the issues that they have, according to the author. I generally agree that turning agriculture from a way of sustaining a family and community into a way to make mass amounts of money was a slightly negative event overall, but I wouldn't say that it makes the local-scale-food better than the globalized food. Like I said, there's so many little details that go under the radar when on this topic that really need to be brought up. In the text, the author includes a promotion for local food over global food, with 10 reasons. The very first reason is a subjective title "Local food tastes better." The other nine reasons seem to be general statements that support local, like it's non-GMO, it keeps diversity, etc. I think that people should do both, buy local and global. Support the local community of farmers and keep the economy going at the same time.

The "Food Miles" article starts out with the statement of "your average food item on your plate has travelled 1,500 miles." The author then makes a point of how that statistic is severely outdated, and had overly-generalized and assumed when calculating the total number. The author basically says that the entire statement is very vague and incomplete, as well as not actually focusing on the real "average" and it was a study in just one city, for a certain kind of product, with an ambiguous term of measurement. The author then makes the point of how the oversimplification / stereotype of; "local food is better because it isn't global" makes no sense when one actually goes into the details. The author then throws a curveball, [at least a curveball to me], and says that the "food mile critiques quickly mutated into 'local food is killing the planet and poor.'" To me, I'd think that the global food would be the cause of the earth's decay, but the author wrote the opposite. It was a headline in a news outlet. Then the author switches back to the "global bad" side and quotes The Economist's quote of "it is virtuous to buy one [a tomato] grow in a lavishly heated greenhouse in the Hudson Valley." The back and forth of the author's writing really gives me a feeling of whiplash, because there is a jump back-and-forth between the sides of the argument.
The author interviewed a number of individuals, and created a list as to why it's better. The top answer, as expected, is the freshness and quality. The rest of the list makes sense; supporting farmers, farms, etc., boosting community, lower carbon footprint. Some of the reasons are a little odd to me, though. Perhaps I don't completely understand what the interviewees meant by "Thankfulness for the food itself." Can one not appreciate food that was produced from elsewhere and put through effort to get to you? Am I misinterpreting the people's words?

The "Piracy by Patent" article goes over the Neem Tree and its vast array of very useful parts. The discovery and use of the Neem Tree, as well as many other plants, had been done for centuries, millennia, even. And in the late 20th century, someone took it to the U.S. and got it patented for themselves and their companies. People claimed that it was piracy to take the work and offer it as their own. The patenting was naturally met with major resistance by the people who had discovered the incredible versatility of the tree.
The way that the companies claimed ownership of those methods of neem usage really put into perspective how easy it is, or perhaps was. Nowadays, it is a very arduous process to get something patented; but back then, you could basically say "yeah I did this thing and it's mine." [Not actually, but it was a lot easier to get something patented.] It was very easy to [essentially] steal an idea that wasn't officially protected and get it to be under your name or company. The article highlights how this was going on with the tree and its subsequent processes, with toothpaste, medicine, toothbrushes, wood, fungal solutions, and many other things. In more recent years, the process has definitely become more rigorous and thorough, making sure that there isn't already something like what someone claims to have invented, as well as generally costing more to do.

E-Reserves 4/29

“Food Miles, Local Eating, and CSA” touches on a lot of important parts of where the food we eat comes from. I was wondering how at the beginning of the paper, how anyone was able to even estimate how far the average food item travels in miles because of how complex of a question that is. I was both glad to see that I was right and upset at how much disinformation had been spread about the answer to such an impossible question. I think the only answer that matters in that the produce you get from your grocery store unless specified otherwise has traveled much too far. It is also important to note that it doesn’t matter if your food was grown locally if it isn’t possible to naturally grow where you are and in the season you are because at that point you're causing the same amount of environmental damage that eating locally is supposed to stop. The best way to eat if you care about the impact the sourcing of your food has on the world is to eat locally from what's currently in season around you, and a great way to do this is through CSA. 

I found “Avoiding the Local Food Trap” to not be specific enough of an article for me to fully understand. I get that just eating locally produced food doesn’t guarantee that it's better for the environment and that it can’t guarantee that nothing will go wrong with the production. But I believe that this is a problem that almost every system has. It is always important to know that corruption can occur anywhere along with people abusing a system. This is why even when eating locally you have to do your due diligence and research the potential consequences if you're trying to do a good thing for either yourself, the environment, or the economy. 

“The Case of the Neem Tree” was an upsetting read. I do not know a lot about law especially when it comes to creating and enforcing patents but I think there needs to be some type of stipulation when it comes to stealing ideas from other people or communities. If something like the versatile use of the neem trees is already widely known and used people shouldn’t be allowed to come in and steal those ideas and resources to make money off of.

4/29

 The Local Trap was about the systems of local food, and how people generally assume local food is the best option. They explain how just because something is local doesn't mean it's more fair or sustainable than other sources. It points out how local systems can still promote inequality and problems depending on who is in control of it. This made me think that it's not really about where something is coming from but more how the systems are in the place it's produced. The goal of local food is to promote fairness, sustainability, and contributing to a local economy, but when things like scaling or focusing too much on local production become more important than these qualities it takes away all of what it's supposed to be. 

The reading on Food Miles and Local Eating talks about how the transportation of food actually works. You always hear that food travels from all over the world to get to your plate. This article does a good job at explaining that these statistics are not entirely true, and have been overused from a small amount of studies. Food miles aren't a good measure for things like environmental impact for example because of the difference in emissions during transportation and production, with production being way more harmful than the transportation process. Focusing solely on distance ignores things like how the food is grown or processed also which is important considering you would be eating it! I think that the CSA interviews were an interesting add on for this article. It did a good job at showing the importance of a connected community and that people will value that just as much as efficiency. This article shows that food systems are more than just food miles and that focusing only on distance food travels oversimplifies and ignores a lot of other issues. 

The Piracy reading was interesting, and focused on neem trees and the impact globalization can have on resources. Neem oil has been used in India for a large amount of medicinal products, and in farming. After the discovery of the significance larger companies came in and began to patent products produced from it. This article talks about the use of it in pesticides and how it was patented even though there was already knowledge of it for that use. Things like GATT made this easier for companies to claim ownership on the uses of these kinds of resources. The Indian farmers protested these changes, as they had to pay premiums to use products that have been in their culture for years. I think this is an example of how greed can totally take over global systems. The sharing of ideas in this case was extremely harmful once it got into the hands of greedy corporations looking for a profit.

Week 16

The articles of this week call for a return of communal exchange of food, liberating from a global economy that can be disruptive and destructive. In the "Conserving Communities" article, Wendell Berry argues that U.S. is in a decline, result of the investment and industry and global economy, instead of community, agriculture and farming. He shows that in less than 100 years, the farming population went from 33% to 2%. For Berry, the globalization antagonizes the local communities, viewing people as replaceable and movable, and the land as a factory. Then, the author proposes rules for a more sustainable and local economy, prioritizing local distribution and supplies, and then sharing with the world. He advocates for a communal economy, protecting the people and the land. 

Then, in the "Global to Local" chapter, the objective is to propose many solutions for people that want to have better practices. They incentivize citizens to support their communities, keeping the money flowing locally. More than just individual choices, the chapter claims for national and global engagement, even replacing WTO with better international institutions that will support local communities and environmental sustainability. 

At the end, both chapters are positivist, not just making complains but showing solutions and individual actions. They suggest that the future must be local, communal and about the people, and not global corporations.  

Week 15

 These articles of this week touch the subject of food and property, and how they work and should work in the international system. The "food miles" author interviews CSA communities, showing that choosing to eat locally is not just a matter of respecting the environment, but local food is also more tasteful, more fresh, and help the local communities. This article challenges the arguments that people choose to eat locally just because, showing that the chose is more complex than argued, and that many factors like culture and social practices are important as well. 

 Then, the "local trap" article exposes the problems with just claiming local food as better, especially in comparison with global systems. The author suggests that sustainability and equity are not linked to an specific space, local or global, but to the systems, the people and the structures. For this article, we can see that local solutions are not necessarily better, but we need to evaluate the systems and contexts to then plan policies that will bring true results. 

Finally, the "piracy" article also challenges the assumptions of property, but in this case not necessarily about food, but intellectual one. Here, it is claimed that although patents are made to protect innovators, many wealthy countries "steal" ideas and traditions from less developed countries, those who use this practices but didn't feel the need to licentiate, and claimed the ownership of them. By that, they make the access more expensive and less accessible, reinforcing inequality. At the end, the author claims for a better approach, when innovations can be balanced accessibility. 

E-Reserves

Piracy by Patent talks about how the Neem tree in India has many uses for the people, like medicine and pesticides. However, the companies have come in and patent products made from the tree, acting like they created these products when they have existed for long before the companies found out. Unfortunately, this is not something that happened only once, there are lots of examples of companies taking credit for things they did not create. It kinda reminds me of something like kombucha, where coporations took credit when bringing it over to the west when it was a actually traditional medicine from China.

Avoiding the Local Trap speaks about the concept of the "local trap" where we automatically assume local is better. This is not always the case, as it really depends on the indivual buisness and how it operates. It brings to my mind when I go to a local resturant because I want to support a local buisness, but the food isn't great or the place is not clean. While going to a chain resturant, and having nice food and good service. While I like supporting local resturants, I don't want to support unclean conditions. Maybe a local buisness is a boutique but all the clothes are extremely marked up, I would not feel great about buying the same piece of clothing for a lot more money even if it is local.

Food Miles and Local Eating says the average food travels 1,500 miles, which is not a completely accurate number. Seeing that number makes it seem like most food is traveling crazy far, but there is a lot of food coming from the area around you. Just like the previous article, people like the idea of local, and I also enjoy the idea of local. When I sit down at my local ice cream place/resturant and have the amazing fresh strawberry soft serve that comes from the local farms, I enjoy it so much better than going to a Cold Stone and grabbing an overpriced scoop of ice cream. There is a difference, and while food traveling far is not inheritantly bad(and nessecary for a lot of foods) there will always be something different about having some nice fresh local fruit.

4/29 e-reserves

The Piracy by Patent article discusses how Western corporations steal indigenous techniques from around the world and reinvent them as their own products to be patented and sold. The given situation here is with the neem tree in India, which had been used over thousands of years for medicine, agriculture, etc. Western companies like W.R. Grace moderized the methods by which the neem was harvested and the essential substances extracted, then had those processes patented. I think this situation is on a fine line and there is no clear right or wrong side to it. I do think it is harmful to those populations that have been using neem for thousands of years to have to see it commercialized by foreign companies. However, the article made the point of saying that there is no synthesized Azadirachtin, meaning that the actual chemical product itself is naturally occurring and therefore available for anyone to use.

Avoiding the Local Trap discusses how labeling a food system as "local" does not make it synonymous with fairness and overall "good". The part that stood out the most to me was when it went over buy-local campaigns and the issues that come with them. The article states that these campaigns tend to combine the label of "local" with organic products and healthier products. I for one am someone who hasn't thought twice about just buying into the idea that local food is healthier and grown better. I think a lot of this sentiment is shared among a lot of people because a big part of supporting local food is also synonymous with "helping the little guy". We assume that local foods are grown on smaller family-owned farms and that the food costs more because those people can't afford to charge less; they have to make their living. In reality none of that is guaranteed by the "local" label, and goes to show how we need to be more careful with what we buy into.

The food miles article discusses how what makes food "local" is the sense of place rather than the measurable distance to where it was produced. Using 1,500 and 1,300 as estimates for how much food travels is generalizing a completely arbitrary statistic. Dr. Schnell goes on to examine how a lot of the critiques of food miles oversimplify the issues, which creates straw man fallacies. He interviewed members of CSAs to gauge their definitions and beliefs about the localization of food. Local is not about how far away something was grown, but rather about the connectivity that went into producing it. Local means knowing about where the product came from and what went into producing it. Critics of local food tends to put the blame on issues of space, while supporters are focused on place. The distinct difference between space and place is what I believe causes the disjunction between the people on either side of the issue. 

4/27 reading

After reading about the neem tree, it really made me think about how unfair the global system can be. The tree has been used in India for centuries for things like medicine, agriculture, and everyday products, yet companies like W.R. Grace were able to take that knowledge, turn it into a product, and try to patent it. The reading describes this as “biopiracy,” and it honestly feels like taking something that already exists and repackaging it as a new invention. What stood out to me most is that the original knowledge comes from local communities and farmers, but they don’t receive recognition or benefits from it. This highlights a larger issue of power, where corporations are able to profit from resources and knowledge that aren’t originally theirs. It also made me think about how globalization isn’t always equal, and how systems meant to protect innovation can sometimes end up ignoring or exploiting the people who created that knowledge in the first place.

The idea of the “local trap” really changed how I think about food systems. Before this, I always assumed that local food was automatically better, whether that meant healthier, more sustainable, or more fair. However, the reading explains that this assumption can actually be misleading . Just because something is local doesn’t mean it will lead to better outcomes. A local farm could still use harmful or inefficient practices, while a larger system might actually be more effective depending on how it is managed. What stood out to me most is the idea that scale itself doesn’t determine whether something is good or bad, but instead it depends on the people and systems behind it. This made me realize that focusing only on “local vs global” oversimplifies a much more complex issue. Instead of assuming local is always the better option, it’s more important to look at how the system works, who benefits from it, and what the actual outcomes are.

The food miles reading also made me rethink a lot of assumptions I had about where our food comes from. At first, the idea that food travels over 1,500 miles seems like a clear problem, especially when thinking about pollution and climate change . However, the reading explains that food miles don’t always give the full picture. What really matters is not just the distance, but how the food is produced, transported, and stored. For example, growing food locally isn’t always better if it requires more energy, like heating greenhouses, while transporting food from another region might sometimes be more efficient. This made me realize that food systems are much more complex than they seem, and simple statistics can be misleading. It also stood out to me that transportation is only one part of the environmental impact, and other factors like production and diet choices can have an even bigger effect. Overall, this reading showed me that while food miles are useful to think about, they shouldn’t be the only factor when deciding what is more sustainable.

3 different e-reserves

After reading about the neem tree, it really made me think about how unfair the global system can actually be. The tree has been used in India for centuries for things like natural pesticides, medicine, and even everyday items. However companies like W.R. Grace then developed products from it and tried to patent them. That’s what the reading calls “biopiracy,” and it honestly just feels like taking something that already existed and then claiming it as something new. It’s frustrating because the knowledge originally came from other people like local farmers and communities, yet they don’t end up benefiting from it. This shows how global corporations really can take advantage of traditional knowledge and turn it into profit.

Looking at the idea of the “local trap,” definitely changed how I think about local food. I had always assumed local automatically means better but the reading explains that’s not necessarily true. For example, a local farm could still use unsustainable methods while larger-scale system might actually be more efficient or fair in some cases. The authors argue that scale, local vs global, doesn’t determine whether something is good or not. In fact, it is more about the power and how the system is run. I think that’s quite important because it stops us from just blindly supporting local food without thinking about the bigger picture on a wider scale. 

Going through the food miles article, it made me realise how misleading some of the common statistics are. The idea that food travels around 1,500 miles sounds convincing, but it actually came from a very limited study of produce going to Chicago, not all food. Also, the reading explains that transport only makes up about 11% of food’s total emissions, while production accounts for around 83%. I did not expect this to be the case. It also mentioned that changing your diet like eating less meat, can have a bigger impact than just eating local. At the same time, people don’t choose local food just because of distance. They usually choose it based off of things like freshness, supporting local farmers and feeling connected to where your food comes from matters more. That idea of “place” stood out to me though because it shows food is about more than just numbers.

Week of 4/27 readings

Piracy by Patent:

This passage argues that traditional Indian knowledge is being removed because of multinational corporations. They are transforming it into patent commercial products by doing extensive research without giving the communities credit for their original knowledge. It highlights the neem tree, an evergreen native to the culture, used for medicine, agriculture, and other everyday essentials. Unfortunately, there are certain companies that have the ability to claim ownership of products, even if they didn't create them. I'm sure this conflict can be very frustrating for the community, as they should get full credit for the work they've put in. I see how this can create major tension between corporate and local communities. This article has made me wonder about fairness in access to natural resources amongst different countries and economies. 

Avoiding the Local Trap:

It explains that there's a common assumption called the 'local trap' within food system research. Citizens believe that local food systems are inherently superior to large corporations that export food from far away. Sustainability, health, and access are all reasons people believe this assumption. A lot of this is shaped by the individual and the power they have, not by whether it's good or bad. I can understand why people would presume this; they should look into the benefits and drawbacks of each before making inferences. I think it's great that many people want to support local businesses, but we shouldn't completely exclude outside exporters. This passage has helped me better understand food systems and how large corporations can be involved in them.

Food Miles and Local Eating:

In this reading, I learned a lot about food miles and how they are widely used but not always accurate. The average food travels about 1,500 miles; this number is more symbolic and not an accurate measurement. The author explains how the number is an oversimplified data point to criticize industrial agriculture. I realized that this can mislead people into quickly judging the entire food system. Reflecting on realistic food transportation patterns is important because it helps us better understand how complex the food system can be. Throughout this topic, I've gained a lot of knowledge on the food system and how accurate food miles are overlooked. 

Post 14: Ch. 13, 14, 57

 In Chapter 13 the author argues that the success of MacDonald’s in Hong Kong did not simply destroy the local culture or some form of indirect cultural imperialism, but rather the local culture adapted to fit McDonald’s into their own customs. And McDonalds to a certain extent adapted to the customs of Hong Kong. It’s interesting the many examples across the world of McDonald’s trying to adapt to local markets; obviously some are more successful than others. What is more interesting though is the differences in what McDonalds means to different peoples across the world, from disgust to reverence.

In Chapter 14 the author discusses the migration from Dominica to Boston. Many of these immigrants stayed closely tied with the island they left, through communication and transfer of money. Through this ease of communication, new social norms can also travel back to the villages of Dominica, such as political views and gender norms. I think this is a good way of helping the home countries of immigrants to the U.S., who otherwise would be without economic opportunity.

 In Chapter 57 the author talks about the spread of religious practices originating in Asia, such as yoga and meditation. This chapter goes into how the religious context of yoga, originating in Hindu and Buddhist religious settings, has perhaps lost some of its original meanings or significance in the Western World. In the West, yoga is used as a form of exercise or meditation, and it has become a prominent part of the fitness industry. While the original religious significance may not be retained in every YMCA across the country, I think the differences between how yoga is practiced in the West and the East are distinct enough that no person is confusing Western practices as authentic to its original meaning, corrupting its historical and cultural significance for Indians.

13, 14, & 57

    Chapter 13 explored the international expansion of McDonald's to Hong Kong and how it has influenced Chinese culture. More importantly, the chapter questioned whether or not the globalization of McDonald's has threatened the local culture of Hong Kong overtime. To me, it does not seem like McDonald's has completely eliminated the local culture of Hong Kong, but rather it has become integrated into their daily lives. Instead of conforming to American fast food culture, residents of Hong Kong simply adapted the rise in fast food to their own cultural practices, turning McDonald's into a place for socialization similar to teahouses or coffee shops. Additionally, McDonald's became integrated into different food categories in Hong Kong compared to here in America. Whereas here, getting a hamburger and fries is considered a meal, those things are considered to be snacks or "small eats" in Hong Kong. Overtime, younger generations seemed to embrace the idea of the fast food items being a "meal," but nonetheless, McDonald's became a staple of the midmorning snack and socialization culture in Hong Kong, and adapted accordingly. 

    Chapter 14 introduced the concept of the "transnational village" by showing how communities in Miraflores in the Dominican Republic bridge with communities in Jamaica Bay in Boston. Regardless if one is a migrant, the participation of migrants' in their own communities influences the "sending community" (Miraflores), leading to non-migrants adopting a lot of the practices of those who live in Jamaica Bay. I find it interesting how the migrants, or Mirafloreños still keep a lot of their cultural practices such as leaving the apartment doors open and hanging curtains in the doorframe. Rather than assimilate to American culture, these communities remain connected to where they came from. Furthermore, by maintain a connection with non-migrants through the transnational village, both the migrants in Jamaica Bay and the non-migrants in Miraflores are able to still share a global culture of their own. 

    Chapter 57 discusses the globalization of religious practices like yoga and meditation and how they have lost their religious significance when expanding to a global audience. I for one had forgotten that yoga was linked to Hinduism because, as mentioned in the article, it had become more centered around health and wellness and decontextualized from much to do with religion except maybe for the spirituality aspect. Although I think yoga and meditation are perfectly acceptable as secular activities for health and wellness, I do think it is important to acknowledge their origins as a religious practice in the East and give due respect to it as such. 

13, 14, and 57

     What I found interesting in chapter 13 was how fast food, like McDonalds, has integrated into Hong Kong.  When McDonalds first came to Hong Kong, older generations were hesitant in eating it, as it had not been the usual type of meal they were used to.  However, this quickly changed, as more recent generations in Hong Kong began to embrace the establishment as sort of a second home.  Americans in general certainly embrace the more recent generation, as McDonalds has become partly a social portal in a a lot of circumstances. 

    Chapter 14 explains the connections between the village of Miraflores and Boston.  I particularly like the fact that people in both these places are able to stay so connected with each other.  They're able to retain major parts of their culture, while still being able to adapt well to the new cultural and physical environment.  Information in Boston by way of Miraflorenos also travels rather quickly, good or bad, and creates an increased sense of community.  Unlike most other places in the U.S., migrants from Miraflores are able to keep their cultural connection strong post-move.

    Chapter 57 focuses on how religion is constantly changing and spreading, with activities such as yoga and meditation being heavily affected.  There are certainly positives and negatives to this.  Older practices can often become less-practiced if not enough people in a newer generation are willing to follow it.  However, the increasing change and evolving of these practices does a good job at helping younger generations practice, and eventually teach generations after them how to follow it.  Evolving of old practices increases appeal, but can sometimes cause it to stray too far away from what it meant in the first place.

Ch. 13, 14, 57

    The chapters presented show us how globalization reshapes and adapts cultures and traditions. In chapter 13, we see this in the way Hong Kong adopted American fast food. For them, it was not considered a meal like in U.S., but rather a snack or side food. They did not simply "americanized" their eating manners, but on the contrary, adapt the foreign food to their habits and preferences. They changed and added their type of food on the menu, while still having American options and ways. In this situation, globalization did not erased the identity of the local, but the local reshaped the globalized chain to their identity. I can attest that in other countries eating burgers is not a common meal, but a food that you eat in weekends or nights out. 

    Then, in chapter 14,  it is the idea of “transnational villages" that take place. The community of Miraflores in Dominican Republic shows that globalization not necessarily create division and range, but can create connection and help. For Miraflores, the connection is with Boston immigrants, that flows money, ideas and goods. This is not just a separated idea, but a change saw in every day life, in economics, values and the community. It represents a globalization that is sustained by common people having global connections. 

    Chapter 57 talks about the Asian religions, and how they became global but adapted to other countries. Activities like yoga and meditation, otherwise linked to religion on the East, became secular and part of health and wellness in the West. Not just adopted, but changed to fit the needs of that populations. At the end, this chapters explain how globalization shapes and transforms global trends, and adapt to local needs. 

April 22

     The divide that McDonalds created in Hong Kong is insane to me. I can see how it happened, as people do like to hold on to old, traditional ways, and the people who hold on to these ways always want to resent anyone who doesn't follow them. But, having said that, they should be able to recognize that this is the new normal for Hong Kong, and try to accept it and embrace it. Maybe they could even begin to enjoy the new things that got brought into Hong Kong in the recent years.

    The readings about the people who move from the DR to Boston but still send the excess money that they make back to family in the DR is really interesting to me because I met someone here at Kutztown who told me they do something very similar. Without going too deep into it, he essentially works and goes to school here in the U.S. so he can eventually get a high paying American job so he can support his family back in the the DR. He had told me that American currency is so much more valuable than the currency they use in the DR, that he will be able to support him and his family with just the money he makes here. To me that really shows just the difference in lives between us here in the U.S. and people who live in worse economic situations, as here, someone who could be considered impoverished will not be able to afford their basic needs, and struggle everyday, but if they made the same amount in another economy, they'd live a comfortable life with all the things they'd need and more.

    I did not know that yoga was a religious practice in other countries, I did know that about meditation, but learning that things like yoga are also religiously rooted shows how many people disregard practices that a sacred in other countries and kind of practice them without giving them the respect they deserve just because they enjoy it.

Ch. 13, 14, 57

Chapter 13 raised some interesting points about the integration of McDonald's into Hong Kong. The first thing that stood out to me was the differences in attitudes toward and consumption of McDonald's between the older and younger generations. McDonald's seemed to represent the "new thing" that younger folks gravitated towards. When I think of things like that today, typically it is just younger people interacting with them, wheras in Hong Kong both subsets interacted with the brand, but they treated the food as different types of meals. Older generations see the food as a snack to eat before their normal meal. Younger generations see it a the meal itself, and it has been integrated into typically cuisine for lunch or dinner. The other thing that stood out to me was the differences in the convention of cleanliness when McDonald's was first introduced. The standards of cleanliness of the bathrooms was held much higher in America, so when the business went into Hong Kong there was a barrier with employees who thought the standards were impossibly high. This is a great example of a small cultural impact that is an externality of the larger impact of bringing new food and business to a foreign place.

Chapter 14 discussed the transnational village between Miraflores and Boston. One thing that stood out to me was the discussion about assimilation. Even though members fo the Dominican community moved to an entirely different part of the world, most of the culture was able to persist because they established a mirrored community to the one they had in Miraflores. I also like how the author defined the difference between a transnational community and village. The community would just be a group of people that relocated and started a similar community somewhere else, but they would not rely heavily on the old place to maintain their strength. It seems like the village aspect of having participants in both places makes the community as a whole stronger since they can share the resources of both places between them. I also find it interesting that the transnational village was able to reach amenties that the Dominican Republic as a whole did not have complete access to, and leverage the government to provide better access to it. The village had better healthcare access and was able to force the government's hand in creating clinics across the country so that others could have the same benefits they did.

Chapter 57 is intriguing because it touches on some concepts we've discussed before with a different context. In the past we've learned about borrowing aspects of others' culture through globalizaing constructs, but this has usually been done to create assimilation within places or to pay respect to another culture, such as with the music podcast from last week. In both of those cases the practice keeps in context, it just is applied to a different scenario. This chapter discusses how Asian religious practices like yoga and meditation are applied to other parts of the world in a different context. I think could be both good and bad. As far as negatives go, I think it harms the possible preservation of culture acorss time. It also could lead to cultures being treated with less respect because their original yoga, for example, does not match what yoga is in the United States. I do think this dissemination of religious aspects can be positve as well. Stripping the context of yoga away removes a barriers for other people who do not practice Hinduism, and can lead to a new context being formed to help others elsewhere. For example, yoga is held in high regard in the United States for its physical health benefits. I know lots of NFL players work yoga into their training regimens because increased flexibility can prevent injury. It can also help heal injuries faster.

Ch 13,14, and 57

 In Ch 13, the chapter talks about Mcdonald's presence in Hong Kong and how to changed culture around meals. Before McDonalds, fast food wasn't part of the culture in Hong Kong, and introduced a new way of having meals. Children who grew up with McDonald's became used to that style of resturants, and created a divide between older generations who were used to the old ways. While innovation and change is not a bad thing inheritantly, it's easy to isolate those who haven't been surrounded by these changes the majority of their life and causes conflict between the generations that can hurt their understanding of each other.

In Ch 14, it discusses the Miraflores of the Dominican Republic and their connection to Boston. Many members leave the Dominican Republic and move to Boston for better job oppurtunities and pay, then sending money back to those still in their home country. While away from home, they still keep in touch with their culture and practices, and stay connected to those back in the DR. Leaving home is always scary, and I am afraid of moving away from the place I've lived all my life and being surrounded by unfamiliar places and people. I would hate to not be able to go see my grandma whenever I needed or not be able to go into a market and grab a fresh woopie pie. I can still make woopie pies and shoefly pie wherever I am, and talk to my grandma over the phone, but it's not the same as being physically around those I care about and things I love.

In Ch 57, the chapter speaks about practices like yoga and mediation that have been recognized globally. These practices have been adopted all around the world, but their cultural roots have slowly been changed into health and wellness instead of religious practices. While I think practicing yoga or mediation is not a problem and can definitely help you with your wellbeing, I feel some people have kinda co-opted them and don't acknowledge their true meanings to make it more marketable to a western audience. We should treat cultural and religious practices with respect as long as it is not hurting anyone, even if they are not what we personally follow.

Chapters 13, 14, 57

While reading through Chapter 13, the author talks about how the eastern countries view western fast food. There are various perspectives on it, with the older individuals seeing it as "non-filling", and the younger people going there on their trips to and from school, businesses, etc. and view them as snacks. It's strange to see this because in media, I've constantly seen the notion that western food portions, even just as a single hamburger and fries, is way too much for just one person to eat normally. Seeing this different view on burgers being a "quintessential snack" is very interesting. I like the fact that the people use these fast foods as ways of hanging out with others, being the "cool spot to be."

The next chapter discusses "Mirafloreños," migrants from Miraflores, and how they've lived in the past, and how they live in their new areas, particularly the greater Boston metro area. During the 1970s, the "Miraflores Development Committee" began meeting. The later part of the chapter discusses the MDC more thoroughly, discussing its feats, one major one being the ability to demand healthcare when the government was unable to provide it. The MDC had also created several smaller branch committees, including sports, education and health. The fact that this group had done so much while being completely independent, not even as an NGO, is jarring.

Chapter 57 goes over 

Ch 13, 14, 57

    Chapter 13 discussed the idea that "transnational is local." The traditional culture in Hong Kong wasn't completely disappearing with the introduction of an American fast foods chain, it was just transforming. I was surprised to learn that cleanliness wasn't very popular in restaurants and homes until McDonald's became popular. I guess that the stereotype in my mind was that Asian cultures tended to hold cleanliness to a higher standard than white Americans. I did find it a little sad that kids would be embarrassed to eat with their parents and grandparents McDonald's because the older generations didn't know the etiquette. Children at that age are always embarrassed by their parents but I bet this was especially alienating for those who wanted to hold on to their traditions. 

    Chapter 14 was about the Miraflores community and their members in Boston. I think it's amazing they they can stay so connected in separate parts of the world. These migrants in Boston also had traditions that they brought with them that changed as they moved. They would keep their doors open in their apartment buildings and hung curtains in the doorway so they people could easily come and go. The extra airflow wasn't needed due to the colder climate in Boston, but the open door policy helped keep the idea of a tight-knit community alive. I find this somewhat similar to college dorm buildings where students will keep their door propped to show that they're not busy and willing to chat with anyone who passes by. As a transfer student myself, my old classmates will keep me updated on drama at my previous school much like the Miraflorenos will share gossip between cities. 

I found reading chapter 57 to be a little tedious because it felt like the same three sentences were being repeated just in different words for the entire chapter. I feel like it could've been shortened to just the last section. Anyway, it was about how the decontextualization of religious practices, like yoga, made them globally popular. I've done yoga and meditation myself and I do really like them as secular activities. Although, I think it's important to acknowledge that these practices come from religions, and to be respectful to that, even if you're not using them religiously yourself. 

Chapters 13, 14, and 57

One thing that stood out to me in Chapter 13 about McDonald’s in Hong Kong is how globalization doesn’t just replace local culture, but actually blends with it. At first, McDonald’s food wasn’t even considered a real meal and was seen more as a snack, which shows how local culture shaped how people used something global. Over time, younger generations started to treat it more like a regular meal, but that didn’t mean traditional food disappeared. Instead, it became part of everyday life in a new way, where something global still fit into a local context . This made me realize that globalization isn’t just about everything becoming the same, but more about how things get adapted depending on where they are.

Chapter 14 builds on this idea, but focuses more on people instead of products. The example of the Dominican village connected to Boston really stood out to me, especially how people can stay connected to both places at the same time. The idea of “transnational villagers” shows that globalization isn’t just about moving somewhere new, but about maintaining relationships, culture, and communication across borders . What I found interesting is that even people who never leave their home country are still affected by globalization through things like money, ideas, and social connections. It shows that globalization is part of everyday life, even if you’re not directly traveling or working internationally.

Chapter 57 takes a different perspective by focusing on how culture, especially religion, changes as it spreads globally. The part about yoga and meditation being taken out of their original religious context stood out to me, because it shows how globalization can simplify and reshape something to fit different audiences. Instead of being part of a larger religious system, these practices are often turned into tools for health, self-improvement, or stress relief . This made me think about how globalization can make things more accessible, but at the same time take away some of their original meaning. When looking at all three chapters together, it feels like globalization is constantly reshaping things, whether it’s food, communities, or religion. It creates connections, but those connections don’t always stay true to where they originally came from.

Chapter 13, 14, and 57

 In chapter 13 the author talks about the culture surrounding McDonalds in Hong Kong. When the fast food chain first opened in Hong Kong the culture there wasn’t really understanding of the American ways of fast food that McDonalds embraced. It took awhile for the people to get used to this quick way of ordering and eating while changing their ideas around it. McDonalds also had to change the way they went about things a little bit by changing their breakfast options and getting rid of the big mac to more suit the culture in Hong Kong. Now we see McDonalds in Hong Kong as mostly a thing that children enjoy. I think globalization is best seen in the ways it affects the younger and newer generations. These people are the most open to change within culture and adapt to it the quickest. It is super interesting to read about the ways the younger generation in Hong Kong is learning more about the American way of eating and teaching it to their older family members, even if those family members aren't as willing as they are. 

Chapter 14 talks a lot about people who migrated from their homes to larger cities. They get jobs there and send money back to their families to improve their quality of life and give them things there was no way they would have before. This creates a changing culture surrounding both the village they come from and in the big city where they move to like Boston. While the villages are becoming increasingly more modern with their access to new technology, neighborhoods in Boston are taking a more traditional turn into becoming similar to what their village was like before they moved. In this way both those who migrated and those who stayed can feel a connection to each other and their culture. There are even groups and organizations like the MDC that keep the community connected across borders and help them.

I found chapter 57 very confusing and hard to understand. I believe it has to do with the modernization of Asian religions where people globally have taken up the practices of these religions without the actual worship part of them. Things like yoga and meditation originated from Asian religions but have become their own separate thing now across the world with new meanings although still following a similar purpose. This can be a good thing where people get to learn different cultures and practices that give them a full life but it can also lead to the appropriation and disrespect of culture.

Chapters 13, 14 and 57

I think McDonald’s in Hong Kong is a really interesting example of how globalisation actually works in real life because it shows that it is not just one culture taking over another. I found it surprising that people didn’t consider burgers and fries to be proper meals and that they were just snacks, which makes sense when you think about how different Cantonese food traditions are but it seems that over time, especially with younger people, that has clearly changed and now fast food became a normal part of everyday life. What stood out to me was that McDonald’s didn’t completely change itself to fit Hong Kong. In fact, people sort of adapted to it and made it their own. It ended up becoming more than just a place to eat but more like somewhere to hang out or even celebrate birthdays, which I didn’t expect. I also think it’s interesting how it influenced things like cleanliness and queuing, which actually changed public behaviour. The part that I found the most surprising was that in Hong Kong, smiling too much can actually seem suspicious, almost like you’re trying to trick someone, so people don’t really value that kind of friendliness in the same way.

I think this idea of “transnational villagers” is actually really interesting because it makes the way we actually think about migration interesting. You’d assume that when people move somewhere like Boston, they slowly leave their old life behind, but this shows that’s not really the case at all. Instead, people are basically living in two places at once, still heavily connected to their home village while building a life abroad. I found it quite surprising how strong those links are. Something that stood out to me the most was that it’s not just money being sent back, it’s ideas as well. Things like fashion, behaviour, and even ways of organising communities are constantly moving between places, which ends up changing life in the village. At the same time though it’s not all positive. There is a lot of mistrust and tension within the community, which makes it harder to work together.

The idea of decontextualisation is quite eye-opening to me because I think it makes you realise how much things like yoga and meditation have changed over time. Before reading this, I never really questioned where these practices came from. For example, I just saw them as normal parts of fitness or wellbeing. It was really interesting to discover that they’ve been completely taken out of their original religious and cultural contexts and turned into something much more individual and modern. It’s cool how people now sort of “pick and choose” parts of religion that suit them, rather than following a full belief system. It feels like religion has shifted from being something collective to something really personal, focused on self-improvement and mental health. At the same time, I do think it’s a bit strange that these practices lose a lot of their original meaning in the process. I think the whole connection to psychology and therapy is probably why meditation has become so popular. I’d say this shows that globalisation doesn’t just spread culture but in fact reshapes it completely into something new that fits today’s  modern life.

4/22/26

Chapter 13 talks about the globalization of McDonald’s specifically in Hong Kong, and the effects on their local culture within the business. When arriving in Hong Kong McDonald's was looked at as something that would fail because of the worries that it is a push to Americanize. It quickly became popular among younger people and students. It was originally viewed as somewhere to get a snack and not as much of a place to eat a meal. Deeply rooted cultural opinions on food is what made it to be viewed as a snack; it did not contain the proper contents to be viewed as a meal. Over time fast food became more accepted to be seen as more of a meal, and with that acceptance menu items were shifted to be more of a blended mix of local cultural food and the staple McDonalds menu items. I found it interesting that breakfast was a huge hit in Hong Kong, and that was because they had more traditional menu items local to the area. If they pushed American breakfast items right away I do wonder how that would've played out for their breakfast success, or would it have been viewed also as more of a snack than meal. I think this shows success in globalizing requires accepting and adapting to other cultures, which is something that is often not seen.

Chapter 14 is about the connections that migration can create across borders using the example of Miraflores in the Dominican Republic, and its ties to Boston. Many of the local villagers moved to the United States but they did not leave everything behind. They stay in contact through communication, tradition, and money. This is reflected back in Miraflores with the exchange of ideas and cultural practices being implemented in their tradition, and technology. I think this shows globalization at more of a personal level, and not just the effect that large companies or governments have when globalizing. I think it's interesting that they have chosen to not change to fit in with one culture, but mix with others and accept new ideas while continuing their own important personal traditions.

Chapter 57 talks about practices like meditation and yoga have deep spiritual and cultural roots and have become globally recognized, but also separated from their spiritual context. They have been shaped to fit a modern global audience often connected to health and personal development rather than its religious roots. This is called decontextualization which makes tradition easily adopted by different backgrounds. These practices have been recontextualized making new forms blending spirituality and modern lifestyle. I think these three readings connect through the thought that globalization does not replace cultures, but they shape through the mixing of others, and interaction.

Chpt 13, 14, and 57

Chpt 13: In the McDonald's chapter, I learned that when businesses spread internationally, it's important for them to recognize and adapt to their local customs. The author explains how globalization is incorporated within large companies and food chains. It’s interesting seeing the differences in American culture versus Chinese culture. I noticed that citizens of Hong Kong primarily use McDonald's as a social space to sit and catch up, while here in the US, we use it as a fast food restaurant. This made me realize that it’s the local cultures that represent global influence in globalization. 

Chpt 14: Chapter 14 introduces readers to how globalization affects the everyday lives of immigrants. When immigrants leave their country, they still carry a piece of the culture with them through their language and traditions. This made me realize that someone can belong to multiple places at the same time, instead of having to choose one identity. Immigrants maintain different traditions, social interactions, food customs, and beliefs. As they travel, they must adapt to their new environments’ cultures to be welcomed in the community. In this chapter, I learned how identity is shaped through cultural exchange and the movement of people throughout the world. 

Chpt 57: The author in Chapter 57 explains that culture and religious practices are reshaped as they spread globally. Meditation was often removed from many original cultures to be reshaped for new audiences. In my opinion, I see both positives and negatives with this. This allows practices to become more accessible to people, so it’s easier to engage with. On the other hand, it has the potential to weaken deep cultural significances. The chapter has made me reflect on how globalization can make complex traditions simpler as they expand worldwide. 

Chapter 59, NPR podcast, WP article

 What I took away from chapter 59 the most was the concerns that the interview with Bharathi brought up about globalization in the work place. It is amazing that so many people can be interconnected around the world but when all those people who are connecting start to lose their individuality because of how much the shared work culture takes over that amazement loses its spark. The benefits of globalization are lost when we start to share one global culture too much, it is important to keep connection with your original roots too. Bharathi states how her work has become full of people who share one class, where she can guess all of their thoughts and opinions because it's the exact same for everyone. This is a fear a lot of people have with globalization, that everyone will become too similar and lose their individual cultures' unique traits. This is why I think it important to experience life both global and local when you can outside of things like your workplace where you have little choice in the matter. Keeping cultures alive is part of an individual's responsibility although not fully their own burden to bear. 

On the other hand the NPR podcast about the globalization of music takes about globalization in the opposite way. Music has always been a way to connect people and bring them together from all over, but with globalization we see this happening in music even more now. Artists are taking influence but different musical genres and styles from all over when creating new music. Not only are artists taking influence but artists from entirely different parts of the world are coming together to collaborate over music while staying so far apart. Globalization has also created the ability for smaller artists with more niche styles with no way to advertise their music in the same way that large artists can to become just as popular and well known globally because of our access to streaming platforms like bandcamp and spotify. Of course the podcast also makes sure to talk about the risks that come with the globalization of music like cultural appropriation and how easy it is for large audiences to spread hate when they don’t like how an artist did something wrong or not. It is always important to stay mindful of potential consequences when creating anything to post online. 

I would argue that the Washington Post article about the global culture war was wrong when they said that the world isn’t conforming to the idea people had right after the Cold War that cultures and countries could slowly become more like the US. As stated by the author the US focuses a lot on power over others and money in the global economy. Russia's war on Ukraine is a power play, they want to have control over Ukraine and other countries like they did when they were the USSR. What China is doing is similar too, the moves they are making within their country and with others seems to be mostly done in order to benefit their economy more. China wants to take over the global economy and be the hegemonic power in place of the US. I think these countries are conforming to our western culture exactly. We just don’t want to see it as that because it means we have competition on a global scale now. Even though they are using the exact same means to gain power that we did in the past we see it as terrible because we left those practices behind but are still reaping the benefits of it. 

Chapter 59,Globalization is Over, Globalization of Music

"The 2010s: The Globalization of Music" goes over a list of various artists and groups, along with their songs. For example, BTS and their album "Love Yourself", and the "girl group" Blackpink. The beginning of the podcast goes over the influence of language in their songs. Additionally, people in the United States requested that radio stations start playing some BTS songs, specifically people from a fan group called "BTS ARMY." The fan group is a global fandom, and they're a major factor of the extreme popularity of the boy band. The podcast then shifts from South Korean music to Latin American artists, like Rihanna and J Balvin. It goes over the contemporary "erasure of genre" of music, and the blending of various kinds of music in single songs, due to the different artists that collaborate. I think that the podcasters are sort of right, in the sense of the sort of fading away of "genres" of music. I don't think that the podcasters meant that the different kinds of music, like pop, hip-hop, and rock are fading. I think they meant more-so that the different cultures of music are blending together, while still being somewhat distinct in the variety. The song "Chicken Noodle Soup" immediately backs this, showing in the first 60 seconds of the song having a massive blend of the different styles of music creation. Further, the recent massive rise of social media, such as TikTok, amplifies the popularity of these different blends of music. Social media also created a gateway to access music, with Spotify and YouTube being highly popular. The easier access to music has greatly popularized all kinds of music, from every corner of the globe.

In my opinion, the points made by the NPR podcasters are correct, in regards to the way that previously "region-locked" music has been pretty much globalized. Anyone, anywhere can listen to any artist from any nation. From Korea, to Colombia, to Nigeria, music has become a massive part of the "global culture." Towards the end of the podcast, they start briefly discussing the topic of "appropriation vs appreciation" and how some artists perform certain actions that are generally seen as negative, as they hadn't collaborated with any of the artists of the culture that they were displaying in their music.

The article "Globalization is Over" discusses the ways in which the recent globalization of the world, whether positive or negative, has begun to die down, and a new "Global Culture War" has started. The author discusses the recent years of globalization and how it sort of brought the world closer together, with democracy becoming the most prominent of government. After the brief discussion on globalization, the article then shifts to a sort of oppositional topic; how nations are more devoted to their own cultural values and how they're striving to protect them from globalization. The differences of two separate regions, the west and the east, are disputing what way is "right." China, for example, believes that "westerners try to impose their values on everybody else." The article then discusses how these differences often lead to conflicts between the opposing sides, citing the Cold War as the most prominent example of such.

In all, it really is a mixed bag; both sides of the argument are technically right. Globalization is starting to die down and is sort of reverting to the ways of independent nations protecting their values. On the other side, though, globalization really is at an all-time high, I think. With the extremely connecting invention of the internet, the world has become closer than ever.

Finally, Chapter 59 of "The Globalization Reader." The beginning of the chapter follows Malini, an employee of "Bangalore." Malini's view on globalization may be quite confounding. Malini is a supporter of globalization, which is a regular thing to some. However, Malini emphasizes that she is content with the fading away or blending of her culture with others, along with the society connected. The later parts of the chapter follows more workers of IT in India, and how their work sort of shapes the way one thinks. Bharathi, a technical writer, explains that working in IT doesn't really give the same experience as a doctor, for example. By this, she means that IT workers don't really encounter and interact with many people from various backgrounds, quoting "...from an IT field, my interaction with people is very limited." Bharathi's ideas directly counteract the more popularized opinion that IT work makes people more open-minded, instead making views more narrowed. Later in the chapter, the author talks about Shubha, another software worker. Shubha thinks in the complete opposite way of Bharathi, believing that it indeed does open one's mind to more opportunities. Shubha temporarily moved to the United States, "assimilating the norms" to herself. The move to the U.S. would certainly have given her an interesting view of the "American" ways of life, opening her to those ideas.

With my very little knowledge about IT, paired with the information of this chapter, I think that working in software may bring one a more open view, rather than shaping to a more narrow one. I think that one would almost certainly encounter people from all kinds of backgrounds, contrasting what Bharathi had described.

Week 13

 

     In the readings for this week, we touch once again on the duality of globalization. Starting with the chapter about India and IT workforce, the author challenges the term global and the way globalization is transforming what this means. Many people think that globalization is just an economic process, but according to the author, it can also means changes, individually and in a whole community. If before a "global person" meant someone that could communicate and work with different nations, today this became a way of life, especially in the workforce. Companies in all the world are going for a "global" thinking, where its employees will be efficient and use their identity, but in a "global mode", adapting to the global world. Then, the NPR listening goes along with this idea, that globalization is a connection, that makes easier to collaborate within countries and find ideas. In a way I thought about good collaborations like APT from Bruno Mars and Rosé that blends American Pop with Korean Pop and became super famous, but it also opens the way for cultural appropriations like Ariana Grande in her "black" era, which the internet joke about her "Blackiana". In this listening we see an optimistic vision of globalization, a process that brings possibilities and jobs, but it makes the point that cultures have to adapt to this global business, just like the chapter 59. This can create more distance than connections, especially among different social levels. This connects back to the idea that people in India are looking more global, similar to the world, and different from people on their own country that are from different backgrounds. Then, the NYT closes the argument showing that although we urge for a global world with sharing and collaborating, globalization now is looking more like clash of cultures and division. Globalization does not benefit all, and it show the cleavage between classes even more. With more cultures we find more differences and we can embrace and accept or negate and distance from them. At the end, globalization can connect, but we have to think about who is connecting and if this connection is creating more of the same. 

4/15

 Chapter 59 has a focus on IT jobs in India, and kind of gives insight on globalized “corporate culture”. I don't think this chapter necessarily tries to show that globalization is a good or bad thing, but more of how people experience it differently. One thing that stood out to me is about how the workers are in a way shaped to talk, or act certain ways to fit into this idea of a global workplace. This in my opinion seems wrong that workers are forced to fit in more than just be themselves. It kind of takes away the culture aspect of globalizing, and strictly focuses on maximizing profit. Although different workers see it differently, like ones who think that the corporate world is a way to kind of get away and escape from some cultural things and make their own new experiences. On the other hand some workers think that this limits them with the plan to make everyone the same. This kind of shows how globalization can get carried away and when it does it destroys the core values of the exchange of culture and acceptance of others' differences. 

The article from the e-reserves talks about how globalization and the idea of it making people closer isn't really what we see happening now. With the influence of international tensions, and economic unfairness pushes countries to care more about themselves than work with others. It kind of shows globalization as more of a competition between countries in a race to be “the best”. Countries still have economic connections, but are moving apart because of political and cultural beliefs. 

The NPR podcast was about the globalization of music, and brought up a lot about how new technology has really changed the game for this. They gave examples like how in the past people used to go to record stores and would go to one section to look at the music they enjoy. With the rise of streaming services this opened the door to the exchange of global music culture. We see today that people can easily exchange this through platforms like Youtube or Spotify. This spread of culture has opened doors to collaborations of music and culture that was never able to be done before. It also was interesting hearing how BTS has fans that love them so much they are willing to translate their work for free so people can understand and enjoy it all over the world.

Ch. 59, Globalization is Over, NPR

The NPR podcast/article, The 2010s: The Globalization Of Music, focuses on how globalization has led to the fusion of music between cultures. Particularly in the 2010s, many pop songs came out blending musical styles from around the world, and the audio clip showed several examples, from the United States, to Korea, to Latin America. The hosts of the show talk about how much of a positive it has been to have artists from all these cultures collaborating. They also discuss the benefits of the development of auto translation technology, and how it allows international listeners to connect more deeply to the music they’re listening to. 

I agree that the creation of auto-translation technology is a good thing and I personally like learning the meaning of words in other languages. I do think however it is possible that the regional distinctions in art will become less and less noticeable as art is easily accessible to everyone everywhere, leading to a more homogenized global culture.

Globalization is Over argues that the age of Globalization as we know it is ending. I agree with the author’s central idea that more are more conflict is happening on the grounds of ideology than before, and I also agree that nationalism is on the rise globally and many people around the world are reverting back to traditions. 

I disagree however that these cultural clashes will overcome the economic interests of multinational corporations. I think money still is the primary driver in global politics and it will remain that way. The world will be globalized forever, now that that box has been opened.

Chapter 59 was mainly about India’s IT industry. It talks about how the workers in IT centers have to often work worse conditions, and learn English, to accommodate clients and other people from the West. I think personally they shouldn’t have to make these accommodations and one downside of globalization is people like those workers in India losing the ability to work for their own community, and instead are working to help people across the world.

Ch 59, Globalization Is Over + NPR

 In Ch 59, it talked about the massive IT Industry in India, and the conflict of living by the rules of one place while having to communicate by the rules of another. In the Indian IT Industry, to have success at the job, workers need to be proficent in western culture, like having English skills and knowning cultural norms. This constant adaptation to a different culture causes difficulties when existing in your own. Being encouraged to mask your identity for work hurts your connection to those around you.

In Globalization Is Over, the reading is about how the world has turned into a giant "culture war" where we are now being divided instead of being connected. We are constantly being told our culture and beliefs are better than others and others that believe in those different things are wrong. Globalization was to connect the world, but even though we have more access than ever before, we are being disconnected from each other. Nationalism is rampant everywhere, and the world is trying to revert everything we tried to accomplish.

In the NPR article, it discusses how music has its part in globalization and connecting to people all over the world. Starting around the 2010s, musicians from all around the globe are now doing world tours and reaching audiences everywhere. Fans that in the past would never get a chance to see artists are now able to listen to their music. As someone who listens to a lot of music in various languages, I've learned a lot about different countries and specifically traditional instruments or music styles. I've also been introduced to different languages first through music within my life that opened up a door to new experiences.

4/15 readings

In Chapter 59, what stood out to me was how globalization affects people on a personal level, especially in the workplace. The example of Indian IT workers showed that being skilled at your job is not always enough to succeed in a global environment. Workers are expected to adapt to Western norms, like speaking English fluently and changing how they communicate and present themselves. Because of that, many of them end up balancing two identities—one connected to their own culture and another that fits the global workplace. In a way, this creates pressure to change parts of who they are just to succeed, which I never really thought about before. It also shows that while companies say they value diversity, they may still expect employees to fit a certain global standard.

The article “Globalization is Over” by David Brooks presents a different perspective by arguing that globalization is starting to fall apart. Instead of bringing countries together, it seems like there is more conflict and division now, especially with the rise of nationalism. A clear example of this is global conflicts like the war between Russia and Ukraine, which shows how countries are focusing more on their own interests rather than cooperation. Because of that, globalization doesn’t look as strong or unified as it once did. At the same time, I agree with the idea that globalization was never going to fully succeed in making the world follow one set of values, especially Western ones. Every country has its own culture and traditions, and people are not going to give those up easily just because another system is seen as “better.”

The NPR article about music shows a more positive side of globalization. It explains how, especially in the 2010s, artists began reaching global audiences through world tours, social media, and streaming platforms. Because of that, people are now exposed to music from different cultures more than ever before. Artists like BTS and Bad Bunny are good examples of how music can cross cultural boundaries and gain popularity worldwide. In a way, music brings people together even when there are political or cultural differences. This shows that globalization can still create connections, even if it is not working as well in other areas like politics or economics.

Another important idea comes from Chapter 56 and the E-reserve reading, which focus on how globalization is viewed by different groups, especially religious organizations. These groups are often critical of globalization because they believe it is too focused on money and ignores issues like inequality and human dignity. For example, Pope John Paul II argued that globalization can harm poorer countries by increasing inequality and concentrating power. At the same time, the E-reserve reading suggests that globalization has turned into more of a “culture war,” where countries are competing based on their values, beliefs, and identities rather than working together. Because of that, it seems like understanding different cultures is more important now than just focusing on economic connections. Overall, these readings show that globalization is complicated, and while it can connect people, it can also create division depending on how it is experienced.