Western Modernization as a Highway to Globalization: An 0utlook into Historical Accounts

We've got to demonstrate why European unity andintegration, our vast single market, our single currency,

equip us with the strength to embrace globalization.1

Peter Mandelson

I. Introduction

Many sociologist, political theorist, economist and historians do

not agree on the point whether globalization gave path to Western

world’s economy and technology or the development of western

modernization brought home the globalization. Generally, by west

we mean Europe and America together but regarding globalization

critics have particularized to America alone2. However, here, we

will discuss on West as a whole and its role in shaping the

globalization from very early stage of civilization to the modern

age of destruction (indicating World Wars). We will further look

into different stages of globalization such as; technical,

economical and cultural phases in regards to both positive and

1 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/globalization.html#VSAW1qrzfqzSV7Tu.992 m-data/32598_02_Turner_&_Khondker_CH_02.pdf

negative sides of the development, which was and still is led by

the Modernization of western world.

There are lots of authors and organizations who have defined

Globalization differently and on their own ways but the one

closer to our topic is From Millennium Report. According to it;

“The greatest challenge we face today is to ensure that globalization becomes a

positive force for all the world's people, instead of leaving billions of them behind in

squalor. Inclusive globalization must be built on the great enabling force of the

market, but market forces alone will not achieve it. It requires a broader effort to

create a shared future, based upon our common humanity in all its diversity. (pp

20)3”

Every medicine has a side effect but this does not mean we don’t

take them, likely, globalization is not a process which is

complete but there are lot of things which when addressed can

make it the progressive one for all. Like the above saying,

humanity for example is a topic which should not be ignored.

3 http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/policy-report/2003/5/globalization.pdf

Globalization is an entity that increases the number of choices

for actors providing them the opportunity of multiple identities

and de-centering of the social subject into individuals ability

to avail them in several organizational options at the same

time.4 This is the reason why westernization or modernization

seems to be more local and centered to west alone.

For Zygmunt Bauman (1998) it depends upon how the community or

individual perceives the force of globalization. According to

him, “Globalization reinforces the already existing patterns of domination while

glocalization indicates trends to dispersal and conflict on neo-traditional grounds. The

privileged walk or fly away; the others take revenge upon each other.”5

Globalization is therefore a force that will affect every society

either it be accepted willingly or unwilling. It touches every

aspect of life and while looking the history of change we have

witnessed that economical, social, technological, and cultural

phenomenon has been always the resource for it.

4 Nederveen Pieterse, Jan (1995). "Globalization as Hybridization". In: Mike Featherstone, Scott Lash & Roland Robertson (eds.), Global Modernities. London: Sage, pp. 45-68

5 Bauman, Zygmunt (1998). "On Glocalization: or Globalization for some, Localization for some Others". Thesis Eleven, 54 (1): 37-49

II. Historical Background

Some scholars trace the history of globalization being long

practiced and therefore is not a product of any particular

culture or geographical region. German historical economist Andre

Gunder Frank argued that a form of globalization was already in

exercise during the period where trade links between Summer and

Indus Valley Civilization in the 3rd millennium B.C where held6. It can

be understood that great civilizations like; Greek, Egyptian,

Roman, Chinese or Islamic who were once having a golden era might

have explored the globalization and achieved it in different way.

It is obviously an understandable fact that the powerful one has

always tried to put on things on the weaker ones and thus

policies might have been different than today but something

similar was certainly practiced before, too. But what we

understand globalization now is the free market, free completion

and free borders to get connected to each other more freely in

advanced ways and in every sector. And this would have hardly

done before.

6 http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

In the same way explorers like Vasco de Gama and Christopher

Columbus are taken as the pioneers of globalization which is not

so convincing idea. Because we now know that both of them had no

idea about what land they found; one was searching the way to

Asia but found the Cape of Good Hope in Africa the other one

going for India found America, would have therefore never thought

of planting globalization as such. But at the same time it cannot

be ignored that they provided the path to colonial practices

which made the world closer and familiar to each other by sharing

cultures, languages and costumes. This in turn might have made

some contributions to the globalization.

Western globalization took a turn exactly from 1790 when

international market started giving response to the western

products, this is what Kevin H. O’Rourke in his article Europe and

the Causes of Globalization, 1790 to 2000 defines7. He further focuses on the

point that it was therefore the nineteenth century that

experienced the higher level of achievement by attaining

international economic integration in the field of globalization.

But then again researchers like Geofferey C. Gunn (2003) has

7 http://www.tcd.ie/Economics/TEP/2002_papers/TEPNo1KO22.pdf

argued that globalization has been already a global phenomenon

long practiced in different times at different places within

different strategies.8 He has strongly opposed the idea of

Western explorers who created the barriers between west and the

rest by bordering themselves through culture, language,

literature, ideas or the products etc. It is because he thought

that such opinions have always broadened the distance between

East and West.

Before the American war of Independence (July 4, 1776)9 Britain

was the ruler of the world. The role of the French people in this

revolution, though now less remembered, shows that Europeans were

positive towards a world free of single dominance. Their support

for American freedom and handshake for other bilateral

relationships with every other country illustrates that the role

of the West was always important in shaping the globalization.

The birth of Marxist philosophy in 1848 which also became the

first major sociopolitical affirmation of modernity was a8 Geoffrey C. Gunn.2003. First Globalization: Eurasian Exchange, 1500-1800. Lanham: Rowman & Littefield ,341 pp. 9 http://hackettlatinacademy.weebly.com/uploads/2/2/5/1/22510182/dbq_project-how_revolutionary_was_the_american_revolution.pdf

milestone in Western thought of forming a social structure.10

Marx and Engels however never promoted the violence and they are

therefore not responsible for events happening around any

communist countries as Therborn demonstrates it by presenting

some examples; war against communist countries and war within

communists. Rather Marxism brought home new themes, views and

ideas on how to function within the society and outside the

country to create a homogenizing environment by demolishing a

hierarchy that was reigning on the basis of material means.

Therefore, we have understood that positive and negatives of

everything is always there.

Discussing on the positive and negative sides of globalization

will surely attract various arguments and counter arguments.

Amartya Sen, a novel prize winner economist, sees globalization

as positive and powerful means which, “has enriched the world

scientifically and culturally, and benefited many people economically as well.”11

Likely, United Nation believes that the poverty of this era can

10 Therborn, Göran (1995). "Routes to/through Modernity". In: Mike Featherstone, Scott Lash & Roland Robertson (eds.), Global Modernities. London: Sage.chap 7, pp 12511 http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

be reduced by the positive forces of globalization. However

economists like Ha-Joon Chang and Joseph Stiglitz have strongly

criticized the globalization for perpetuating inequality around

the globe rather than reducing it. The International Monetary

Fund also admitted in 2007 that introduction of new technology

and investment of foreign capital in poor or developing countries

have dramatically increased the inequality.12

Globalization is force that has and will shake the world of

social reality up and down like any other processes of change.

Now, we are able to understand from the history of the human race

that this force aroused from the west. It is also because every

worth some inventions so far has been invented, developed and

exercised from the west itself. Therefore, it is relevant to see

the heavy influence of western economics, politics and culture

over East. But concluding globalization only in terms of world-

wide economic integration could lead us to a false

interpretation.

12 http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

Authors like Turner and Khondker have defined globalization by

saying that, “Globalization, for us, is a historical process or a set of intertwined

processes with certain structural properties. At one level it is a macro-historical process,

a process of processes; at another level, namely, the micro level, it deeply affects human

beings directly, including their consciousness and everyday life.”13

It is true to what the authors Turner and Khondker explains,

that, observing in a macro level we will find that globalization

does nothing to the lives of ordinary people but in a micro level

the cause of pollution to rise of population and from poverty to

tension of war and conflicts is because of globalization.

But then Iyan Clark (1997) has strongly defended to the point

that globalization is a positive process for upgrading the

development. He found that the Fragmentation14 which came along

with the globalization has pushed the theme of uniting cultural

identity as one, into chaos. He further claims that the forces of

fragmentations like poverty, inequality etc have provided ample

space for the rise in international instability.

13 m-data/32598_02_Turner_&_Khondker_CH_02.pdf

14 Iyan Clark .1997. Globalization and Fragmentation: International relations in thetwentieth century. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 17

In the same manner Waters (1995) has opposed the most influencing

theory of Wallerstein on globalization by saying; “the allege that

Wallerstein’s theory provides us the authentic theory on globalization has been now

discarded on the grounds that his mechanisms of geosystemic integration are

exclusively economic. Pp 25.”15

This means that globalization has a larger scope and importance

rather than centering it into economic arena alone. But the way

today’s formation of globalization is developing clearly

presents egocentric and monopolized western cultural hegemony

over the rest of the globe.

III. Phases of Globalization

We can therefore understand that there might be different phases

of globalization according to the time and demand of the people.

But the one which influenced the whole world is the modern

globalization which strongly grew from the western

industrialization in nineteenth century.

a. Era of Discovery: Economical Phase

15 Iyan Clark.1997. Globalization and Fragmentation: International relations in twentieth century.

As we know that Vasco de Gama and Christopher Columbus are the

pioneers of the age of exploration. Their contribution is still

remembered in the name of Cape of Good Hope and America

respectively. French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch and British

empires encouraged their explorers and gathered information as

much as they could so that to later rule them.

Europe was engaged in expanding their territories and spreading

their language and culture throughout Asia, Africa, America and

Australia. Britain took hold of almost every corner of the world

and with its imperialism power the country became rich. Every

kind of resources for development was collected from the

colonized countries. In this era, slave trades, diamonds, gold

and herbs smuggling from Africa and local technologies and wealth

stolen from Asia made Europe the richest and powerful countries.

Economist like Adam smith writes down in his Wealth of Nations

that the foods produced by the hunters and shepherds were the

real source of trades in the past.16 He further claims that this

eventually developed in a large scale from village to town, and

16 http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

country to continents in systematizing the integration of market.

He also stated the fact that the colonization of North Americans

by Europeans provided the way of cheap labor market hence making

them cheap or no wage and high economy in the country.

It is now clear that this competition of enlarging Western

world’s economy slowly made space of anger and hatred towards

each other. This resulted several conflicts and wars including

First World War among themselves which then opened the eyes of

the rest of the world. The cold feelings for each other were

still going on. In the mean time depression hit the western world

leading it to conclude in Second World War quite quickly.

Then the western globalization was centered on strengthening the

economy that was lost during Second World War. According to

Encyclopedia Britannica, globalization was pulled by the global

expansion of multinational corporations based in the USA and

Europe, and worldwide exchange of new developments in science,

technology and products dominantly having their origins in the

Western world alone.17 This clarifies further on what level of

exercises were done in West to uplift their broken economy.

Theorist like Tomlinson (2007) believes that globalization is a

multidimensional process which not only centers on economics,

politics and technology but also to the environmental changes and

culture as well.18 According to him this global connectivity will

combine us together by sharing everything that characterizes

modern life; people, ideas, knowledge, information, beliefs,

fashion, commodities, flows of capital, pollution, crimes,

diseases and so on. This sounds logical that once we start to

share ideas, have the same beliefs and behave accordingly

together then this might provide a way to homogenized society.

b. Age of Advancement : Technological phase

After the age of exploration West as a whole was concentrated in

developing different technologies to advance their lives. Once

17 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Globalization_cite_note_18

18 Tomlinson.2007. Cultural Globalization: http://www.pacificdiscovery.org/credit/SEAreadings/Globilization%20and%20Culture%20-%20Tomlinson,%20John.pdf

again Britain gets credit in leading the west in this regard. In

around 1701 a farmer named Jethro Tull invented a seed drill

which systematized the seeding in the fields.19 Henceforth, there

were lots of inventions in the field of industry. James Watt

became the first person to discover steam engine. This revolution

shaped the human world to rapid change and progress with some

negative effects, too. Therefore, United Kingdom became the first

country to produce railroads and steam engines.20 This provided a

huge pavement for the growth of globalization. With this growth

of industrialization globalization brought home modernity.

Leading the western world’s modernity through technical

advancement Industrial revolution provided the space for

economical growth in United Kingdom. This was then spread

throughout Europe and even in America. The west was rapidly

concerned on productions, and expansions of the roads to enlarge

their markets. Therefore, it is now easier to theorize that this

crave for the bigger market for their products finally lead to

conflicts’ and wars such as WWI and WWII.

19 http://www.ltisdschools.org/cms/lib/TX21000349/Centricity/Domain/287/Chapter_25.pdf

20 http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

Both of these World Wars were fought on the basis of

technological development each of these Western countries built.

Japan as an exception from Asia was doing even better in this

case. But, what we are trying to say is, it is obviously sad to

see that the technological phase of advancement was used for

destruction of human kind itself but it was again the source of

rapid construction and development.

This period of technological improvement made the path of modern

age to run on the speed as we find today. Learning from the west

Eastern giants like China and India are considered to be among

the most technically advancing countries of the world. Here we

will not dig so much on what were the things that were discovered

because the list of talk will be never ending then. Instead the

aim of our paperwork is to figure out the different phases that

were the source for uplifting the globalization.

In this regard China has been critically examined and sometimes

brutally criticized for restricting it from the outside world.

Though we see China is no way less in advancement of technology

or other things it still is burning the eyes of many. Professor

Geoffrey G. Jones also disagrees with what some Western

politician and theorist talks on China’s stand for global

conception. He says, “Despite the perception of many in the West that China

existed in isolation prior to opening up in 1979, China has a long history of

internationalization, shaped by interaction and intersection with other cultures via

trade and invasion.”21 It is not a debate of whether one country

opposes to the idea of homogenizing but rather of a perception we

have for each other.

History has witnessed that since the birth of globalization we

have been interacting with both the positive and negative effects

of it in our daily lives. Because the negativity has terrorized

us more we want to homogenize in possibly every aspects with

everybody around the corner. Since we realized that globalization

was more centered on business than societies the concept of

global culture aroused to assist the homogenizing process.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Thomas L. Friedman strongly

believes that ten things are behind the technological phase of21 http://www.hbs.edu/centennial/businesssummit/globalization/historical-roots-of-globalization.pdf

globalization. He describes that this “flat” or globalized earth

is a world that is increasingly integrated; a place where states,

companies, and individuals are increasingly interdependent; where

the actions of not only multinational corporations, but—more

significantly—individuals can have increasingly important global

effects.22

For him the platform to this phase of advancement were because of

the following things:

i. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the development of the

Apple and Windows-enabled personal computer (PC),

ii. The development of the Internet, the World Wide Web and

web browsers,

iii. The development of work-flow software.

Even though the advances in communication technologies were

integral to the creation of a globalized world, Friedman does not

reduce the factors behind the creation of a “flat world platform”

to mere developments in technology. What is at least as important

22 https://clg.portalxm.com/library/keytext.cfm?keytext_id=34

(if not more important) was the rise in demand for these

technologies and the general know-how to take advantage of them.

Globalization has created a more level playing field on which

corporations, individuals, ideas, and processes can compete.

It is undoubted fact that the advancement in technology led

western world to rule in the economic market of the world. But

things do change and has to be changed according to time and

therefore we also witnessed the fall of great empires of the

economic field like UK and USA. This means globalization is very

vast and it has no boundaries. It cannot be limited within your

periphery; you know the rules you are a player yet you can fail.

But because you know the rules already, failure becomes positive

lesson and possibility of winning becomes more the second time.

c. Era of Western Modernism: Cultural Phase

Western world did not only advance itself in technology of

industries but was also able to handle culture, art, literature

on the same phase and speed. Though Great Britain was being

strict on sharing the knowledge and ideas of industrial

inventions it opened its gates for global cultural relation. This

is also shown by Lechner and Boli (2005) where they have

mentioned Lord Macartney’s effort in 1793 to please Chinese

Emperor and bring their strong Eastern counterpart under western

influence.23 Likely, the first modern 0lympiad held in Athens in

1896 positively suggests that it was a praiseworthy endeavor in

bringing the world together in one place. Nevertheless, both

events mentioned by Lechner and Boli failed to achieve the

organizer’s expectations. At this instant one can argue, how can

such small events as mentioned above be able to represent a world

culture?

The most influencing of all theorist of cultural globalization

Wallerstein (1991) explains culture as almost the broadest

concept in social science under whose umbrella nothing is left

behind. According to him every individual has different as well

as similar traits to other and such traits which are neither

universal nor idiosyncratic is called Culture.24 Therefore it

23 Lechner, Frank J. & John Boli . 2005. World Culture: Origins and Consequences. Malden, M.A.: Blackwell

24 Wallerstein, Immanuel .1991. Geopolitics and geoculture: Essays on the changing world-system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

seems logical to say that even a work done by individual that

intends to serve for all humankind can strongly symbolize a world

culture. In this regard 0lympiad is a cultural event. But unlike

the authors view I would like to argue that Macartney’s endeavor

were lesser cultural and more political (imperialistic) approach.

As we discussed before the fragmentation brought by the

globalization has created many barriers in homogenizing the world

into single culture. Likely, many philosophers have critically

examined that this practice of making a one world through the

path of single culture is to invite catastrophe. Samuel p.

Huntington’s Clash of Civilization suggests something similar

when he says;

“The people of different civilizations have different views on the relations between God

and man, the individual and the group, the citizen and the state, parents and children,

husband and wife, as well as differing views of the relative importance of rights and

responsibilities, liberty and authority, equality and hierarchy. These differences are the

product of centuries. They will not soon disappear. They are far more fundamental than

differences among political ideologies and political regimes. Differences do not

necessarily mean conflict, and conflict does not necessarily mean violence. Over the

centuries, however, differences among civilizations have generated the most prolonged

and the most violent conflicts.”25

True, that the more we call ourselves civilized, cultured, more

liberal in thoughts and democratic in behavior the more we have

shaped ourselves conservative in actions. Let us relate Albert

Einstein’s remark when nuclear power was used by humans to kill

humans. He said, “The unleashing of power of Atom Bomb has changed

everything except our mode of thinking, and thus we head towards unparallel

catastrophes.”26 The ongoing killings and the tensions of war till

this date puts forward the message that change has never been

occurred to us by neither means and we somehow are growing the

barbarian attitude like in the past.

Well than is there no hope?? Certainly not, if we are alone the

creator of these problems than we alone are the healers.

Theorists like Tomlinson (2007) believe that globalization is a

multidimensional process which not only centers on economics,

politics and technology but also to the environmental changes and

25 Huntington, Samuel P. 1993. "The Clash of Civilizations?" Foreign Affairs, 72 (3): pp25

26 Quoted in the New York Times Magazine, August 2, 1964 and in Calaprice 2000

culture as well.27 According to him this global connectivity will

combine us together by sharing everything that characterizes

modern life; people, ideas, knowledge, information, beliefs,

fashion, commodities, flows of capital, pollution, crimes,

diseases and so on. This sounds logical that once we start to

share ideas, have the same beliefs and behave accordingly

together might provide a way to homogenized society.

Other relevant example on positive homogenizing process through

cultural globalization can be drawn from Livia Pekajova’s (2010)

findings of Zlin region of Czeck Republic. He claims that advent

of globalization has touched all human activities in all the

areas of daily lives and thus Zlin region can be no exception.28

He has presented Hollis’ (2009) research as his source to prove

that there is homogenizing process going on. In this research

culture in completion with local and global brands were done were

people have shown respect to their home product but have been

fond of using global brands.

27 Tomlinson.2007.

28 http://conference.osu.eu/globalization/publ/21-pekajova_novosak.pdf.

He further stresses on this point by saying, “The homogenization–

heterogenization framework may be also applied for conventionally understood

meanings of culture. Commercial culture, symbolized e.g. by multiplex cinemas or pop

music, may be regarded as a homogenizing feature in this respect while local culture,

symbolized e.g. by non-professional artists in marginal segments of culture, as a

heterogenizing feature.”29

From above saying we can portray a hypothesis that sometimes even

such positive thoughts might carry some strong message for global

cultural integration. Despite so many worries going on around the

globe; such as HIV-AIDS, global warming, terrorism etc, it is

also a positive move that we are able to know, understand and if

possible act on improving these features through literature, news

broadcast, movies and radios, internet etc. This is undoubtedly a

gift of cultural globalization.

iv. Conclusion

Globalization is an entity that increases the number of choices

for actors providing them the opportunity of multiple identities

and de-centering of the social subject into individuals ability

29 http://conference.osu.eu/globalization/publ/21-pekajova_novosak.pdf.

to avail them in several organizational options at the same

time.30 It is therefore Americanization or westernization sounds

more local and centered to west alone.

The impacts of Americanization, Chinese market policy, Indian

localism, etc all these phenomenon are accepted in/voluntarily in

the globalization. It is because global acts locally to be more

global. But there are both positive and negative impacts of these

features. Postcolonial theorist have observed crypto-imperialist

motives in the exploitation of subaltern labor markets and

natural resources {Antonio and Bonanno (2000)-quoted in Ritzer

and Stillman (2000)}. This applies in Americanization very well,

too.

We now have bring into being that globalization goes in multi-

directional for multiple purpose from political to economical and

social to cultural arenas. On the other hand Americanization is a

powerful one-directional process that tends to overwhelm

competing processes as well as the strength of local forces that

30 Nederveen Pieterse, Jan (1995). "Globalization as Hybridization". In: Mike Featherstone, Scott Lash & Roland Robertson (eds.), Global Modernities. London: Sage, pp. 45-68

might resist, modify, and/ or transform American models into

hybrid forms.31

At the end, from the arguments we have drawn so far, we can now

say that the modernity and the beginning of globalization is from

the west. But at the moment local has acted to be more real and

strong in uplifting and shaping today’s form of globalization and

modernity. It is therefore that current form of globalization has

acknowledged different modernity practiced across the globe

according to the locality. A. Giddens (1990) agrees with our

argument, too, when he says,

“Globalization can thus be defined as the intensification of worldwide social relations

which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events

occurring many miles away and vice-versa.” 32

Finally, west acting to enlarge and further strengthen the

process of globalization is not only necessary for western world

31 Ritzer, George & Todd Stillman (2003). "Assessing McDonaldization, Americanization andGlobalization". In: Ulrich Beck, Natan Sznaider & Rainer Winter (eds.), Global America? The Cultural Consequences of Globalization. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

32 Gidden, A (1990).The Consequencees of Modernity. Standfort C.A: Standfort University Press.

alone but to the rest of the world, too. Therefore, west is being

flexible in adding the list of the G20 countries and pushing up

other developing countries to walk shoulder to shoulder with

them. This will directly help to backup western countries failing

economy but those walking along them will learn to grow as well.

References/ Bibliography:

1. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/ globalization.html#VSAW1qrzfqzSV7Tu.99

2. m-data/32598_02_Turner_&_Khondker_CH_02.pdf3. http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/

policy-report/2003/5/globalization.pdf

4. Nederveen Pieterse, Jan (1995). "Globalization as Hybridization". In: Mike Featherstone, Scott Lash & Roland Robertson (eds.),Global Modernities. London: Sage, pp. 45-68

5. Bauman, Zygmunt (1998). "On Glocalization: or Globalization for some, Localization for some Others". Thesis Eleven, 54 (1): 37-49

6. http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

7.

http://www.tcd.ie/Economics/TEP/2002_papers/TEPNo1KO22.pdf

8. Geo rey C. Gunn.2003. ff First Globalization: Eurasian Exchange, 1500-1800. Lanham: Rowman & Litte eld ,341 pp. fi

9. http://hackettlatinacademy.weebly.com/uploads/2/2/5/1/22510182/dbq_project-how_revolutionary_was_the_american_revolution.pdf

10. Therborn, Göran (1995). "Routes to/through Modernity". In: Mike Featherstone, Scott Lash & Roland Robertson (eds.), Global Modernities. London: Sage.chap 7, pp 125

11. http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

12. http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

13. m-data/32598_02_Turner_&_Khondker_CH_02.pdf

14. Iyan Clark .1997. Globalization and Fragmentation: International relations in the twentieth century. Oxford University Press,New York, pp 17

15. Iyan Clark.1997. Globalization and Fragmentation: International relations in twentieth century.

16. http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

17. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Globalization_cite_note_18

18. http://www.pacificdiscovery.org/credit/SEAreadings/Globilization%20and%20Culture%20-%20Tomlinson,%20John.pdf

19. http://www.ltisdschools.org/cms/lib/TX21000349/Centricity/Domain/287/Chapter_25.pdf

20. http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-1

21. Lechner, Frank J. & John Boli . 2005. World Culture: Origins and Consequences. Malden, M.A.: Blackwell

22. Wallerstein, Immanuel .1991. Geopolitics and geoculture: Essays on the changing world-system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

23. Huntington, Samuel P. 1993. "The Clash of Civilizations?" Foreign Affairs, 72 (3): pp25

24. Quoted in the New York Times Magazine, August 2, 1964 and in Calaprice 2000

25. Tomlinson.2007.

26. http://conference.osu.eu/globalization/publ/21-pekajova_novosak.pdf.

27. http://conference.osu.eu/globalization/publ/21-pekajova_novosak.pdf.

28. Nederveen Pieterse, Jan (1995). "Globalization as Hybridization". In: Mike Featherstone, Scott Lash & Roland Robertson (eds.),Global Modernities. London: Sage, pp. 45-68

29. Ritzer, George & Todd Stillman (2003). "Assessing McDonaldization, Americanization and Globalization". In: Ulrich Beck, Natan Sznaider & Rainer Winter (eds.), Global America? The

Cultural Consequences of Globalization. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

30. Gidden, A (1990).The Consequencees of Modernity. Standfort C.A: Standfort University Press.

31.