…as rapidly as forces from various metropolises are bought into the new societies they tend to become indigenised in one way or another.
One of the great Tarantino scenes actually says a lot to me about how global/glocalisation actually works. The idea of how a major franchise will change its product pending on location speaks volumes to it.
The necessity of this from a business standpoint is unquestionable and expansion into global markets would likely fail without it.
But what does this say about our new global environment? Does this make “McDonaldisation” a feasible outcome for the growth and development of a global economy
are we stripping away the very thing that makes the difference in our spatiality so unique and precious for a quick buck.
I remember during my first degree Dr. Natascha Klocker asking what is a “developing” country really needing to develop to? Is a western principle of how we should fundamentally develop our economy suitable to many of these situations or is the loss of culture and tradition suffered too hefty a price to pay?
Inevitably this is always where globalisation debate will end up.
While I can’t be definitive I have an inkling the right answer is somewhere in the vs.