Seabrook (1) argues there are three principle responses to globalization:
Fatalism
A fatalistic response, which states that the world is simply powerless to resist globalization. Seabrook argues that most leaders of the developed world take the position that globalization is inevitable and irreversible. He suggests these leaders are experiencing an ‘impotence of convenience’ – their confessed powerlessness disguises the fact that the forces of globalization economically advantage their countries and their economic elites.
Reasserting Local Identity
Some cultures may attempt to resist globalization by reasserting local identity. This may involve deliberately highlighting and celebrating local folklore and languages. For example the French government have banned words such as ‘email’, ‘takeaway’ and now ‘hashtag’ and imposed a ‘culture tax’ on cinemas showing non-French films. Another aspect of this trend is ‘commodification’ in which local populations package and sell aspects of their local traditional cultures – for example members of the Masai tribe in Kenya perform for tourists, after carefully removing their trainers and watches to make the whole thing more authentic.
Violent Resistance
A final response is the emergence of violent resistance, mostly in the developing world, as some peoples interpret globalization as an assault on their identity. Seabrook argues that this is how we should understand terrorism – not as a response to poverty, but as a response to the ‘supposed miracle working, wealth-creating propensities of globalism’ as some religious and ethnic groups resist globalization because their interpret the West as having declared an ideological war on local cultures.
Sources used to write this post
(1) Chapman et al (2016)
Video lessons
Quizzes & Worksheets
Classroom Integration
Lesson Plans
I would definitely recommend Study.com to my colleagues. It’s like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. I feel like it’s a lifeline.
Sociology Index
STAY IN THE HIMALAYAN MOUNTAINS FOR HEALTH, PEACE, AND YOGA
Fatalistic suicide occurs in social conditions where the individual experiences pervasive oppression. David Emile Durkheim defined fatalistic suicide as suicide resulting from excessive regulation. Fatalistic suicide is committed by individuals whose passions are choked by oppressive discipline. A classic example of fatalistic suicide is when a slave commits suicide to escape the control of his or her owner. We can call it fatalistic suicide because the individual considers himself condemned by fate or doomed to be a slave. A fatalistic and hopeless situation calls for fatalistic suicide as a solution.
Fatalistic suicide served as a descriptor for suicides in traditional societies, because Durkheim was faced with the issue that even in societies with abundant social capital, individuals nevertheless killed themselves. The category of fatalistic suicide was constructed mainly for purpose of contrasting it with egoistic suicide, and because it would undercut his central claims about the role of modern urban life as increasing the incidence of suicide.
Anomic Suicide can occur when an individual has set goals and then experiences a failure in achieving those goals due to societal conditions. Altruistic Suicide is a suicide committed for the benefit of others or for the community. Egoistic Suicide occurs when an individual has a low level of integration into society. Durkheim could never seriously examine the possibility that social integration could result in suicide.
Durkheim distinguished between egoistic, anomic, altruistic, and fatalistic suicide. Dismissing altruistic and fatalistic suicide as unimportant, he viewed egoistic suicide as a consequence of the deterioration of social and familial bonds and linked anomic suicide to disillusionment and disappointment. Fatalistic suicide occurs in a highly regulated, social environment where the individual sees no possible way to improve his or her life.
Fatalistic suicide arises from “excessive regulation” that pitilessly blocks the possibilities of future. Individuals do not want their lives due to the extremely suppressing environment. The suicides of those suffering from mental and physical oppression are closer to fatalistic suicide. - Labor Politics of Suicide in Korea, Lim Hyun-Chin, Hwang Suk-Man.
Women's Fatalistic Suicide in Iran - A Partial Test of Durkheim in an Islamic Republic. Akbar Aliverdinia, University of Mazandaran, William Alex Pridemore, Indiana University. Durkheim's theory of fatalistic suicide, or suicide resulting from overregulation of behavior, has been neglected empirically. The authors examine the association between female suicide rates and multiple measures of social control of women, with rates expected to be higher in areas with greater social regulation of the lives of women and stronger traditional tribal cultures. The authors' findings reveal that hyperregulation is associated with Durkheim’s Theory of Fatalistic Suicide: A Cross-National Approach.
A regression analysis using U.N. data on 45 nations found that indicators of totalitarianism were significantly related to the rate of suicide independent of the control variables.
Fatalistic Suicide in a Tight-Knit Community
Sarah Catherine Billups, Anna S. Mueller and Seth Abrutyn.
Modernization and Women’s Fatalistic Suicide in Post-Mao Rural China: A Critique of Durkheim
Introduction: Chinese Modernity and the Individual Psyche
,
Hyeon Jung Lee, Palgrave Macmillan US.
Durkheim argued that the process of modernization (modernization theory) can engender an increase in egoistic and anomic types of suicide, which results from a lack of social integration and regulation. Comparatively, altruistic or fatalistic suicide, each of which is caused by excessive social integration or regulation, rarely occur in modern society and can be regarded as relics of a traditional, premodern world.
Durkheim's theory of fatalistic suicide: a cross-national approach. The Journal of social psychology 1979;107(Second Half):161-8.
Altruism and Fatalism: the characteristics of Palestinian suicide terrorists
Pedahzur A.; Perliger A.; Weinberg L. Deviant Behavior, Volume 24, Number 4. The suicide method became one of the most prevalent tactics of Palestinian Terrorism in Israel. Who are these people willing to sacrifice their lives and what drives them to do such things? We answer these questions, while relying on the concepts of altruistic suicide and fatalistic suicide from Durkheim's typology of suicide behavior. Palestinian suicide terrorists from 1993 until the beginning of 2002, fit the "altruistic" type as well as some elements from the "fatalistic" and represent a combination of both types; thus they can be labeled under a new category of "fatalistic altruistic" suicide.
Suicides in prison fall into two groups: egoistic suicide and fatalistic suicide (Durkheim typology). Egoistic suicide occurs when an individual has a low level of integration into society, while fatalistic suicide occurs in a highly regulated, social environment where the individual sees no possible way to improve his or her life. Therefore, most suicides in prison are egoistic, whereas those by death row inmates may be both egoistic and fatalistic, because they are socially isolated and heavily regulated, and at the same time, weakly integrated. - Lester D, Danto BL: Suicide Behind Bars: Prediction and Prevention. Philadelphia: The Charles Press, 1993.