Historiography and Globalisation. well, not quite what i had in mind based on our sessions this week, though i had a good chuckle this morning reading this article. bonus for the classic old school textbook illustrations of these ancient chicken tender baskets …. 🙂 in all seriousness though — for world historians the issue of whether certain things — written language, pottery, etc. — are independently developed (and if so, why ….) versus learned/borrowed are as controversial as the fundamental issues we have discussed (linear versus circular; individuals make history versus history making individuals ….) for Globalisation, these global food/foodways patterns — poor people food, dumplings, meat wrapped in some type of bread, sausages, noodles, soup — are the microcosms we use to access global and historical patterns and characteristics of globalisation. The Onion started at Madison Wisconsin when i was a student there, and they have had a long history of writers taking class material and turning them into articles. Professor Liang
Historians Reveal Multiple Cradles Of Civilization Each Independently Developed Chicken Tender Basket
Poli Sci and Globalization. Imperialism, exclusive knowledge, power, resources. if we were to add up all of the billions available from this list of mostly north American/US companies, what percentage of the globe’s total annual “cultural production” budget would that be? the power to narrate — to include and exclude, to interpret and misinterpret — trumps every other form of power. as i often note in classes, not that one form of imperialism is better than another — physical-economic-political imperialism one can fight and resist and easily see when victory appears; cultural imperialism — much much more complicated and difficult to process and handle. Professor Liang
Apple’s streaming service is cheap, but how does it stack up against Amazon, Netflix and Disney?
Globalisation 2019. the paradox of globalisation is that the more connected the globe has become, the more we realize how much we share in common while at the very same time the urge to draw distinct boundaries becomes more radicalized, militant, and often violent. part of this has to do with the unusual pace and scale of this global connection — what used to take thousands of years now occur weekly, daily. part of this has to do with a sense of chaos and lack of control — and loss of dignity — whether it is indigenous groups, oppressed groups, laid off auto workers, members of a small town. and of course, part of this has to do with the very unequal engine driving globalisation — imperialism is the engine driving this process, hence, the natural reaction. much as i love efforts like these — and as often as i volunteer my time and donate money to any effort to save the historic, the local, the quirky — in the larger context i also believe this: a culture/civilisation is alive when it isn’t spending a lot of time thinking about what it is or isn’t, and the moment one sees efforts to “save” it or to “revitalize” it, then something dreadful has already occurred. my application of this sense is pretty universal, all the way from efforts to make English as the official language of the US, to efforts to save Taiwanese as a language. in any case, this is the broadest theoretical framework for our semester, as always, open to debate, discussion, counter-examples, improvements, and so on. Professor Liang