3. Construction “of a hierarchy of a superior and
inferior knowledge and thus, superior and
inferior people around the world” Grosfoguel, 2008
Western knowledge as the sole achiever in a
universalistic consciousness
3
4
4. Globalisation:The rapid spread of the “Euro-
Identity” Morely and Robins, 2002
Emergence “of a subject-object relation”
Quinjao, 2007
5
6
5. Submergence of society intoWesternisation
Why is everyone so suddenly ill at ease
and confused (just look how solemn their faces are)?
Why are the streets and the squares all at once empty,
as everyone heads for home, lost in their thoughts?
Because it’s night now, and the barbarians haven’t
shown up.
And there are others, just back from the borderlands,
who claim that the barbarians no longer exist.
What in the world will we do without barbarians?
Those people would have been a solution, of sorts.
C.P Cavafy, 1971
7
8
7. “Rather than refining the idea of feminism as
something that stretched from its radical
incarnation to its liberal form, we have to
broaden the scope of its reference” Viber, Cited in
Power, 2009
10
8. Inequalities represented through gender
expectations
Feminism fights for equal rights for both
women and men
11 12
9. Diminishing gender expectations which are
ultimately shrinking opportunities for both
women and men
13
14
13. “A transfer in control and/or ownership of
business and industry form the public realm
to the private” Harvey, 2007
18
14. Privatisation of public entities
Neo-liberal ideals of prioritising “the integrity
of financial institutions and bond holders
[over] the well-being of citizens” Harvey, 2007
19
15. 2014 budget cuts,Australia
$15 billion budget cuts to the health sector
20
16. References
Adichie, C. (2013). We should all be feminists: Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie atTEDxEuston. [online]
YouTube.Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg3umXU_qWc [Accessed 20 May.
2014].
Grosfoguel, R. (2008).Transmodernity, border thinking, and global coloniality. Eurozone:
Decolonizing political economy and postcolonial studies.
Harvey, D. (2007). Neoliberalism as creative destruction. the annals of the american Academy of
political and social science, 610(1), pp.21--44.
Levy, A. (2009). LIFTAND SEPARATEWhy is feminism still so divisive?. The NewYorker, [online]
p.1. Available at:
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2009/11/16/091116crbo_books_levy?currentPage=a
ll [Accessed 19 May. 2014].
Mansfield, B. ed., (2009). Privatization: Property and the Remaking of Nature-Society Relations. 1st
ed. Massachusetts-USA,Oxford- UK,Victoria- Australia: Blackwell Publishing, pp.1-11.
Morely, D. and Robins, K. (2002). Spaces of Identity:Global Media, Electronic Landscapes and
Cultural Boundaries. London and NewYork: RoutledgeTaylor and Francis Group, p.vi-9.
Palmer, C. (2014). Budget 'based on lies', says Clive Palmer. [online]YouTube.Available at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd6WXBzXyB4&feature=youtu.be [Accessed 21 May. 2014].
Power, N. (2009). One-dimensional woman. 1st ed.Winchester, UK ;Washington, USA: 0 [Zero]
Books.
Quijano,A. (2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural studies, 21(2-3), pp.168--178.
Tong, R. (2013). FeministThought: AComprehensive Introduction. 6th ed. London: Routledge, pp.1-
16.
Vidal, A. (2014). 'Intersectional feminism'.What the hell is it? (And why you should care). The
Telegraph, [online] p.1.Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-
life/10572435/Intersectional-feminism.-What-the-hell-is-it-And-why-you-should-care.html
[Accessed 20 May. 2014].
17. Images
1. Google Images:
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=globalisation&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=J56CU_ScC
caIkgX8_IDQBA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=912#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=GLNi6XVjLXkjQM%253
A%3BxCdzfJi7Ulx8vM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.scotlandsaysnaw.com%252Fwp-
content%252Fuploads%252F2014%252F04%252Fglobalisation.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.scotlandsa
ysnaw.com%252Fopinion-the-illusion-of-independence%252F%3B1124%3B604 [Accessed 24/05/2014]
2. Google Images:
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=globalisation&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=J56CU_ScC
caIkgX8_IDQBA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=912#q=colonialism&tbm=isch&facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgr
c=hnvvnGaSbyNhVM%253A%3BuhmcxicLV-
VXMM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fsleague.civfanatics.com%252Fimages%252F5%252F5f%252FColonialism_Ti
tle.png%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fsleague.civfanatics.com%252Findex.php%252FColonialism_-
_The_Age_of_Discovery%3B720%3B424 [Accessed 24/05/2014]
3. Google Images:
4. Google Images:
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=define+submergence&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Vo
GCU_S3KoelkAWIg4GgBQ&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=912#q=eurocentrism&tbm=isch&facrc=_&im
gdii=_&imgrc=unOMTCbdtmCngM%253A%3Ba-
xMIKHAY6DkrM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fobsoletematter.files.wordpress.com%252F2013%252F05%252Feur
ocentric.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fobsoletematter.wordpress.com%252F2013%252F05%252F20%252Fen
d-of-postcolonialism-and-the-challenge-for-non-european-thought%252F%3B473%3B355 [Accessed
24/05/2014]
5. Google Images:
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=globalisation&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=J56CU_ScC
caIkgX8_IDQBA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=912#q=colonialism&tbm=isch&facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgr
c=bI2HBLzSLHt6IM%253A%3BBKRdm_vyQVfimM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fnothingtobegainedhere.files.wo
rdpress.com%252F2011%252F05%252Fcolonialism-
1898.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fnothingtobegainedhere.wordpress.com%252F2011%252F05%252F29%25
2Fenjoy-colonialism-1493-and-1898%252F%3B3000%3B1500 [Accessed 24/05/2014]
Globalisation today is a term most commonly associated with the grand transition of our society from a somewhat “sequestered” world to a suddenly interconnected global community. It has been largely recognised as a transition wherein which individuals were presented with a greater opportunity day by day to exercise their free will of humanity and explore the previously “unknown” territory of the human identity, marking the beginning of a new global era. However, globalisation is not in its entirety a term constructed by modern day theorists. In order to better understand the process of globalisation as we are familiar with in its contemporary movements, it is vital to take a step back and look deeper into not only the economical, but ultimately also the cultural/social, ethnic/racial structures which have ultimately influenced this global commute.
Globalisation as we know it today can be perceived largely as the restructuring and fundamentally the refurbishing of an essentially “Eurocentric” ideal which established during the pre-perceived, concealed process of globalisation. European colonial domination from the 16th century (Grosfoguel, 2008) provided a leeway for the Eurocentric ideals and attitudes to act as a proxy for its “exclusively European product and as a universal paradigm of knowledge and of the relation between humanity and the rest of the world” (Quijano, 2007), and thus forming a Eurocentric world view.
The domineering and uncanny characteristics of the European/Euro-American world-views acted as a catalyst for the sequential construction “of a hierarchy of a superior and inferior knowledge and thus, superior and inferior people around the world” (Grosfoguel, 2008). The rapid emergence of a truly global community in our modern day society aimed to respectfully eliminate the cultural hierarchy and domination through power structures which existed in our societal system and ultimately create a sense of unity amongst those who were previously labelled as the “barbarians” of society.
However, the representation of the “western man’s knowledge” as the sole achiever in a universalistic consciousness (Grosfoguel, 2008) during the period of European world domination led to the emergence “of a subject-object relation” (Quijano, 2007), wherein which the ‘subject’ continues to hold its status of the “bearer of ‘reason’”, whilst the ‘object’, even to this day, is essentially recognised as “different [in] nature” (Quijano, 2007). Fundamentally, the essence of a global community in a contemporary society can be recognised as the rapid spread of the “Euro-identity” (Morely and Robins, 2002) in the masquerade of spreading the idea of a pluralistic global community and as such, “the [Eurocentric] power structure was, and still is, the framework within which operate the other social relations of classes or estates” (Quijano, 2007).
The very notion of expressing individuality through the ‘emergence’ of globalisation is stripped back by the submergence of society into westernisation. The poem ‘Waiting for the Barbarians’, written by C.P. Cavafy, powerfully conveys eerie reality of modern culture moulding itself into solely the western ideals; “Because Night has fallen and the Barbarians have not come; They said there are no Barbarians anymore” (Cavafy, 1971 cited in Morely and Robins, 2002).
A key issue in association with feminism in our societies today, is the confusion associated with essentially what it means to be a feminist in contemporary society in comparison to a feminist during the late 1900s. Feminism, as majority of today’s society choses to believe in, is not merely the perceived ‘barbaric’ attitudes of women ‘losing their cool’ over the labelled “masculinities” of men by taking part in actions as eccentric as burning bras, which occurred during the 1960s, as an indication of woman’s equality to that of a man’s (Levy, 2009). It is also neither just the radical actions taken by women as a means of expressing their rights as a citizen of society by attaining a somewhat ‘totalitarian’ control over men in the political and economic, nor should it remain as a typically “woman’s only” movement.
By focusing simply on the more radical acts of feminism which occurred during a time of greater oppression, it is no wonder that many today still perceive feminism and the idea of being a feminist as something “associated with its invocation with the bellicose” (Viber, Cited in Power, 2009).It is vital for society today to better understand that “rather than refining the idea of feminism as something that stretched from its radical incarnation to its liberal form, we have to broaden the scope of its reference” (Viber, cited in Power, 2009).
That is, being a feminist is not merely fighting for the equal rights of woman, but that it also places emphasis on fighting for the equal rights of both women and men. Feminism also encapsulates a movement highlighting the inequalities presented within our society in terms of gender expectations, which have ultimately doomed both women and men of our world to be subjected, supressed and squeezed into a tiny box of suspected behaviours (Adichie, 2013).
As such, feminism can also be viewed in perspective as aiming at diminishing the various gender expectations which have essentially ruled the lives of both men and woman (Tong, 2013). The very gender expectations which are essentially ‘shrinking’ the opportunities available for both sexes, and ultimately disfavouring the abilities of both men and woman to exercise their true identities and essentially express their true personalities in the eyes of society without being altered and bullied into inevitable suppression.
‘Intersectional’ feminists, as they are more widely known as today, also fight for the rights of both men and woman to have the ability to be accepted for their own uniqueness which separates them from the previous gender ideals and provides a leeway for both men and woman to be who they want to be without having to explain themselves to society’s unrealistic expectations (Vidal, 2014). Whether their expressions highlight their willingness to be a stay-at-home mum or a business woman, or whether their expressions highlight their wishes to be a male childcare teacher or work in the sports industry, feminism in contemporary society also fights for the rights of equal expressions of both men and woman, and for the right to do so without being questioned for their sexuality.
Throughout time and history, the role of class systems and power of the minority over the majority has always remained as a salient issue transcending through time and space into what is regarded as a contemporary society fixated on the construction of a more equal society. The essence of social class structures has been a central part of our societies for many centuries, and although the growth of a more global community as well as the development of a contemporary society created a sense of illusion in many western societies of a somewhat class-less social structure, whilst reality indicated that “we have, [in fact have always], lived through a whole generation of sophisticated class struggle on the part of upper strata to restore or…construct class dominance” (Harvey, 2007). Class struggles in our society today are largely perceived through the political and economic domination constructed through the system of government titled ‘neoliberalism’.
The nature and history of class systems and its pre-embedded structures of power distributions throughout society formed a smooth manoeuver for the neoliberal system of thought to dominate a pre-structured class society (Harvey, 2007). This meant that neoliberal figures were provided with a greater ability to debate as well as actively exercise their ideas for the necessity for a “society in which freedom may be effectively preserved [through] the [diffusion] of power and initiative associated with (private property and competitive market” (Harvey, 2007).
Adamant with the neoliberal argument of a “system of justification and legitimisation” (Harvey, 2007), neoliberalism paved the way to a contemporary formation of privatisation and the legitimate means of “a transfer in control and/or ownership of business and industry from the public realm to the private” (Mansfield, 2009). The uneven distribution of power and equality throughout society highlights the characteristics of neoliberalism as a “theoretical template for the reorganisation … and the restoration of class power” (Harvey, 2007) fundamentally achieved through the privatisation of once labelled common goods which inevitably “separates individuals from the means of production and forces them into wage labour” (Mansfield, 2009).
The nature of the neoliberal system of government has led to the privatisation of previously sought to be public goods, essentially limiting the access to resources for those restricted by their position in the class structure. The privatisation of public entities, such as health and education, ultimately indicates the willingness of the government to place forward in level of importance “the integrity of financial institutions and bond holders [over] the well-being of the citizen” (Harvey, 2007).
Privatisations of public entities, as argued by neoliberals, are always backed by the idea of a financial crisis disabling a nation from functioning to its full extent. As such society is faced with the masked ideologies that the redistribution tactics are in fact a method of reconstructing a ‘brighter’ future for society (Harvey, 2007). Evidence of this neoliberal view is highlighted in the 2014 debate surrounding the budget cuts made by Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbott. Budget cuts as large as $15 billion to the health sector, forcing the health sector to become a private owned entity and thus charging extra for public use as a means of revitalising the ‘debt crisis’ Australia is seemingly facing, indicate the willingness of the neoliberal government system to somewhat disable the social well-being in order to reassure funding is limited to those in power (Palmer, 2014).