Social Globalisation

The term ‘Economic Globalisation’ is very popular in use the recent years, and these days especially. The term, as we know, describes the following economic phenomenon: with the help of internet communications, free trade, sophisticated logistics and (at least when it started) affordable fuel for transportation, it can be economically rewarding to shop, sell and produce things not where your headquarter may be, but rather around the globe- wherever the overall framework (markets, wages, resources etc.) fits best. Nothing new here. This developments brings both good and bad, more of which shall not be subject of this article. But at least it is save to say the topic is a polarizing one. Globally that is, of course.

What this article should well be about, is a closely related phenomenon on the social and cultural side - let’s call it the Social Globalisation. This for sure has been investigated already by sociologists (i admit i really don’t know, as i am nonchalantly out of my field of expertice here), but it is as a fact by far not as exposed to public discussion, politics and media as the complex of Economic Globalisation.

I would guess there is probably hardly anyone not experiencing it in everyday life, at least no one who has got internet access of some sort. It means the peer group you feel close and connected with are not anymore exclusively the fellows ‘close by’ in terms of distance, as it once used to be in a 1950ies or even late 80ties town. Of course there are differences in characteristics between city and countryside and other demoscopics, but it is hard to deny it does exist at all.

And there is nothing wrong with that. Why shouldn’t folks with highly specialized interests or requirements, which have no chance for a match in their proximity and therefore no chance for local peers, go and find the like-minded on the Internet? May it be orchid breeders, MBA alumnis or fans of norwegian speed metal - they all find their social peer groups they could hardly ever find in their neighborhood. Results triggered or supported by the internet add up to that and are in principle similar, such as long distance relationships, studying abroad, job nomads and the like.

There might be two potential pitfalls though (probably more, but those are the ones i think of):

a) Neighborhoods, communities, national states, union states with all their subsystems like taxation etc. are not prepared for this development at all. Both the MBA alumni and the norwegian speed-metal fan act with a lot of honest loyalty with their international peer group, whereas the connection with the neighbor down the street diminished. This is not said as a regressive judgment, but as an observation.

b) With cultural individualisation plus the introduction of the internet, it seems everyone found out they got their own special interests (like this article itself seems to be a proof of).

Now what? Again, the development of people finding more matching peers than in former times to exchange with, be it professionally, scientifically, to work up personal blows of fate, or many others is a good thing in general. Yet there remains a strange gut feeling about this. Not about Social Globalisation itself, but rather about the tools our societies (not) got for it.