"Globalization" and "culture" are concepts with complex connotations and diverse definitions. Generally speaking, the study of globalization is interdisciplinary, holistic and inclusive, and the concept of economic globalization has been basically recognized by people. However, with the advancement of economic globalization and the arrival of the information age of science and technology, the close communication between economy and culture and people's requirements for some rules have raised such a question-the study of cultural globalization. From the perspective of the world, at present, there are two main methods to study cultural globalization. One is to pay attention to economic factors at the same time from the past. For example, wallerstein, a representative of the world system theory and an American scholar, revised his theory; The other is to explain the process of globalization directly with civilization and culture. For example, Friedman of the University of Copenhagen believes that the changing process of the globalization system is the substitution process of different cultures. [1] Looking at various theories and viewpoints, there are mainly the following problems: the relationship between globalization and culture, the construction of global culture and cultural globalization.

The relationship between globalization and culture

The premise of studying cultural globalization is to grasp the relationship between globalization and culture. The great change in the methodology of globalization theory in 1990s was to introduce the concept of culture into the research field, which expanded the inclusiveness of globalization theory and improved its explanatory power. [2] British scholar John Tomlinson clearly pointed out in his book Globalization and Culture: "Globalization is the center of modern culture; Cultural practice is the core of globalization. " [3] In his view, globalization and culture complement each other. Tomlinson believes that the study of globalization should be led from the fields of politics, economy, sociology and communication to the field of culture, so as to reveal the cultural practice connotation of globalization. Regarding globalization, he proposed to think from the perspective of daily life experience and analyze closeness and uniqueness. With regard to culture, he believes that the cultural purpose should be defined from the complicated realistic relationship between culture, politics and economy, that is, what kind of feelings make life full of meaning. He paid more attention to the widely accepted characteristics of culture, and he used Williams' famous saying "culture is ordinary" to interpret his own culture. In fact, Tomlinson discussed the relationship between globalization and culture from the aspects of hybridization, media affinity and cosmopolitanism, and proposed that globalization is not only the global flow of capital, labor and commodities, but also the change of our cultural experience. This cultural experience is not only secular and universal, but also profound. He focused on the concept of "non-territorial expansion", believing that non-territorial expansion is our current cultural situation of globalization, which exists in daily experience and grasps many aspects of global culture. What the concept of "non-territorial expansion" wants to express is that globalization has fundamentally created the place where we live, changed the relationship between our cultural practice, cultural experience and cultural identity, and weakened or eliminated the relationship between daily active culture and territorial positioning; For national culture, opportunities and dangers coexist. Therefore, he called on the whole world to unite.

American literary critic Fredric Jameson also has his own thoughts on the relationship between globalization and culture. Regarding globalization, he thinks it is a concept of communication, which alternately covers and spreads the meaning of culture or economy. However, he also believes that taking communication as the focus of the concept of globalization is essentially incomplete. In his view, the development of contemporary communication no longer has the meaning of "enlightenment", but has the connotation of new technology. This concept of communication has a complete cultural level, that is, it has been given a more appropriate reference or significance at the cultural level, and the assumption of communication network expansion has been secretly changed into some kind of news about the new world culture. At the same time, it was secretly changed into a view of the world market and its newly established interdependence. A very large-scale global division of labor, a new e-commerce path full of commercial and financial connotations, that is, its economic direction. Therefore, Jameson believes that as two aspects closely related to the globalization of communication concepts, but not commensurate, there are two different types of views: if we only emphasize the cultural connotation of this new form of communication, it will gradually show a post-modern celebration of differences and divisions, and immediately feel that all cultures in the world are in a mutually compatible relationship, forming a wide range of cultural pluralism, which is irresistible; However, if we tend to think about the global economy, it will be influenced by those economic norms and meanings, and people will find that this concept is becoming more and more vague and obscure. He believes that what stands out here is the increasing identity, not the difference. [4] It can be seen that Jameson positioned the concept of spreading globalization in the interactive interweaving of economy and culture, and made an "economic and cultural" analysis of the relationship between globalization and culture. As he asked, "has the relationship between culture and economy changed fundamentally in our time?" [5]

Second, the reality and imagination of cultural globalization

With the development of economic globalization and the close penetration of economy and culture, the national character of culture is more and more closely linked with the world, and the issue of cultural globalization is increasingly put on the agenda. There is no clear and unified definition of the connotation of "cultural globalization". Scholars talk about the phenomenon and possibility of cultural globalization from the scope and influence of globalization research. David Held and others pointed out in The Great Global Change that there are three kinds of debates about the nature and influence of cultural globalization: extremists, skeptics and reformers. With the support of American popular culture or western consumerism, the world described or predicted by various hyper-globalists is homogeneous. But hyper-globalists are also challenged by skeptics. Skeptics believe that compared with national culture, global culture is hollow and temporary, and cultural differences and cultural conflicts are of continuous importance due to geopolitical barriers of major civilizations in the world. Those who hold the theory of change believe that the mutual integration and exchange of culture and population will produce mixed culture and a new global cultural network. With regard to the emergence and development of cultural globalization, Herder and others believe that cross-regional, cross-civilization and cross-continental cultural exchanges and the existence of cultural systems-cultural globalization-have profound historical roots. 3000 years ago, the cultural interaction between societies was very complicated, but the violent movement of images and symbols and the wide spread of thinking modes and communication modes were the unique characteristics of the end of the 20th century and the new millennium. Due to the construction of modern telecommunications, broadcasting and transportation infrastructure, the global coverage and the number of cultural exchanges are unprecedented in history. [6] He specifically analyzed the different historical forms of cultural globalization. Their classification basically summarizes the different attitudes towards cultural globalization at present. Extremists and skeptics have one thing in common, that is, the single linearity of thinking, which obviously does not conform to the complex and pluralistic reality. In fact, no matter what attitude, it shows that cultural globalization is going on. Cultural globalization is both realistic and imaginary.

Cultural globalization is realistic. First of all, with the globalization of cultural consumption, culture has spread rapidly around the world. With its popularity, consumer culture has penetrated into every corner of the world. In the modern society characterized by consumption, it is a very effective way to package and spread culture with the help of commodities. Secondly, with the advent of the information age, with the help of the network, information dissemination is more convenient and fast. The whole world is like a small village, and a message and a message can spread all over the village in an instant. The "global village" shows the reality of cultural globalization. In addition, culture is not groundless, and its existence and development depend on individuals, organizations, nations and other entities. With the deepening and extensive exchanges of these subjects in economic globalization, culture carries economy, and economy spreads culture, resulting in global cultural exchange and cultural globalization.

Cultural globalization is imaginary. From the perspective of consumer culture, it seems to be a homogeneous process at first glance, but in fact it presents a mixed feature, and no culture will exist in a cultural vacuum that is not limited by time and space. From the perspective of cultural recipients and consumers, the production and dissemination environment of culture will eventually encounter the influence and restriction of an existing frame of reference. The latter involves a more complicated process, and the simple concept of homogenization cannot correctly record these problems, their mutual influence, the nature of their interaction and the cultural creativity they produce. Therefore, cultural diversity and cultural diversity are inevitable. But one premise is equally important, and that is the premise of cultural diversity and cultural diversity-the equality of cultural subjects. Only on the basis of equality can there be real pluralism and diversity. From the realization path of cultural globalization, Wang Ning, a domestic scholar, believes that the process of cultural globalization has two directions: first, with the expansion of capital from the central area to the marginal areas, (colonial) cultural values and fashion will penetrate into these areas; Second, the struggle and interaction between the (colonized) marginal culture and the mainstream culture made the marginal culture penetrate into the main body of the mainstream culture and dispelled the hegemony of the mainstream culture. [7] It can be seen that Wang Ning analyzes the path of cultural globalization based on the path of capital output. Globalization means the input and output of culture, indicating the contact and infiltration between cultures of various countries, but it is fundamentally an economic practice. Economy gradually evolved into culture, and culture gradually evolved into economy. Culture is an important economic product. Without culture, the economic system cannot develop and grow. At the same time, there are also views that culture carries concepts and operations such as citizenship and can be used as a testing ground for democratic politics. Obviously, this is setting up the "integration" of culture and politics.

Third, the construction of "global culture"

With different national cultures gradually going to the world, the exchange and penetration of national cultures are increasingly extensive and in-depth, which gradually puts forward such a problem-the construction of global culture. There are also different views on this.

First, the monistic "global culture". Tomlinson openly questioned the concept of cultural imperialism in his book "Cultural Imperialism", pointing out that cultural imperialism has no primitive form, only different interpretations. Only by analyzing its connotation in different discourses can we understand its essence. He believes that some scholars are too protective of cultural differences and deny their homogeneity, which is easy to fall into cultural relativism. The premise of cultural development is the balance of diversity and unity. A certain degree of recognition is conducive to the dialogue and exchange among all ethnic groups in the world and to the harmony and progress of mankind. The globalization of modern culture is our cultural destiny. Based on his own cultural background, he denied that the same culture has "cultural domination" and the corresponding "cultural hegemony" and "cultural colonization".

In fact, when analyzing whether there is global monism, there is always an unavoidable topic, that is, how to treat American culture. In today's world, American culture is not the only culture that can expand globally, but at the same time, it must be affirmed that the United States still leads the world in many aspects of global culture. This is not only because the United States has unparalleled means to create and spread its own ideas and lifestyles around the world, but also because the United States has a set of cultural and historical characteristics that can make it a global cultural communicator. Although this situation does not mean that the world is branded with cultural homogeneity, it does mean that in more and more places, people have to regard American culture and local culture as a * * * phenomenon. American pop culture has what joseph nye called "soft power"-the power of persuasion or cooperation. In fact, Tomlinson's cultural imperialism only wants to affirm and promote American culture in the world. A discerning person can expose the essence of cultural imperialism at a glance. Jameson believes that advocating the same cultural globalization is actually affirming American culture. He reminded people that when talking about cultural globalization, nationalism or national pride and dignity are not the only things facing danger, and people should be more alert to another tendency contained in it. He pointed out that culture and nation (or race-nation) are consistent with popular or traditional cultural forms, and these cultural forms seem to be being expelled and replaced by popular cultural models in the United States (TV performances, clothing, music, movies, etc.). For many people (especially those who work in literature and culture), American culture has gradually become the real core of their definition of global culture. He said: "American TV, music and movies are replacing everything in the world." [8] In this regard, samir amin, a scholar of the Egyptian dependency theory School, also put forward his own views. He believes that the United States is still in the hegemonic stage today, but this hegemonic position has been weakened by the catch-up of Europe and Japan, and the system that has been hit by the crisis for a long time in the framework of neoliberalism has entered the stage of collapse. In recent years, the rise of post-colonialism and new nationalism is also directly related to this, and edward said, an Indian-American scholar, is a famous representative in this respect.

Second, the pluralistic "global culture". In the construction of "global culture", most scholars tend to be multicultural. British scholar Si Tong put forward the possibility of global culture in his introduction to a special magazine. He believes that the expansion of global cultural interconnection is also a process of globalization, which can be understood as leading to the emergence of global identity, that is, "a region where cultures constantly interact and communicate." This global culture should be cultural diversity. Therefore, in his view, globalization includes the generalization of particularism, not just the specialization of universalism. Heterogeneity and diversity in the increasingly globalized world culture have actually become an indispensable part of globalization theory. American scholar Roland Robertson believes that a direct result of the interaction between globalization and localization is the emergence of "global localization", that is, globalization can not completely replace localization, and localization can not stop the wave of globalization. There is always some tension between the two, sometimes globalization dominates, and sometimes localization dominates. This situation is most obvious in the field of culture. Therefore, he believes that the phenomenon of cultural globalization is not only a single convergence, but also a diversified development. Because the cultures of all ethnic groups have their own characteristics, it will only lead to the retrogression of world culture if we cover up or obliterate this characteristic. Therefore, he described globalization as "a dual process of universal specialization and special generalization". In addition, wallerstein, a representative figure of the world system theory, also believes that the concept of a single world culture is facing strong resistance, which will inevitably be opposed by political chauvinism and various counter-mainstream cultures. The development trend of world history is not so much towards cultural homogenization as towards cultural differentiation and complexity. H.V.Perlmutter, a theorist of global civilization, also pointed out that the current globalization is the first real forerunner of global civilization, and globalization is to create a world civilization, in which there is a dynamic form of global "integration". He regards this dynamic "integration" as a coordination process between different or even opposing aspects. 〔9〕

Third, cultural conflict and dialogue. When it comes to the construction of "global culture", it is inevitable to talk about the conflict and dialogue of civilizations. Samuel huntington, an American scholar, replaced nation-state and ideology with civilization, and designed various scenes of future clash of civilizations, claiming that the biggest rivals of western civilization are Confucian civilization and Islamic civilization. He actually systematized and abstracted some contradictions in real politics. Although he made some adjustments in his later works, it is not difficult to see his competitive position in the relationship between civilizations. Similarly, it can't be ignored that Francis Fourniama's final conclusion on history. He believes that freedom and democracy, as human ideas, are perfect and unparalleled, and they have gained the legitimacy to rule the world no matter where they are. So history is over, that is, many problems in history have been solved, and a reasonable system and behavior pattern have been formed. It can be seen that this view is essentially a theory of cultural convergence, that is, the world is unified in freedom and democracy. In fact, Fukuyama and Huntington share the same view, that is, they are both considering the status of western civilization-Fukuyama believes that western civilization has won, reflecting a sense of superiority; Huntington, on the other hand, is worried about the dominant position of western civilization. In Globalization and Diversity, written for the United Nations Declaration on Dialogue among Civilizations in 200 1 year, Du Weiming said that in 2 1 century, the biggest threat to international security is not economy or politics, but culture. In this respect, the theory of clash of civilizations is more convincing than Fukuyama's conclusion of the end of history, because it recognizes the important position of culture and hopes to properly handle religious differences. However, Du Weiming explicitly opposes the conflict between civilizations. His foothold is to insist on cross-civilization dialogue, realize cultural diversity, transcend universalism and nationalism, and realize real civilization reconciliation. The concept used to mark this reconciliation is called "global isomorphism" or another "global village isomorphism". 〔 10〕

In addition, German scholar Hadeler La Miller also showed a different position from Huntington, and criticized Huntington's theory of clash of civilizations in The Existence of Civilization. Miller believes that culture is not the decisive factor of historical development, nor is it the only factor. What really has an important impact on historical development is economic and political forces. In his view, the conflict and integration between cultures mainly depends not on the culture itself and the cultural attitudes of various ethnic groups, but on the economic and political development. He believes that economic and political development may lead to both cultural conflicts and cultural integration. He called on people to strengthen cultural dialogue and promote cultural integration. But for cultural dialogue and integration, he pinned more hopes on westerners, especially the United States. He said, "Where will mankind go in 2 1 century? Whether cultural differences will become the cause of dividing lines or the driving force of promoting cooperation depends on our attitude towards culture in western countries. As a leader of the West, the United States should naturally assume its own responsibilities. " 〔 1 1〕

label

On the one hand, the surging wave of globalization has accelerated the communication between cultures, expanded the scope of cultural communication and strengthened the overall consciousness of human beings in cultural spirit; On the other hand, the interaction of culture, economy and politics has caused the crisis and loss of traditional culture, and it is difficult to sublimate the true cultural spirit. It can be seen that, in fact, global cultural research must follow the two logics of cultural self-discipline and heteronomy, and its connotation and influence are complex and profound. But in any case, we must see two facts: first, the development of global culture is not just a cultural issue, but a process in which economy, politics and culture are intertwined; Second, American culture has an important influence on the global cultural development, and its expansion has caused the tension between cultural cosmopolitanism and nationality. Therefore, in the research and development of global culture, both national parochialism and universalism have obvious limitations, and cultural exchange should be achieved through equal dialogue, and real equality is not only the equality of cultural identity, but also the equality of economic and political status.