ReviseSociology

Tag: Globalisation

  • Global Inequality and Luxury Experiences…

    Introduction

    In an era where extreme wealth allows for unparalleled experiences, the most exclusive adventure trips in the world reflect both human ambition and the stark inequalities of our globalized economy.

    From space travel to deep-sea exploration, these luxury experiences push the limits of what money can buy. However, beyond their staggering costs, they also highlight global economic disparities, raising critical questions about who benefits from globalization and how resources are distributed.

    This article will explore the most expensive adventure trips and provide an analysis using World-Systems Theory, trade as a strategy for development, and pessimist theories of globalization.

    1. Orbital Spaceflight – $450,000+ (Virgin Galactic)

    Space tourism is no longer a dream of the distant future. Companies like Virgin Galactic (source) are offering suborbital spaceflights for $450,000 per seat, allowing passengers to experience weightlessness and witness Earth from the edge of space. While much cheaper than past space missions, this remains one of the most exclusive travel experiences available. SpaceX also has plans for lunar missions with costs expected to run into the tens of millions.

    2. Summiting Mount Everest – Up to $160,000

    Climbing the world’s tallest mountain is a feat reserved for the most determined—and wealthiest—adventurers. According to National Geographic (source), a basic guided climb costs around $40,000, but those opting for premium packages, including private Sherpas, oxygen supplies, and luxury base camp accommodations, can spend as much as $160,000.

    3. Private North Pole Expedition – $100,000

    Reaching the North Pole is an extreme undertaking, and those wanting a private expedition must pay top dollar. Companies like Quark Expeditions (source) offer guided icebreaker cruises starting at $20,000, while private journeys involving helicopter transport and custom experiences can cost upwards of $100,000.

    4. Antarctic Private Jet Tour – $80,000 – $150,000

    For those who prefer their extreme cold with a side of luxury, Antarctic private jet tours are the pinnacle of exclusive travel. Operators like White Desert (source) offer luxury eco-camps where guests can visit penguin colonies, explore ice caves, and dine on gourmet meals—all for the hefty price of $80,000 – $150,000 per person.

    5. Diving to the Titanic Wreck – $250,000

    Before its operations were suspended, OceanGate Expeditions (source) offered the chance to dive nearly 13,000 feet below the ocean’s surface to visit the wreck of the Titanic. The cost? A staggering $250,000 per person. Though currently unavailable, deep-sea exploration remains one of the most expensive and elite adventure experiences.

    6. Round-the-World Private Jet Tour – $100,000 – $150,000

    Luxury travel companies such as Four Seasons (source) offer extravagant private jet journeys that take travelers to multiple countries in first-class comfort. These curated experiences include stays at top-tier resorts, fine dining, and cultural excursions, with prices ranging from $100,000 to $150,000 per person.

    7. Deep-Sea Submarine Exploration – $50,000 – $100,000

    Deep-sea tourism is an emerging industry, and companies like EYOS Expeditions (source) offer submarine journeys into the ocean’s most remote trenches. With a price tag ranging from $50,000 to $100,000, these trips allow travelers to explore the deep sea in a way previously reserved for scientists and researchers.

    8. Luxury African Safari – $50,000 – $100,000+

    Safari experiences range widely in cost, but for the ultra-rich, companies like Singita and &Beyond (source, source) offer private safaris with exclusive lodges, personal guides, and aerial wildlife tours. With add-ons like hot air balloon rides and custom wildlife photography workshops, these safaris can easily exceed $100,000 per person.

    9. Luxury Amazon Rainforest Expedition – $30,000 – $80,000

    For those who want to explore one of the most biodiverse places on Earth in style, high-end tour operators provide Amazon expeditions featuring private riverboats, expert naturalist guides, and five-star jungle accommodations. With full customization and private charters, costs can range from $30,000 to $80,000 per person.

    Image showing the excesses of global adventures

    Global Inequality and Luxury Travel

    These high-priced adventures highlight the stark inequalities present in our globalized world. The world’s wealthiest 1% control nearly half of global wealth, enabling them to indulge in extreme luxury experiences, while billions struggle to meet basic needs.

    From a World-Systems Theory perspective, this reflects the core-periphery divide, where wealthy nations (the core) dominate global economic structures while developing nations (the periphery) remain dependent on them for investment, tourism, and resource extraction. As sociologist Zygmunt Bauman states: “When the rich pursue their goals, the poor pay the price.”

    Trade as a Strategy for Development

    While some argue that tourism and global trade help developing economies, evidence suggests that much of the profit remains in the hands of Western corporations rather than local populations. The luxury tourism sector, particularly in Africa and South America, reinforces economic dependency rather than fostering sustainable development. It is difficult to see how these luxury trips help development in any meaningful sense.

    Pessimist Theories of Globalization

    Pessimists argue that globalization exacerbates economic inequality by allowing wealthier individuals and corporations to control resources while the working class remains excluded from its benefits (source). The luxury travel industry is a prime example, as it allows an elite minority to experience the wonders of the world while climate change, economic exploitation, and resource depletion disproportionately affect the Global South.

    Conclusion

    Luxury travel reflects the widening gap between the wealthy and the rest of society. While these elite experiences may offer excitement and prestige, they also underscore how globalization benefits the few at the expense of the many. As the world becomes more interconnected, the question remains: should such extreme wealth disparities continue unchecked, or should global economic systems be restructured to create more equitable opportunities for all?

  • Ulrich Beck: Global Risk Society

    Risk society refers to modern societies in which technological developments such as nuclear power and biotechnology create new risks and uncertainties.

    Risk society is another way of characteristing postmodern or late modern society. The term was developed by sociologist Ulrich Beck in the mid 1980s to describe the way new technologies were changing our experience of risk.

    in modern society/ modernity, science and technology were generally seen as delivering social progress and improving our lives.

    In Risk Society, science and technology are increasingly viewed as having introduced problems of development and global risks. Nuclear Power and Artificial Intelligence are two excellent examples of this.

    Nothing appears fixed anymore, and contradictions emerge between scientists and policymakers about the appropriate risk response.

    Society’s dangers have shifted focus

    Social structures have always faced dangers. Historically, these have usually been “natural” in origin. In recent years, science, technology, and industry have created prosperity but have also brought about new dangers (for example, those posed by the production of nuclear power), which have focused the thoughts of individuals and societies on a quest for safety and the idea of calculable risk.

    In the mid-1980s, the German sociologist Ulrich Beck claimed that our relationship to society and its institutions had changed profoundly over the past decades, and that this required a new way of thinking about risk. Beck argues that social life is progressing from a first stage of modernity to an emergent second, or “reflexive,” stage. This is shaped by an awareness that control of—and mastery over—nature and society may be impossible. This awareness may itself lead to disenchantment with existing social structures as providers of safety and reassurance.

    The emergence of a global “risk society”

    A key characteristic of this new stage is the emergence of a global “risk society,” by which Beck means that individuals, groups, governments, and corporations are increasingly concerned about the production, dissemination, and experience of risk. We now have to confront problems that previous generations could not imagine, and this requires new societal responses.

    In his earlier work, Beck points in particular to the risks posed by nuclear energy, the chemical industry, and biotechnology. He says that the application of science and technology to meet human needs has reached a critical point, creating risks that are no longer calculable or manageable by existing societal frameworks.

    Contextual milestones in the development of “risk society”

    KEY DATES

    • 1968: The Club of Rome think tank is founded and in 1972 publishes a report, The Limits to Growth, which identifies the risk posed by excessive population growth.
    • 1984: U.S. sociologist Charles Perrow publishes Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies.
    • 1999: U.S. sociologist Barry Glassner draws on Ulrich Beck’s concept of risk in The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things.
    • 2001: The 9/11 attacks on the USA lead to worldwide changes in the perception of the risks posed by international terrorist organisations.

    Loss of respect for institutions and experts creates uncertainty and doubt

    Beck observes that we begin to fear that we are living in a world that is beyond controllability.

    Our advances have not only opened up new possibilities but have also introduced dangers on an unprecedented scale. Should such a catastrophe occur, the consequences would be so grave that it would be almost impossible to contain its impact or to return society to the way things were before.

    The nature of risk in modern society

    Beck identifies three significant characteristics of risk:

    1. Global, incalculable damage: Accidents may cause damage that cannot be compensated for, as traditional mechanisms like insurance no longer work.
    2. Irreversible exclusion of precautionary measures: We cannot return conditions to the way they were prior to the accident.
    3. No limit in space and time: Accidents are unpredictable, can be felt across national borders, and impose their effects over long periods of time.

    In terms of dealing with the possibility or likelihood of such calamities happening in the future, traditional methods of risk calculation have become obsolete in relation to many of the new kinds of risks that concern us in the 21st century, such as health pandemics, nuclear meltdowns, or genetically modified foodstuffs.

    A conceptual cityscape blending traditional urban elements with futuristic, chaotic overlays, symbolizing uncertainty and transformation. The image fe

    Real and virtual risk

    Beck identifies a strange ambiguity in how society understands risks. On the one hand, they are real—they exist as objective, latent threats at the heart of scientific and technological progress. They cannot be ignored, even if authorities try to pretend they do not exist. At the same time, however, risks are also virtual; that is, they represent current anxieties about events that have yet to—or may never—happen.

    Nonetheless, it is the apparent threat posed by these risks, the anticipation of disaster, which ushers in new challenges to the power of scientists, corporations, and governments. Beck observes that no one is an expert on questions of risk, not even the experts themselves. The intrinsic complexity of many risks means that scientists often cannot agree on questions of likelihood, possible severity, or how to set up proper safety procedures.

    In fact, in the public mind, it is these same experts—in their manipulation of genes or splitting of atomic nuclei—who may have created the risks. However, while there is public scepticism about scientists, Beck notes that they are nevertheless essential in the risk society. Precisely because we cannot feel, hear, smell, or see the risks that we face, we need these experts to help measure, calculate, and make sense of them for us.

    A group of scientists in a lab surrounded by symbols of risks they have created, such as chemical spills, a nuclear

    Making risks meaningful

    Beck notes the important role played by so-called “new social movements” in raising public awareness of risk. For instance, Greenpeace, an independent organisation committed to environmental protection, runs many high-profile publicity campaigns to draw attention to the environmental risks both caused and downplayed by corporations and governments.

    The media feed on public anxieties about risk, claims Beck. To increase sales, news providers latch on to stories of corporate or institutional failures to adequately manage risk or sensationalist stories of the hidden threats posed by technological developments.

    While ultimately self-serving, Beck sees this as a positive thing because it helps develop public consciousness about risks and promote open debate. The media make risks visible and meaningful for people by giving abstract risks a powerful symbolic form.

    Responses to risk

    Beck identifies three main responses to contemporary risks:

    1. Denial: Ignoring or minimising risks.
    2. Apathy: Acknowledging risks but failing to act.
    3. Transformation: Taking global action to live positively under the shadow of risk.

    Risk and inequality

    In earlier times, wealthier individuals could shield themselves from risks, but modern risks, such as climate change, transcend boundaries of wealth, space, and time. For example, while outsourcing industrial production to developing nations might reduce immediate risks for wealthier countries, environmental consequences ultimately “boomerang” back.

    A highly contrasting split-screen illustration showcasing the extreme inequality of risks in modern society.

    Globalised fears and hopes

    Beck argues that global risks require global responses. He highlights three positive outcomes:

    1. Collective responses to catastrophic risks.
    2. Increased media attention to how disasters disproportionately affect the poor.
    3. Dialogue between diverse groups, such as environmental activists and businesses, to address common threats.

    Risk and reward: Positive possibilities

    While Beck’s focus on risk may seem bleak, he underscores the constructive potential of risk awareness. Responses to global risks can lead to innovative solutions and societal transformation. For instance, fears about acid rain and global warming led to the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988.

    An image depicting collaboration against global risks. The scene shows diverse groups, including scientists, environmental activists, and business.
    Signposting: Relevance to A-level sociology

    The risk society theory is best characterised as a late modern social theory. It is part of the theories and methods module, usually taught as part of the second year of A-level sociology.

    Sources

    Ulrich Beck Risk Society

    Risk Society on Wikipedia

  • Why is Haiti in a State of Anarchy?

    Haiti is currently in a state of anarchy.  There is no functioning government and the country is effectively in control of numerous violent street gangs.

    There are currently an estimated 300 gangs in Haiti, consisting of around 40 000 members. At the moment the most powerful group of 12 gangs are organised into a federation headed by Jimmy Chérizier, nicknamed Barbecue.

    The gangs control most of the capital, Port au Prince, and rule through fear and violence. Kidnappings for ransom are a daily occurrence, which many of the gangs use to raise funds. 

    40% of the police are corrupt or liaising with the gangs. 

    Why has Haiti descended into anarchy…?

    This was the topic of a recent Radio Four podcast in which Mike Thomson explores the longer term history behind Haiti’s current precarious situation. 

    At least the following factors explain Haiti’s descent into anarchy:

    • Longer term structural factors: more than a century of paying reparations to ex-colonial rulers France, more than $20 billion.
    • Half a decade of brutal dictatorial and military rule in the mid 20th century
    • Natural disasters – hurricanes and an earthquake since 2000.

    All of these have contributed to grinding poverty in Haiti and left a modern day power vacuum which gangs have walked into!

    Longer Term Structural Factors 

    Haiti declared independence from France in 1804, following a revolt from slaves. It was the second country in the Americas to ever gain independence. Haiti was also the first country in world history to gain independence after a successful slave revolt. 

    Following Haitian independence, Napoleon demanded hundreds of millions of dollars in reparations for the country’s former slave owners. Haiti’s new leaders complied with this in order to avoid going to war with France. 

    This had a hugely damaging long term effect on the Haitian economy. Over the next several decades an estimated 50-70% of Haiti’s national income was used to service this debt. This scuppered any chances of positive economic and social development. 

    In 2003 the then president of Haiti calculated that Haiti had paid $21 billion to France over the years. He publicly declared France should pay this back. However, France refused to repay a single cent, let alone apologise for enslaving Haitians in the first place. 

    All of this is in line with classic dependency theory arguments. Dependency theory argues that the long history of colonialism and exploitation are to blame for underdevelopment today. 

    20th Century Dictatorships 

    In 1957 Francois Devalier, popularly known as Papa Doc,  won the presidential elections and became ‘President for Life’. He went on to  establish a brutal dictatorial rule. He maintained power through his paramilitary wing, the Tonton Macoute. These were well armed and loyal only to Papa Doc and his estate. They drove fear into the majority of Haitians through visible displays of violence on the streets. There was zero tolerance of criticism of the regime, anyone who spoke out against it was imprisoned or killed.  

    To find out more about Papa Doc’s rule you might like to watch this documentary with Alan Wicker, from the 1960s…

    Papa Doc died in 1971 but his son, popularly known as Baby Doc, immediately took over, and carried on the brutal regime for another 15 years. 

    After almost 30 years of dictatorship an estimated 40 000 people had been killed by the regime.  

    In 1986 there was a popular uprising that led to the fall of the dictatorship. Baby Doc and his family were forced to leave the country. Celebrations, however, were short lived as this created a power vacuum which was filled by the military. 

    There were two military coups in the next two years until elections in 1990 brought Jean Bertrande Aristide to Power. However,  only six  months later he was overthrown in another coup and Astride went into exile in the U.S. for three years. 

    Astride returned to Haiti 1994 with the help of the then American President Bill Clinton and 20 000 American troops.  On his return Astride disbanded the Haitian arm, to prevent further military coups from happening.  

    This created a security gap which led to street-based military forces forming, in other words this was the beginning of the era of freelance gangs backing a range of political leaders. 

    These gangs were possibly worse than Papa Doc’s Tonton Acuoute. They were just as brutal as the previous paramilitary wing, but this new wave of gangs lack any structure or accountability, and so there is no control over them. 

    Post 2000 Natural Disasters and Aid Mismanagement 

    Grinding poverty in Haiti has long been a fertile recruiting ground for gangs. And a series of natural disasters has made it impossible for standards of living to improve. If anything, living standards have declined over the last few decades. 

    Haiti was plagued by Hurricanes in the 2000s making it difficult to improve the day to day conditions of the Haitian people. 

    In 2010 a devastating earthquake struck, killing an estimated 300 000 people. Haiti received more than $13 billion in international aid to reconstruct after the earthquake.

    The aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti in 2010.

    However Haitians themselves had little say in how the aid money was spent. The international aid donors didn’t ask the Haitians what they needed. As a result many development projects got approved but few got off the ground. Many development initiatives weren’t relevant to the Haitians, so the aid did little to promote economic or social development.

    In the decade that followed the earthquake, what the country needed was strong leadership, but this was lacking, so there was nothing to keep the gang’s power in check. 

    Haitian Gangs since 2020

    Since 2020 gangs have controlled most of the Haitian capital, Port au Prince, and by 2021 gangs had so much power that the president was assassinated in his own home. This sends out the message that no one in the political elite is safe. 

    The most powerful body in Port au Prince at the moment is a federation of 12 gangs headed by a former police officer, Jimmy Chérizier, nicknamed Barbecue. 

    Jimmy ‘Barbecue’ Cherizier.

    The Federation sees itself as working on behalf of the Haitian people and is resistant to any formal political power base being re-established. 

    In March 2024 gangs stormed the prison in Port au Prince releasing thousands of prisoners. 

    There is currently a Transitional Council in Haiti who are working towards setting up elections in 2026, but the Federation is actively trying to stop this from taking place. 

    Routes out of Anarchy…?

    There are plans to put in place some kind of international intervention force. There is a deal for Kenyan forces to entire Haiti to try and restore order and the US has pledged $40 million towards this. 

    Some people in Haiti are getting nostalgic for the days of Papa Doc’s dictatorship. 

    They had schools, hospitals and people felt safe as a general rule, as the old style paramilitaries had more of a sense of order. 

    These new gangs are much more chaotic and unpredictable, and there is a lot of infighting between them. 

    Possibly the most miraculous thing is that after two centuries of turmoil, the Haitian people still have hope for a better future! 

    Relevance to A-Level Sociology

    The history of Haiti is most relevant to several areas within globalisation and global development.

    Find out More

    To find out more about the chaos of modern gang warfare in Haiti. 

    The Week (March 2024) Haiti: Who is Jimmy Cherizier aka Barbecue, gang leader threatening civil war? 

    BBC – Haiti Country Profile.

  • The exploitation of female migrant domestic workers in the UK 

    Many migrant workers who do domestic work in the U.K. are exploited by their employers. 

    Approximately 80% of people engaged in employment in the domestic sphere are women. increasing numbers of workers in the home-care sector are also migrants. 

    Abuses against such workers include everything from not being paid to overt physical violence including rape. 

    This is according to a recent study: Abuses against Female Migrant Domestic Workers in the UK: An intersectional Approach by Joyce Jiang (2023). 

    This study draws on two research projects: one an ethnographic study carried out between 2009 and 2013 and another a participatory video-study carried out between 2018 and 2020. 

    The study takes an intersectional approach. It focuses on the intersection between these workers being both female and migrant workers.

    This blog post is a summary of this research.

    The global care chain

    Domestic work in more wealthy households in rich countries is increasingly done by migrant workers from poorer, developing countries. We thus have a global care chain. 

    This is a result of the lack of state funding for domestic care in wealthier countries. It potentially creates a divide between elite women in rich countries and poor women from poor countries. 

    31% of  domestic workers in the UK are migrants. They are mainly from Asia and Africa, from countries such as The Philippines, India, Bangladesh and Nigeria. Most migrant domestic workers in the UK are live-in workers. 

    They get into the UK with a domestic overseas work VISA which lasts for six months. They have to work for a particular employer in their country who will choose to bring them abroad. 

    The number of organisations recruiting domestic workers has grown rapidly over the last 20 years…

    The exploitation of female migrant domestic workers

    A survey of 500 workers found that 70% of them don’t have their own bedroom, in some cases they have to sleep in the corridor. 

    Paying below minimum wage and working long hours is the most common form of abuse. Some have reported having to work 90 hours a week and being required to be on-call 24 hours a day. 

    More extreme cases of abuse include:

    • not being paid.
    • being locked in the house during the day.
    • racial abuse.
    • Isolation, having passports locked away is common.
    • A wide range of physical, psychological and emotional violence, including rape by male employers. 

    Why migrant workers come to the UK

    The main reasons why they come to the UK are financial. 

    Many cannot cannot afford medical bills, or basic goods for the children. Or they are in debt. 

    Some return back to the UK over and over again knowing how bad their working conditions are going to be. This is because they cannot earn enough to meet their needs in their home countries. 

    Trades Unions are aware of the exploitation. However migrant workers are hard to reach because they are so isolated, and thus fragmented. 

    Signposting/ find out more

    This post is a summary of a 2023 episode of Thinking Allowed podcast on Intersections which covers the above study. 

    This issue is most relevant to the globalisation and global development module. 

    This is a useful report on domestic workers by the ILO.

    While this post focuses specifically on domestic workers, the issue is broader. 

    Recently the government added health and social care workers to the shortage list. Increasing numbers of migrants are now coming to the UK on these visas. 

    According to one recent International Labour Organisation estimate there are 75 million domestic workers in the world.

  • Cruise Ships: the wrong kind of globalisation?

    The Icon of the High seas is the largest cruise ship in the world. It is 1198 feet long and weighs 250 800 tons. The ship has berths for 5610 passengers and 2350 crew. It cost more than $2 billion to build.

    Icon of the Seas.
    The Icon of the Seas.

    It is set to have its maiden voyage in January 2024 with tickets costing from $1000 to $75 000. It represents the size-pinnacle of the modern cruise industry. 31.5 million people are expected to go on a cruise in 2023.

    The ship has 20 decks and eight ‘neighbourhoods’ aimed at different types of passenger: from families to older adults. It has 40 bars, mini golf, rock climbing and a water park with seven swimming pools.

    Cruise ships can pose challenges to the areas they visit as thousands of passengers suddenly disembark for only a couple of hours at a time. Amsterdam recently closed its cruise ship terminal for just this reason. However this is less of an option the Caribbean which absorbs about a third of the cruise industry’s capacity. That area is more reliant on cruise ship income.

    The wrong kind of globalisation?

    Cruise ships are a mobile example of globalisation benefitting the very wealthiest. Those who can afford it, typically older middle class people, can afford to go on a week or month long jaunt to foreign countries on such vessels.

    You could also argue these benefit locals in the places they visit because they bring money and jobs to local areas, often in poorer parts of the world.

    However the downside is that locals have to put up with a massive influx of tourists all at once in a short space of time, which can’t be pleasant.

    There is also something quite detestable about the fact that it’s only the very rich that can afford to go on a cruise.

    Cruise ships are also polluting: passengers on a seven day Antarctic cruise can produce as much CO2 as the average European in a year!

    They are also great for transmitting infectious diseases around the world!

    To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com

  • Globalisation, Nations and National Identity

    Andrew Pilkington (2002) argues that nationalisms are socially constructed. Nationalism is a relatively recent phenomenon, despite the fact that many nationalist movements claim their origins go back thousands of years.

    For most of human history, humans organised themselves in small social groups, and the idea of identifying with millions of strangers would have seemed alien.

    It was only in the 18th century that the idea of nations and national identities started to emerge, encouraged by economic changes brought about through the industrial revolution. Strengthening the idea of the nation was also useful for colonialism.

    A concept of ‘otherness’ was also central to developing national identities. For example the British (Protestant) national identity was developed in contrast, even opposition to the French (Catholic) national identity and vice versa.

    development of mass communications that the abstract idea of the nation became possible and national identities started to be constructed.

    Pilkington documented how a sense of Britishness gradually filtered down from the elite to the middle classes as the population became more literate during the 18th and 19 centuries and then down to the whole population as mass communications spread the idea more broadly.

    All of the pomp and ritual surrounding the British monarchy has been a crucial part of establishing British national identity over the centuries, as well as stories about heroes who fought the French, such as Nelson.

    Pilkington notes that the British National Identity has historically been very white, with Black and Asian people having almost no representation (NB this may have changed recently), but that it never managed to overwhelm Scottish, English or Welsh identities.

    Globalisation and National Identity

    Because they are socially constructed, ideas surrounding national identities change over time, and globalisation has had a profound impact on nations and nationalisms around the world.

    Globalisation brings a dual threat to nations and national identities which come under pressure from centralisation and decentralisation.

    • Centralisation creates pressures from above, with the increasing importance of regional and international institutions such as the European Union and the World Health Organisation.
    • Decentralisation creates pressures from below with the strengthening of ethnic identities within countries and the breakup of some countries, such as the collapse of the USSR.

    One response to globalisation is the strengthening of ethnic identities as ethnic minorities, such as the Welsh and Scottish within Britain (for example) stress their ethnic distinctiveness in relation to the English and campaign for more independence and autonomy from the British State – as we see with the development of the Welsh and Scottish partially devolved governments.

    Some people see globalisation as threatening national identities and one response is to retreat into a more restrictive and narrow definition of Englishness. Anyone who claims that White Britishness is superior would fall into this category.

    Another response is increasingly hybrid-identities as some people accept that it is possible to have multiple identities at the same time – to be simultaneously European, British and Scottish, for example.

    A good example of this is Gordon Brown who once claimed that he believed Britain could be the first multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and multi-national state. We see a similar mind-set in any group willing to celebrate hybrid-ethnic identities.

    Signposting

    This material should be useful for anyone studying the culture and identity module as part of A-level sociology.

    To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com

  • Global Military Expenditure at an All-Time High in 2022

    World military expenditure stood at $2240 billion in 2022, an all time record high.

    Global military expenditure fell in the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union, then rose from 1999 to 2010, fell slightly in the next few years and then saw a steady year on year increase from 2013 to 2022, increasing by a total of 19% during the decade to 2022.

    2021 to 2022 saw the the sharpest rise, with an increase of 3.7%, fuelled largely by the War on Ukraine.

    Ukraine’s military expenditure rose by 640% in 2022 to $44 billion, compared to a previous (approximate) $6 billion a year before the Russian invasion. That $44 billion does not include military aid from other countries, estimated to be around the $30 billion mark in 2022.

    Russia’s military expenditure rose by almost 10% to nearly $90 billion in 2022, making it the world’s third largest spender on the military.

    Military Expenditure as usual

    While the war in Ukraine has obviously had a massive impact in Ukraine as military expenditure now accounts for a third of its GDP (compared to 2.5% in the United Kingdom for example), as well as in Russia and many other nations through their giving military aid to Ukraine, when we look at things globally the impact of the war on Ukraine on overall expenditure has been relatively small.

    Granted, the increase for last year is greater than previous years, but it’s not a massive break with the trend of steadily increasing military expenditure over the last two decades.

    The worrying thing is (at least it’s worrying if you are a fan of world peace) is that in terms of overall military expenditure, the increase in expenditure caused by the war in Ukraine is really just a drop in the ocean: around a $100 billion increase is not a lot compared to a total usual annual spend of $2200 billion.

    The world’s biggest military spenders

    The United States remains the largest military spender, having spent an astronomical $877 billion on it military in 2022, accounting for 39% of the total global spend in 2022.

    China comes second on the list, but is a long way behind America with an annual expenditure of $292 billion, a third less than America’s expenditure.

    Russia is third in the war league tables, but even with the war on Ukraine it spends three times less than China (1/10th that of America), at just under $100 billion annually, and slightly more than Saudi Arabia and India who come in fourth and fifth positions.

    The United Kingdom has the highest military expenditure in Europe at almost $70 billion in 2022, and at 2.3% of its GDP, it spends twice as much on its military proportionately compared to most other European nations except for France.

    The United States and China spend more on the militaries than all other nations combined.

    Relevance to A-Level Sociology

    The War in Ukraine has dominated the news throughout 2022 and the conflict has severely retarded development in the country both in the short term because of loss of life, injury, emigration and destruction of infrastructure, but also in the long term as tens of billions of dollars have been spent on the conflict, diverted from what could have been positive investment in social development in health, employment and education, for example.

    But stepping back from the immediate shock of this particular conflict and just looking at it in terms of wider military expenditure we are reminded of the huge sums we spend globally on constant preparedness for war, and even Russia is something of a minor player in terms of its own expenditure, spending three times less than China and 10 times less than the United States.

    The United States spends so much on its military that it has been able to provide billions in aid to Ukraine without it being a significant dent in its military budget.

    If either one of those two countries decides to wage war against a lesser power in the future, they can dwarf the harm Russia has done in Ukraine, moreover, imagine how much good even a tenth of global military expenditure could do if it were devoted to positive development: $200 billion more on global health, education and employment initiatives could transform the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

    Instead we choose to spend more than $2 trillion on being prepared to kill each other.

    It’s a stark reminder of just how far off global peace and enlightenment we are, and how small global development agendas are compared to the military agendas of the world’s largest nation states.

    Signposting

    This material is mainly relevant to the Globalisation and Global Development module, which is sometimes taught as part of the second year in A-level sociology (AQA specification).

    War and Conflict are the main things which prevent positive economic and social development, and this update is a depressing reminder that in terms of military expenditure the world seems to be getting less peaceful.

    Sources

    Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2022) Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2022.

  • America’s Climate Change Bill

    The United States recently introduced a huge climate change bill which promotes investment in green energy through indirect subsidies. This bill represents one the largest state-level investments in green energy in history and seems to suggest we are moving away neoliberal models of development.

    The green-subsidies are included in the broader Inflation Reduction Act which came into force in August 2022 and is primarily designed to tackle climate change through boosting the country’s green energy sector, mostly through indirect subsidies in the form of tax credits.

    The main aims of the bill are to reduce carbon emissions and create millions of new jobs in the green energy sector, in industries such as manufacturing solar panels, wind turbines, heat pumps and carbon capture technologies.

    The bill is also designed to help the U.S. reduce its reliance on imports from China, in a process it calls ‘onshoring’, and there is hope that it will encourage trillions of dollars in private investment into manufacturing green technologies.

    To give a specific example, the U.S. now offers a tax credit of $7500 for buyers of most electric and hydrogen powered cards. However, this is conditional on final assembly taking place in the U.S. or other countries which have free-trade treaties with the U.S. such as Canada and Mexico.

    There are also a ‘domestic-content’ rules: the more components and raw materials sourced in America, the higher the tax-credit, but there are no credits available if if critical minerals have been sourced from ‘foreign entities of concern’ such as China, Russia or Iran.

    It is estimated that the IRA will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 10% more than if it hadn’t been passed.

    In the six months since the bill was passed there has already been $89 billion of investment into the green energy sector, and 100 000 new jobs created. Companies such as BMW, Honda, and Tesla have either moved manufacturing of batteries to the U.S. or are considering a move.

    The end of Neoliberalism?

    This policy shift feels like we are moving away from the neoliberal development model in which nation states do less. Here we have the United States government actively supporting, selectively, green technology.

    Maybe climate change is such an important global issue that we need co-ordination at the level of the nation state.

    Limitations of the Climate Change Bill

    Indirect subsidies are protectionist and they distort the free market.

    Even after only six months green tech companies are already pulling out of Europe and seeking to relocate the the United States, meaning that this policy is hurting U.S. allies as well as its perceived ‘enemies’ such as China.

    When nation states provide subsidies it can promote something of a ‘race to the bottom’ among competitors, with the EU already considering its own Green Deal Industrial Plan, simplifying regulation for green companies.

    The bill potentially violates World Trade Organisation free trade rules, and the EU is challenging it on these grounds.

    And let’s not forget, where manufacturing is concerned, green energy isn’t necessarily than green: there is a lot of metal and plastic in wind turbines and batteries, and a lot of toxic-chemical processes that go into their manufacture, and we haven’t exactly figured out a pollution free strategy for storing used-batteries when they are past their use-by date.

    In other words, light regulation now might not be an effective way of promoting green development in the greener sense of the world.

    While lowering emissions will benefit developing countries more (because they are more exposed to the extreme consequences of global warming) this kind of development is all about developed countries in economic terms.

    The bill only passed the senate by one single vote and it had to be ‘disguised’ in a larger ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ which included a range of other measures on healthcare and tax.

    There is still plenty of political resistance to state-subsidies for green technology, meaning the bill could be watered down or countered by subsidies for petrochemical industries in future years.

    Signposting

    This material is mainly relevant to the global development and globalisation module, sometimes taught during the second year of A-level sociology.

    Wiki Entry: America’s Climate Reduction Act

    To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com

  • Global Culture

    Global culture is where large numbers of people in different countries across the world share common norms, values and tastes, and is one aspect of globalisation. Those sociologists who believe that a global culture exists tend to see it as an ongoing process with more and more people around increasingly sharing similar world views and developing a global consciousness.

    Global culture is a contested concept: there are several different perspectives on the nature and extent of global culture and disagreements over whether such a thing exists in any meaningful sense at all!

    This post considers two theories of global culture:

    1. Lechner and Boli (2005) who argue that global institutions are laying the foundations for what they call a ‘world culture’
    2. John Storey (2003) who argues that Time-Space Compression (following David Harvey) has resulted in more cultural mixing and hybridity around the world, so we have a plurality of cultures rather than one global culture.

    You might like to read this post in conjunction with my other related post on cultural globalisation which looks at aspects of cultural globalisation in more depth, looking at different aspects of cultural globalisastion one by one (such as consumption patterns, shared values etc.) as we as concepts such as detraditionalisation and the risk society.

    That post is really the overview of the topic, this post offers a little more theoretical depth, focusing in on two actual theorists.

    World Culture, institutions and organisations

    Frank J. Lechner and John Boli (2005) use the term ‘world culture‘ rather than ‘global culture’ and argue that globalisation has resulted in a world culture that is here to stay, it cannot be undone though its content may change and it may increase or decrease in influence.

    Lechner and Boli’s conception of culture is one of socially constructed and socially shared symbolism, so they see it as being about ideas and meanings rather than tangible material objects.

    World culture develops through global values, becoming institutionalised through a process of structuration. Actors within global institutions establish typical patterns of behaviour and values and these eventually become institutionalised, and adopted by more and more people globally, who in turn ‘enact’ these behaviours thus further reinforcing them.

    Examples of world culture

    Two examples of world culture are education and chess.

    Many education systems in different countries have similar institutional norms surrounding formal education such as having around 11-13 years of age-grouped teaching, curricula which clearly outline what is to be studied, well-structured examination systems leading to qualifications, and similar hierarchies of organisation within schools.

    There are also and codes of conduct outlining expected patterns of behaviour and attendance from students, and a clear code of professional practice for teachers, which are very similar in many countries.

    Throughout the world local chess clubs follow the rules of the World Chess Federation, and players look up to and seek to learn from international grand masters whose achievements are recognised all over the world.

    There are also a set of norms about how to play chess, not just the rules, but norms to do with demeanour, how to communicate, and how to approach more senior players.

    Lechner and Boli accept the fact that there isn’t total homogenisation of the way education and chess are enacted locally, there are local variations, but increasing similarities too.

    There are also institutions whose purpose is to explicitly promote world culture such as:

    • The United Nations (UN) which overseas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
    • The International Criminal Court (ICC) which is responsible for bringing to trial people who have committed crimes against humanity
    • The Olympic Movement which promotes fair play in several world sports.

    Lechner and Boli accept the fact that there are examples of movements against global culture, such as the way Islam has manifested itself in Afghanistan or Iran, but at the same time there are people in both countries who argue for less extremist Islamic State policies and identify more with the global community.

    Lechner and Boli argue that much of the apparent local diversity we see is just superficial, about clothing and food, rather than about deeper shared meanings and values where there is more global consensus.

    Evaluations

    While Lechner and Boli do identify some definite trends towards global culture they possibly overstate the extent to which we have an established global system of shared values and meaning.

    The example of chess is especially weak as there simply aren’t that many chess players, and while education systems around the world have similarities the experience of education varies massively depending on whether you are a pupil in Britain or Somalia or Afghanistan, especially a girl in the later country.

    There is a lot of difference and conflict and people just ignoring ‘universal global values’ that isn’t sufficiently taken into account.

    John Storey: global culture

    Storey (2003) argues that in the past, cultures around the world were generally separated from each other through space and time. In the 19th century, for example, it simply took too much time and money for people to travel across the globe and so there was relatively little intermixing of cultures.

    Today however, the world is much smaller thanks to time-space compression. The main engine of this is the media which makes it possible for cultures in different parts of the world to influence each other instantaneously.

    Global travel is also much faster which makes it possible for global cultures to develop. Global cultural events such as the World Cup and the Olympics can happen because it is relatively easy for teams and supporters to travel to one place , and the existence of these events create a global cultural legacy that endures.

    Heterogenisation

    Storey rejects the theory that cultural globalisation is simply a process of Americanisation. He argues that culture is much more than the products people buy, and that there are considerable variations around the global in how people use the same products and values they attach to them.

    There are many examples of American products being adapted to fit into local cultural styles, such as with regional variations on McDonald’s food.

    Hybridisation

    Globalisation offers the possibility of cultural mixing on a scale never known before.

    It has not undermine local culture nor does it lead to a single global culture. An ever greater plurality of hybrid-cultures: where global influences mix with local cultures and produce something new: a mixture (hybrid) between the global and the local, as with the example of Chicken Tika Masala.

    One consequence of this is that folk culture is undermined, because even the oldest and most isolated traditions are changed by global influences.

    Evaluations

    Storey seems to paint a more accurate picture of the hybrid and complex nature of ‘global culture’ than Lechner and Boli, it seems accurate to accept the fact that there is no meaningful overarching global culture, rather pluralities and hybrids.

    However Leslie Sklaire argues that he fails to recognize that not all cultures in the world are valued equally. There are maybe more powerful and dominant cultures which can disrupt local cultures against people’s will, such as consumer culture linked to brands pushed by Transnational Corporations.

    Signposting

    This material is mainly relevant to the Global Development module.

    Sources

    John Storey (2003) Cultural Studies and the Study of Popular Culture

    Frank J. Lechner and John Boli (2003) World Culture: Origins and Consequences

    Part of this post was adapted from Haralambos and Holborn (2013) Sociology Themes and Perspectives 8th Edition.

  • Two ways globalisation has influenced religion’s capacity to change society

    The following 10 mark outline and explain question above came up in the AQA’s November 2021 Sociology 7192/2 topics paper, as part of the beliefs in society section.

    Outline and explain two ways that globalisation may have influenced the way in which religion acts as a force for change (10)

    Probably the safest way to approach this question is to consider one way in which globalisation has reduced the capacity of religion to act as a force for social change and another it has increased it.

    The challenge is going to be to keep the question tightly focussed on two ways, and drawing out the links, rather than drifting into discussing several ways in general.

    This post on the impact of globalisation on religion more generally would be a good source to draw on for this question.

    Globalisation and religion for social change

    • One aspect of globalisation is the increased use of the internet for global communications which makes it easier for people to access information about religion.
    • This means it is easier for fundamentalist groups to gain access to a wide audience via setting up their own websites and through social media, increasing their global reach, meaning that groups such as ISIS have managed to radicalise individuals in countries thousands of miles away from their main base such as England.
    • Fundamentalism may appeal to people living in postmodern society as there is more anomie, and the simple messages which appeal to traditional values offer a sense of certainty and identity to people who may feel lost and without purpose.
    • In some cases radicalised individuals have travelled to countries like Syria in order to become part of fundamentalist movements.
    • The internet has also made it easier for fundamentalist groups to gain funding through cryptocurrency, meaning it is harder for governments to cut off funding for them, giving them more power.
    • Such groups can make use of encrypted apps such as Telegram to discuss strategy and recruit members making it more difficult for governments to prevent terrorist attacks, and this is such a serious matter there is currently an online privacy bill going through parliament that may make Whatsapp illegal in the UK.
    • Another indicator of how serious a threat to social change fundamentalism may be is the PREVENT agenda in schools, designed to protect British Values from radicalisation.

    Globalisation undermining religion and social change

    • one aspect of globalisation is increasing amounts of cultural diversity as ideas and people migrate from country to country.
    • This means in the UK for example that we now have several religions rather than one.
    • This undermines the capacity of the Church of England to claim that it has a monopoly on the truth and thus undermines its ability to compel people to act in its name.
    • We saw this in the attitude of religion during the King’s Coronation, with all of the religious aspects looking outdated and a little bit silly which was broadcast to a global audience via the media.
    • State religion now seems like something that is for entertainment and a choice rather than something with the power to change society.
    • When there are many religions competing with each other it becomes more obvious that there are religious truths rather than one truth and the State increasingly focuses on how to create a society in which multiple religions can get along without conflicting rather than the state allying with one religion as a powerful source for social change.
    Signposting and Sources

    Mark Scheme for AQA Sociology Paper 2 November 2021.