Franklin
Foer’s book How Soccer Explains the World, offered a different
perspective on how globalization works. Overall, I found the novel very intriguing.
Specifically, chapter six “How Soccer Explains the Black Carpathians.” Chapter
six discusses how the Ukrainian Premier League recruits Nigerian soccer players
to play for their teams. It directly relates to globalization in terms of
outsourcing and loss of cultural diversity.
Outsourcing in corporations isn’t
something rare. Many corporations, like Dell and Nike, partake in outsourcing
because it reduces cost of production of a good. It also allows goods to be
reasonably priced for consumers. One negative of outsourcing certain aspects of
your company oversea is the big difference between cultures. In Foer’s novel,
it was said that Nigerians were recruited because it was a good investment for
the Ukrainian soccer team. That then is outsourcing in soccer. The cultural
differences between the Ukrainians and the Nigerian players caused high tensions.
Ukrainians believed that with the amount of money spent on the outsourced
recruitments could have been used to recruit Ukrainians. Playing in another
country was a big culture change for the Nigerian player Edward Anyamkyegh. He
said, “It’s hard for African players to adapt, especially when you have
training sessions at minus 25.” When outsourcing, one has to consider and
understand the culture of the outsourcing country. That would dictate their
work practice, ethics, etc. In Ukraine they often practice in below zero
temperatures so it was something Edward had to adapt to so he could play.
A critique of globalization is that cultures may lose
cultural diversity. In Foer it was said, “It broke down into factions. You
would walk into the team dining room and find the various nationalities eating
at their own separate tables. They would sit apart on the team bus and at
practice.” The Ukrainian interacted with the Yugoslavs because their cultures
and language were similar. They often ignored the Nigerians so tensions and
racism were high at the time. Ukrainian players weren’t open to the idea of
having player from other countries. Foer said that they thought it was a
humiliation to have to have Nigerian players imported to have a great soccer
team again. The players also believed that all the money used to recruit
players like Edward could have been used to train a young Ukrainian for the
team. The Ukrainian team didn’t want much change for their team. In
globalization, with the interconnectedness of different nations, countries lose
cultural identity and often become less culturally diverse since one country
usually has more power.
Globalization has its positives and negative. It also
depends of the perspective it is looked at. Globalization allows countries to
communicate faster with each other and trade is made easier but there are often
people who don’t gain as much. Countries are prone to lose certain aspects of
their cultures and there’s often “losers” in globalization. In Foer, the losers
would be those who could have had the opportunity at the soccer position but it
instead was outsourced to another country. Foer’s connections of soccer to
globalization put a different type of perspective of globalization. Overall,
globalization is something that can be very helpful to the international world.
Although I understand how globalization led to cultural differences on the Ukrainian soccer team, I don't understand how globalization led to the loss of cultural identity. The Nigerian soccer players still thought of themselves as Nigerians despite living and playing in a totally different country. In my opinion, if anything, this cultural divide reinforced their identity, since they couldn't escape their race and were forced to confront people giving them problems about their race. If globalization led to the loss of cultural identity, you would see no problems between the Nigerian players and the Eastern European ones, since the race and culture barriers were destroyed. In my opinion, this scenario highlights prejudices and racism strengthened by globalization, not loss of cultural identity through globalization.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to have to agree with Josh; I'm a little confused on your "loss of cultural identity" example - in that situation, who is losing cultural identity and how? Maybe it would help if you thought of another, more clear-cut hypothetical example of culture loss?
DeleteYou are absolutely right that globalization has its positives and negative attributes. And generally out sources has a negative connotation to it. The real controversy on outsourcing really comes down to economics. And Soccer, an activity purely for entertainment and making money cannot be discussed without talking about the economics of the game. When a team out sources players, just as a company outsources jobs, builds factories abroad and customer service centers, the anger that comes with that in society and in the sphere of politics comes from the disappointment in jobs lost in the home nation. By outsourcing players, the Ukrainian team is admitting that the talent in the Ukraine is not good enough, and Ukrainian soccer players are not good enough to play. Just as when a company outsources, it means the skills, resources and economic conditions within a host nation are not ideal enough to do business. Soccer explains the world of business decisions in a globalized world where culturally, and politically in the international system out sourcing is possible and common practice.
ReplyDelete