Non-Western Critiques of Globalization: Discourses from Kyrgyzstan

Abstract

There are varying opinions regarding the role and influence of “Globalization” on world affairs, states and their citizenry. The main discourses on Globalization have two diverging perspectives: The positive (or neoliberal), in which proponents consider Globalization as an opportunity for economic and technological developments, and the spread of new ideas; and the negative (or critical), in which critics tend to oppose the idea by stating that the very concept of Globalization—particularly in its neoliberal version—brings destruction in all spheres, including politics, economy, culture, and environment. This Thesis examines the differing views of Globalization by analyzing scholarly works on the topic with an emphasis on non-Western discourse. By focusing on the Central Asian case of Kyrgyzstan, this Thesis conducted in-depth interviews with seven Kyrgyzstani intellectuals who expressed both favorable and critical opinions on the concept of Globalization. The Thesis tested three hypotheses corresponding to the cultural, economic, and political critiques of Globalization vis-a-vis opinions of the intellectuals. While many non-Western critics list the negative impacts of Globalization on economy, power of state and local cultures, this Thesis found that that Kyrgyzstani do not fit into that generalization. The intellectuals concurred that Globalization has a homogenizing effect on culture, but contradictory opinions on its normative basis. The Thesis also found that Kyrgyzstani intellectuals are generally uncritical of the economic components of Globalization on Kyrgyzstan, but they agree that the spread of liberal political norms associated with Globalization are limited due to the state and society being under the heavy influence of Russia.