During our lesson on post-colonialism today, we talked a lot about cultural appropriation, cultural colonialism, and globalization. After having defined the terms in class, I thought I had a decent understanding of what they all were, but I’m still left with a question. Would the American exportation of democracy into other (emphasis on the Americanized/ self-centric term “other”) countries count as globalization? More specifically into American involvement in the Syrian conflict?
We agreed that globalization was the spread of more economically linked ideas throughout the world, however, are political systems not heavily tied to the economy? For instance, a true democracy probably would not occupy a command economy. Are we appropriating these by becoming involved in the conflict through our Americanized view of what is best, government-wise and economically, for all people? Simultaneously, is it possible that our involvement and exportation of democracy abroad is not as virtuous as we might be conditioned to think? If more countries used democratic systems, these same countries would be more heavily inclined to using market and mixed economic systems. This then would lessen sanctions on trade as the government has less of an influence on the production and sale of goods and would further stimulate the world economy (thereby stimulating the American economy).
If considering these points, is the exportation of democracy considered a use of globalization?