Objective vs. subjective globalization

Most of all, the growth of markets has
made food in India more Indian. The major regional cuisines are now available in
many different parts of India, not just in their original regions. The most
important globalization, if we can call it that, has occurred within India
itself and it has spread Indian diversity around the country. But that
development feels like it should have been the case all along, even though it
wasn’t, and so it is discounted in importance. The fast food outlets are simply
more noticeable and thus create many objections. A more dispassionate view would
realize that the growth of food markets, viewed as a whole, has disseminated and
supported India’s many cultures.

Here is more, by me, in the Indian newspaper Mint.  Here is the conclusion:

The good news is this: cultural
globalization will, with time, become less of a polarizing issue in India and in
other developing countries. The first Martian to arrive is the biggest news
story, but at some point change becomes commonplace and ceases to attract much
notice. At the subjective level, people eventually realize that globalization
has preserved or enhanced many parts of India’s heritage. The bad news, however,
is closely connected to the good. While cultural evolution in India is hardly
over, it is possible that the exciting and heady feelings of change have already


Comments for this post are closed