"Not long ago, people said that globalization and the revolution in communications technology would bring us all together. But the opposite is true. People are taking advantage of freedom and technology to create new groups and cultural zones. Old national identities and behavior patterns are proving surprisingly durable. People are moving into self-segregating communities with people like themselves, and building invisible and sometimes visible barriers to keep strangers out."I don't think trying to understand this is limited to cultural geography (anthropology, anyone?) but it is an interesting stance, and makes me wonder. Which is more powerful, globalization or segregation? Or does it matter, when in fact both are probably equally strong? My dissertation looked at a smaller scale (pilgrimage) that many assumed was all about breaking down social boundaries, and I argued that yes, it does that, but it is also an arena where social boundaries get emphasized...so is this the way of our world, however large our geographic boundaries get?
I am just annoyed at the claim itself. Granted, we anthropologists are not always good at advertising ourselves...in that we offer a holistic approach, and theoretical insight based on our training. So anybody who observes people is now an anthropologist. Or is it just that Americans are so used to sound bites that they don't understand the nuanced differences in anything?