4.0 Technological Revolution and Cultural Disruption: The Challenges of the Transdisciplinary of Cultural Studies

4.0 Technological Revolution and Cultural Disruption: The Challenges of the Transdisciplinary  of Cultural Studies

¹A.A. Ngurah Anom Kumbara

^{1anom_kumbara@unud.ac.id}

¹ Doctoral Study Program (S3) Cultural Studies, Faculty of Cultural Science

Udayana University

 Introduction

               The era of global disruption can be simply understood as an era of uncertainty or chaos due to the influence of globalization that has disturbed the established sociocultural order. Globalization which, according to Appadurai (2006) takes place through five main streams covering ethnic scape, finanscape, technoscape, mediascape, and ideology scape, has dramatically transformed billions of people in a new world configuration that melts geographical, political, ideological, economic and cultural boundaries. . The technological revolution of transportation and digital technology 4.0, cross-country movement of people through migration, tourism, political asylum, and capital and financial movements between countries that often take place mysteriously through the stock market and free market; and the ideological arena between nations and nations, marking the ongoing globalization in various parts of the world.

The rapid and massive penetration of globalization makes conditions that have never been predicted before which often results in cultural shock to traditional societies. Because it is not globalization that adjusts to the tradition patterns of society, on the contrary opposes a global culture that integrates society in a global order (Abdullah, 1995). This requires the character of globalization which will crush and reform all barriers here, including traditional cultural values. More globalization of capitalism is moving through technological revolutions and global policies determined by Western superpowers to manipulate the world free market. In connection with the phenomenon, the purpose of this paper is to discuss the paradoxical problems of globalization in the era of the technological revolution 4.0 and the challenges of the epistemology of Cultural Studies in this arena.

The Globalization Paradox

               In the context of culture, culturalists see globalization as a paradoxical phenomenon. Some consider that the most obvious impact of globalization is the occurrence of cultural uniformity because people with different ethnic, cultural, national and religious backgrounds tend to consume the same goods, information, values, lifestyles, even ideologies. On the other hand, Naisbitt (1988) rejects this view by saying that uniformity and the disappearance of cultural identity differences are only 'myths of globalization' that are over-exaggerated. In fact, globalization will always present paradoxical, unexpected, and present themselves as real. The rise of ethnic, racial, national, and religious based identity articulations; cracking of national identity; decentralized politics; and the rise of local culture are some examples of global paradoxes that emerged in the current era. In other words, globalization is a disruption or uncertainty that is really real because humans are confronted with life values ​​that are so diverse and often conflicting with each other. 

               In Megatrends 2000, Naisbitt and Aburdance present an example of a global paradox by predicting the rise of free market socialism and the emergence of China as a potential ruler of the world economy. China, as a recent economic case study, was particularly marked by its success in moving home industries to produce various commodities capable of penetrating and controlling world markets. This production model certainly becomes the antithesis of the capitalism system which prioritizes mass production through large-scale companies with capital strength. Globalization as a new form of capitalism carried by Western countries (read 'capitalists'), certainly contradicts this phenomenon. The question, "Does this phenomenon mark the revival of socialism in China by utilizing free market policies?" From another point of view, it is difficult to state the revival of socialism in China only with this evidence, due to the fact that China also implemented a capitalism system and gave birth to a capitalist of Ma Ma's caliber. Therefore, it might be more correct to say that it is only one small example of a global paradox that confirms the absence of a single system that is truly universally applicable.

               What is done by China and several other Asian countries, it shows that globalization provides space and greater opportunities for nations to choose their own way in responding to various global influences. In this regard, Giddens (1998) proposed the concept of "The Third Way" (The Third Way) to address the conflict between the two most influential ideological poles in the world, namely capitalism and socialism. The third path is a strategic effort by taking the good and removing the bad from every ideology so that undoubtedly found an ideological concoction that is in line with the cultural identity of the community. On the other hand, Robertson (1995) offers 'glocalization' as a middle way by emphasizing how global processes are influenced or even subverted by the application, interpretation, and adaptation of local culture so that dynamic interactions between local and global values ​​can occur. This means that globalization can be interpreted positively as an extension of the range of alternatives for people to take a strategic role in the global arena through cultural revivalism and revitalization.

               The idea suggests the increasingly important role of culture, both as a controller and as a driver of social transformation. In multipolar and multi civilization societies, cultural discourse is seen as increasingly strategic and significant in determining the existence or future of a nation. The Great Disruption Fukuyama (1992), and The Clash of Civilization Huntington (1996) draw a common thread regarding the future picture of the world that culture (civilization) is predicted to have a greater share in determining integration and progress, or conversely, conflict and setbacks in a society, beyond just political, economic, and social matters. Cultural and religious discourses are seen as increasingly productive to be capitalized for social, political and economic interests. Given only through this discourse, differences will inevitably be found and calculated as potential advantages, when other fields of life are almost entirely uniform. The implication is that the politics of difference, locality issues, and cultural identity will be increasingly strengthened, as world life interactions increasingly globalize

Conclusion

               Reflecting on all of the above, it can be understood that global disruption provides both a challenge and an invitation to researchers and participants in Cultural Studies to develop transdisciplinary scientific research. The importance of transdisciplinary research in the study of Cultural Studies cannot be separated from the paradigm that is carried in understanding cultural phenomena. In contrast to cultural studies with other paradigms, Cultural Studies views culture more as a liquid, construct, and differential phenomenon in relation to a number of others. Cultural interaction with globalization certainly also provides a broad field of research for Cultural Studies, especially related closely to the influence of human movements, technology, capital, media, and ideology that are celibate with the process of dissemination. Each of these elements certainly has an influence on the existence and dynamics of the culture of a society so that cooperation and participation of other disciplines is needed to be able to express it better and more productively.

Reference

Abdullah, Irwan, 2006b. “Dari Bounded System ke Boundaries Society: Krisis Metode Antropologi dalam Memahami Masyarakat Masa Kini”. Antropologi Indonesia, Vol. 30, No. 2, 2006.

Appadurai, Arjun. 1990. “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy” in Mike Featherstone (Eds.). Global Cultural: Nationalism, Globalization, and Modernity. London: Sage Publications.

Barker, Chris. 2005. Culture Studies Teori dan Praktik. Yogyakarta: Bentang Pustaka.

Fukuyama, Francis. 1999. The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstruction of Social Order. London: Profiles Book.

Giddens, Anthony. 2000. Runaway World: How Globalization Reshaping Our Lives. London: Profile Books Ltd.

Huntington, Samuel P. 1996. The Clash of Civilization and The Remarking of World Other. New York: Simon & Schuster.  

Naisbitt, John. 1988. Megatrends: Global Paradox. New York: William Morrow and Company, Ltd.

Robertson, Roland. 1992. Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London, California, New Delhi: Sage Publications.