In our era of globalization, critics have begun to argue that it is not in fact globalization that is occurring all over the world - it is Americanization, or the imposing of american culture, politics, and economics onto the rest of the globe. America has long since been seen as a global hegemon, but to what extent has the American ideology been spread to the rest of the world?
Critics of globalization claim that America is using globalization as an engine of corporate imperialism, trampling on the human rights of less powerful states (claiming to bring prosperity or to create democracy) but always profiteering and plundering in the process.
America, which has the largest military spending budget in the world, has preoccupied itself in recent years with fighting a 'war on terror' in Afghanistan, Iraq, and most recently Syria. Astonishingly, the US has managed to invade, occupy or bomb 14 middle eastern counties in the space of 30 years - and at the end of each war it seems america acquires yet more cheap oil to run its economy with.
Through globalization, America is not only able to influence the politics and economy of the world but it also imposes its culture - even advocates of globalization such as Thomas Friedman question this: 'globalization is in so many ways Americanization: globalization wears mickey mouse ears, it drinks pepsi and coke; eats big macs'. America has, through cultural globalisation, been criticised for bringing about a global monoculture of consumerist capitalism - and it is true that trends towards materialism have a markedly western (but more specifically american) character.
But aside from spreading its culture across the globe, (through cultural globalisation), how far is the US a true hegemon? Can it be said that the US is achieving global ideological domination?
The Washington consensus can be used to answer these questions to an extent. This describes the policies favoured by the IMF, World Bank (international institutions based in Washington) and the US Treasury in terms of reconstructing economies in the developing world. The Washington consensus draws on the ideas of Neoliberalism, the essence of it being to 'stabilize, privatize and liberalize'.
More specifically, it favours:
-cutting public spending
-free trade
-privatization
-cutting personal and corporate taxes
These are common conditions imposed on counties which have been bailed out by the world bank after a financial crisis, (a recent example being Greece) implying that America's ideology, or at the very least its preferred policies, are being imposed on developing countries through non governmental organisations. It should also be noted that America is the only country able to veto decisions made by the IMF, demonstrating its disproportionate influence over NGOs.
But how much influence does America really have on the world? Government in each country (as long as it is developed) has the freedom to make its own policies, and state sovereignty remains to an extent - it cannot truly be said that all countries are turning into carbon copies of America - culture remains even in a multi-cultural society. It could be argued that TNCs (which are essentially supranational so cannot be considered American) are a prominent reason for globalisation being compared to Americanisation due to their existence in all countries (McDonalds and Starbucks are a good example).
In conclusion, I would say that America certainly does have a disproportionate influence on global politics (over NGOs especially) as well as state politics (in terms of it invading counties with 'authoritarian' regimes and imposing democracy). However, in terms of cultural globalisation, it may be that a western ideology is spreading, but in everyday life American culture is unique in having escaped its borders - it is not uncommon for us to eat Chinese or Indian takeaway, do yoga or practice Karate or Kung-fu. It would be hard to imagine culture staying within rigid borders in today's world of instantaneous communication (through technology), increased tourism and frequent migration - naturally, as globalisation progresses, we will become more connected with one another. So while America does have a questionable foreign policy and perhaps too much influence over NGOs, its culture has spread no more than other cultures have - it should also be noted that the spread of neoliberal values is not necessarily Americanisation but is better suited to westernisation. In terms of cultural globalisation, the term cannot be interchanged with Americanisation - in economic or political terms this is questionable.
