Grassroots Globalization and the Research Imagination
Grassroots Globalization and the Research Imagination
复制标题
草根全球化与研究想象力
DOI：
10.1215/08992363-12-1-1
复制
发表时间：
2000
期刊：
影响因子：
1.5
通讯作者：
A. Appadurai
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Appadurai
全球化无疑是美国学术界焦虑的一个根源。这种焦虑的根源有很多：社会科学家（尤其是经济学家）担心市场和放松管制是否会以不平等加剧为代价创造更多的财富。政治学家担心，如果全球化真的创造了一个“无国界的世界”，他们的研究领域可能会沿着他们最喜欢的对象民族国家消失。文化理论家，特别是文化马克思主义者，担心尽管它与他们已经知道的关于资本的一切相一致，但在它的运作中可能隐藏着一些令人尴尬的新的公平可能性。历史学家曾经担心过新的问题，他们意识到全球化可能不是大规模历史变迁的一员。学院里的每个人都急于避免看起来仅仅是庆祝全球化的巨大公司机器的宣传者。产品差异化对于学术界（以及学术界内部）来说，就像对于学术界所讨厌的公司一样重要。在学术界之外，对全球化有着截然不同的担忧，其中包括这样的问题：全球化对劳动力市场意味着什么，
lobalization is certainly a source of anxiety in the U.S. academic world. And the sources of this anxiety are many: Social scientists (especially economists) worry about whether markets and deregulation produce greater wealth at the price of increased inequality. Political scientists worry that their field might vanish along with their favorite object, the nation-state, if globalization truly creates a “world without borders.” Cultural theorists, especially cultural Marxists, worry that in spite of its conformity with everything they already knew about capital, there may be some embarrassing new possibilities for equity hidden in its workings. Historians, ever worried about the problem of the new, realize that globalization may not be a member of the familiar archive of large-scale historical shifts. And everyone in the academy is anxious to avoid seeming to be a mere publicist of the gigantic corporate machineries that celebrate globalization. Product differentiation is as important for (and within) the academy as it is for the corporations academics love to hate. Outside the academy there are quite different worries about globalization that include such questions as: What does globalization mean for labor markets and