Multinational
Companies and the need of consumption pedagogies
Of the top one hundred economies in the world,
fifty two are companies (Brubaker 2007, p. 27). This gives companies ever
imagined power.
I have always been relatively conscious of the two faced nature of
multinational companies. I am worried about the fairly recent development in where
multinationals are becoming more and more influential. We as consumers should
be aware of the consequences that our choices bound to cause. Still I am
reluctant to believe that people really are willing to achieve full
realization, and to think beyond their self-interest even if they would have a good
will to do it. Naomi Klein (1999) talks of a phenomenon of obsessive branding
where companies have started to create and sell images, lifestyles and
attitudes instead of concrete products. Even children worship brands and use
them as tools to build up and process their identities. Our life, and whole
existence, is signified by brands and measured with indicators of material well-being.
Life is nothing without the newest Apple device or Gucci handbag. The suck of
materialism has gotten strong. As a teacher I think that one of my most
important objectives is to make my students see that the reality conceals many inconvenient
truths worth considering as consumers and moral agents. Today’s problems and
moral negligence demands radical re-evaluation of values and methods to become
more aware of global consumerism and the defects of multinational companies. In
this essay I will exam multinational companies from a teacher’s perspective.
Consumerism and global justice are themes that every educator should keep in
mind when implementing teaching and giving examples of morally enduring choices
to children. Hopefully in the future children as adults would have motivation
to change the current course of ugly and repulsive consumerism into something
more useful. In the end it is a matter of conscience.
Multinational or Transnational Companies (MNCs or
TNCs) such as McDonalds, Ford, Sony, H&M have substantial power over our lives.
I will use the term “Multinational(s)”
to cover the essays conceptual versatility. The Multinational is a company that
controls operations or income-generating assets in more than one country. They
are owned in their home economy and invest in foreign economies. From the
nineteenth century onwards have business enterprises controlled the world’s
economic order. Within the last hundred years their achievements have been
remarkable. The Multinationals developed, manufactured and provided products
and goods and put in place banking, trading, and informational infrastructure
for the global community. Also transportation and communication network was
established thanks to efforts and funding of invest-eager corporations. After
the meltdown of the global economy and times of wars the Multinationals started
to regain their positions and expand to new potential market areas. (Jones
2005, p. 5; 285; 287.) We cannot argue about the good contributions provided by
the Multinationals but still we can raise some problematic features surrounding
their rise and the growth of influence.
Since their birth the Multinationals have had
effects on both home and host economies. Countries have gained in income but
also had losses because of transfers of resources from economy to another. Shifting
production elsewhere has also reshaped domestic economy. Decisions made by the multinational
companies have impacts on many levels. In host economies it has been witnessed
that companies create employment but suppress the local productivity. Increase
of imports has followed expand of exports. Many countries have also felt that
importing foreign goods or exchange of commodities is only another form of
cultural colonialism. In any case the impact on host economies depends on the
features and nature of the receiving culture and the type of the investment.
(Jones 2005, p. 294.) Generalizations about the consequences are difficult to
generate. In any case the Multinationals have the power and ability to shape
any country’s economic state for better or worse. They can be agents of
development or catalysts of even more severe poverty and economical inequality.
The Multinationals have also impacts on areas other
than economy. Political and social landscape has also been bound to shape as a
result of the emergence and expansion of the Multinationals. Their activities
have both positive and negative effect on individuals and human rights. The
concern for protecting human rights in poor countries is more than justified
but so far the Multinationals have pretended to be handicapped and unable to
face their glocally manifest social responsibilities. This urgency for
responding global fears must also bring forth actions to create enforcing set
of standards how to run up a company. Means of monitor and control are
necessary to see justice happen. It is not so much of a question of what but how. Whether the answer lies in restructuring international
organizations, linking their strengths, enhancing private
actions and media exposure, or creating a single intermediary institution, or
regional or global governance, it has to be found soon. The main problem is how
the ethical code of conjuction should be made legally binding. Should there be
a globally solid jurisdiction over companies and their behaviour? (Monshipouri,
Welch & Kennedy 2003, p. 971; 987−988.)
This problem may not seem relevant but actually it
is one the most critical in the field of business ethics. Are multinationals
really putting a real effort to improve the quality of working conditions,
wages, labour rights and so forth. Actually it is relatively difficult to
discern the real causes of flaws in global capitalism. But anyhow the
Multinationals tend to sustain the present situation instead of changing it for
the better. Of course they will react when forced to, but it seems that globally
people miss to see the big picture. Multinationals would not change their
practices if not forced to co-operate and correct the current state. Here even
a one particular consumer can make a significant ethical statement and a
choice. From the educational perspective we need to understand that the
Multinationals cannot function properly without the consumers and their
willingness to buy their products. That’s why we have to enlarge our
understanding in these issues. I think the question brought up needs to be
solved but it may require solutions beyond politics. Education is one of the
means to build up and improve the awareness of people This way the
Multinationals are also forced to take correcting measures albeit this might
take ages to carry into effect.
The dominance of the multinationals is deeply
interwoven with the general progress of globalization which can be summarized
as the global circulation of goods, services and capital but also of
information, ideas and people (Brubaker 2007, p. 23). Globalization as a
historical process has proven its worth but at the same time it has produced
number of severe side-effects. Its transplanetary nature provides possibilities
beyond imagination but we can also easily identify the problems it brings
forth. The current model of globalization has reinforced geographically uneven
patterns of development. The inequalities between poor and rich countries have
widened even though standards of living have gotten higher in some regions
(Perrons 2004, p. 319). Still despite the acknowledged facts it is very
difficult to live morally in the global economy where all actions are
interrelated. This makes it even harder to show to children how they should
live and be responsible and critical consumers.
What is happening in the world from global point of
view then? The appétit of the Multinationals is insatiable and their
competiveness fatal. There are several reasons driving multinationals to
compete such as a more open approach to trade, globalization of consumer
tastes, a willingness to accept product and ideas from other countries, access
to information and large scale economic potential. The Multinationals are
moving the globe into the direction of similarity and state of convergence.
Demographics, trade and media all show us how the world is becoming one instead
of many. (Ind 1997, p. 134; 137.) The segments of life are becoming similar
everywhere: family types, jobs, sports, luxuries, necessities, communication
etc. I cannot see how this could be a desirable course for the future. Even if
companies adapt and apply strategies which honor cultural distinctions, risk of
permanent losses of traditional values is apparent. Global corporate culture
has already put national heritage out of fashion. I already have personally seen
how the world is evolving into one homogeneous mass where cultural distinctions
are merely decorations. Luckily there are still those who believe the opposite,
and I am also destined to be optimistic.
There are many possibilities to challenge the
oppressive realities behind the food we eat, clothes we wear or devices we use
(Brubaker 2007, p. 111). Through responsible and cognizant choosing we can
really choose otherwise. This is a
message that should be shared to young people also. On the other hand I should
accept the idea of certain kind of cosmopolitanism but again at the same time
praise the locality. The global citizenship is a primary goal for education
without any doubts. To my knowledge also understanding the principles of global
business and consumerism promote children to shape both their moral consciousness
and moral personality. This means that children cannot only clarify their own
judgments but to become more aware of the rights and needs of others.
I think many of us normal citizens and consumers do
lament and feel bad about the situation, but they lack the true insight and
will to oppose the domination of the Multinationals when necessary. Luckily we
have witnessed how people are ready to march for their cause, but this doesn’t
seem to be effective enough. The people need
to empower themselves and gain intellectual resources to form a solid
opposition. According to Klein (1999) people should govern themselves. For
example workers have the potential to make a change and demand acts of respect
for their rights. It is not enough to let others try to make the necessary
effort. Problems should be encountered with means of increased
self-determination. The world has after mid-nineties witnessed many forms of
resistance with varied agendas. Everyone shares the same goal to get justice
and oppose the dominant rule of capital giants. (Klein 1999, p. 441; 445.) It
gives also to us educators a meaningful signal. We need to see education as a
powerful emancipating force. Teachers are the vital source for children to
learn how future can be turned for the better.
Education needs to address the challenges children
face in the more and more globalized world. Curren (2010) thinks that it is
necessary to discuss the ways our actions impair each other’s interests, and
how to avoid harming interests of others. Sooner or later there will be necessary
adjustments in the ways we live. It is inevitable to take educational steps
towards a world of global caring and justice. Children need to hear and learn
about things surrounding them, and grow into shared consciousness. Everyone is
entitled to a protected and stabile well-being where basic needs are satisfied.
So individuals should know how to value co-operation and take responsibility
for universally stressed moral obligations. Education calls for criticism and well-informed
critical capacity to guard against the strategies used by corporate front
groups and others to misinform, discourage, and subvert cooperation. (Curren
2010, p. 71−73.) In other words it is important to teach children to think for
themselves - critically and in a cosmopolitan manner.
In a teaching context it is a tricky subject to
make the right statement whether to choose this and leave that one on the
shelf. It doesn’t happen with a snap of fingers that people would just learn
how to address global problems and response in an all-beneficial way.
Especially children are hard to turn around after they have tasted the
deliciousness of consuming. Consumerism is a monster fed by multinationals.
Without manipulation, fulfillment of social and personal needs, and habituation
it would not exist at all. Consumerism is promoted by clever people with the
obvious assistance of the mass consumers. It gives a sense of belonging and
authenticity, boosts freedom and individual expression and helps people to deal
with confusions about social identity and life-expectations (Paterson, 2006, 50−53). Consumption defines us as human beings: you are what you buy. The
main criticism against consumerism is not that it would be bad per se but the
side-effects it causes. We cannot erase the fact that the spread of consumerism
to some extent accelerates poverty and economic unbalance. Many aspects of
consumerism are inextricably linked to the learning and enacting of oppression,
and to ecological, environmental, natural resource, and cultural destruction
across the planet (Koh, 2011). This should encourage us to question the living
habits we share. Critical consumption pedagogies are required so that we could “talk
back” to the all pervasive ideology of consumerism that tells us that consumption
will make us complete or happy.
The Multinationals are in my
opinion manifestations of global malevolence. They affect directly or
indirectly in lives of millions. They are accused of exploiting underdeveloped
countries and ignoring the problems this approach will produce. There is an
ongoing debate whether the rich countries should accept the costs of welfare
upkeeping or whether it should try to build economic growth on more ethically
enduring foundations (Monshipouri et al. 2003., p. 967). Many recognize that
multinationals are not only protecting their interests but also giving
contributions to those countries in which they operate. Jobs are created and
improvements introduced in forms of technology and new innovations. Still
companies cannot hide their obligation to carry their part of social
responsibility. Individualization, liberalization and free trade are bound to
have fatal consequences if people don’t realize that the Multinationals and the
mechanisms of consuming need to be changed. As educators we are responsible for
the raising of new generation conscious consumers. In essence education holds
many answers. My part is to stay focused and send this vital message forward.
References:
Brubaker, P. (2007). Globalization at What Price? Cleveland:
The Pilgrim Press.
Carron, R. (2010) Education For Global Citizenship
and Survival. In Y. Raley & G. Preyer
Philosophy of Education in the Era
of Globalization (pp.67-90). London: Routledge.
Ind, N. (1997). The
Corporate Brand. New York: University Press.
Jones, G. (2005) Multinationals and global
capitalism: from the nineteenth to the twenty-first century. Oxford:
University Press.
Klein, N. (1999). No Logo. New York: Picador.
Koh, A. (2011, February).
Consumer Pedagogies. Paper presented
during the course Introduction to Film Studies, HKIEd, Hong Kong.
Monshipouri, M., Welch,
C. & Kennedy, E. (2003, 25.4). Multinational Corporations and the Ethics of Global
Responsibility: Problems
and Possibilities. Human
Rights Quarterly. (pp. 965−989).
Paterson, M. (2006). Consumption and Everyday Life. London:
Routledge.
Perrons, D. (2004). Globalization and Social Change. London: Routledge.
