Experimental Developer States
The first difference between British and united states is the difference between the top offices. These top offices is the office of the prime minister of the British and the office of the president of united states. the main difference between these offices is that one is elected to office while the other comes as a result of an election. The prime minister in the British government commands the part with the majority in the house of commons while united states is not stable as it keeps on trying to stabilize the power of the legislature and those in executive.
Another big difference that is found between these two countries is that is that in Britain the party that the prime minister is affiliated to can act as a shield when the prime minister is out of favor from the public. United states presidents always go for reelection and cannot hide themselves from the wrath of the public. This means in united states the power belongs to the people while in Britain the prime minister holds much of the power. Removal of prime minister from the seat means doing away with his party from power. It is the crown that selects the prime minister and it is a formality. It is the position that he holds as the party leader gives hi, power and this counts a lot. Removal of the united states president means removal of the person holding that seat while the party remains intact.
The politics of the both countries exhibits much difference. The brutish has three parties while us has two main parties. The Britain has three political parties although it is ruled by two prevalent parties. The third party is very viable and has taken more than twenty two percent during the recently completed elections. In united states we have only two parties that control the country. Birth of a third party in this country was not successful. In use the small party factions are forced to offer support for the bigger parties and denounce their parties and declaring loyalty to bigger ones. In 1960s people lobbied against the policies of lyndon johnson although they had to remain loyal and democratic to him.
These two states have similarities between them. The culture presented by these states is recurring. The developmental divergence in human cultural history was consistent throughout these four states (Pargeter, 2011). In most parts of the world, especially the temperate and woodland environments, the early stage traditions of life were basically readapted on the way to more or less progressively deepened levels of food gathering (Pargeter, 2011). These versions of older food measures to the variety and sequence of post-Pleistocene environment are generally mentioned to be going on in the Mesolithic period.
According to this, progression in history presented all through these states, it is evidenced by two developmental patterns: the preadaptation of culture to post-Pleistocene environments on a more or less intensified level of food collection and also the development of an effective level of food production. The appearance and development were attained in an independent manner through the various states at different localities (Steger, 2017). Use of stone crafted materials such as spear and axes were significant all through. Emergence of iron smiths improved the works at this time as people shifted their craftsmanship (Pargeter, 2011). Gathering and hunting happened throughout the early state, middle state and late state although it was not significant in the developer experimental state. It is within this matrix of search for food and food production that any type of the civilization of the world was realized (Weiss, Otcherednoy & Wiśniewski, 2017).
Globalization and homogeneity have been greatly influenced by western world – ideals, values and culture (Steger, 2017). Taking an example of American fast food, it is evident that this industry is not only taking over the more and more parts of American society but also those around the world (Steger, 2017). As fast food industries in the whole world are adopting the same standards of health, health has become a major concern for consumers worldwide. According to this it is evident that people become united through a common brand rather than national belonging. The more people consume and use the same brand; they become connected despite of distance. Although people are far from each other closeness and a sense of global community is felt built on brand cultures rather than cultural diversity (Deacon & Deacon, 1999).
However, arguing that the world can be completely homogenized into a single global village is too deterministic due to some limitations. The fast foods restaurants are not identical in the whole world. Acknowledging the existence of powerful homogenizing tendencies in the world is one thing and asserting the diverse cultures in the world is another thing (Steger, 2017). All in all, globalization is not all about sameness but also differences. Although the world has strong homogenizing inclinations, that does not imply the final extinction to diversification (Steger, 2017).
Finally, it is vital to know that the idea of complete homogenization means there is a one-way flow from the West to the rest of the world. Also, it fails to identify that people have action and control over our deeds. Generally, there is a complex collaboration of homogenizing global tendencies in tension with cultural diversity. One does not necessarily mean the end of another.
Deacon, H. J., & Deacon, J. (1999). Human beginnings in South Africa: Uncovering the secrets of the Stone Age. Rowman Altamira.
Pargeter, J. (2011). Interpretative tools for studying Stone Age hunting technologies: experimental archaeology, microfracture analyses and morphometric techniques (Doctoral dissertation).
Steger, M. B. (2017). Globalization: A very short introduction (Vol. 86). Oxford University Press.
Weiss, M., Otcherednoy, A., & Wiśniewski, A. (2017). Using multivariate techniques to assess the effects of raw material, flaking behavior and tool manufacture on assemblage variability: An example from the late Middle Paleolithic of the European Plain. Journal of Archaeological Science, 87, 73-94.