4 ms·
Sure, that might be one factor, but the global imperialism of the British and United States is another huge factor.
by blt 8y ago
Sure, that might be one factor, but the global imperialism of the British and United States is another huge factor.
- weberc2 8y agoOr even just the cultural exports due to British and US media (BBC, Hollywood, etc) or the desire to do business in wealthier markets.
- knuththetruth 8y agoMany of the “cultural exports” are, however, essentially propaganda to glorify the power and righteousness of the American empire. History has proven that this “soft power” approach to be incredibly effective. After all, we still study and celebrate similar texts from the Greek and Roman empires, even though they’re 1000s of years dead. Much less so those who they conquered, exploited, and enslaved.
- toasterlovin 8y agoWhile Hollywood definitely takes into consideration foreign markets when making films, the idea that their agenda is to propagandize the rest of the world is laughable. They make what sells, because all they care about is making money.
- jcranmer 8y agoHollywood has in the past made films that were pretty explicitly propaganda. Look at all of the propaganda films of World War II, and those weren't forced production by the US government. Granted, at that point, the propaganda was for domestic consumption, not foreign consumption. Furthermore, other countries definitely use films and film exports for propaganda--China really comes to mind here.
- weberc2 8y agoI’m not familiar with such films. Are you positing that propagandist films are the norm or the exception?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- knuththetruth 8y agoLaughable, huh? >Files we obtained, mainly through the US Freedom of Information Act, show that between 1911 and 2017, more than 800 feature films received support from the US Government’s Department of Defence (DoD), a significantly higher figure than previous estimates indicate. These included blockbuster franchises such as Transformers, Iron Man, and The Terminator. On television, we found over 1,100 titles received Pentagon backing – 900 of them since 2005, from Flight 93 to Ice Road Truckers to Army Wives. ... When the CIA established an entertainment liaison office in 1996, it made up for lost time, most emphatically on the Al Pacino film The Recruit and the Osama bin Laden assassination movie Zero Dark Thirty. Leaked private memos published by our colleague Tricia Jenkins in 2016, and other memos published in 2013 by the mainstream media, indicate that each of these productions was heavily influenced by government officials. Both heightened or inflated real-world threats and dampened down government malfeasance. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hollywood-cia-washington-dc-films-fbi-24-intervening-close-relationship-a7918191.html https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hollywood-cia-washingto...
- shanghaiaway 8y agoThe idea that Hollywood films are propaganda is a historical fact.
- geoalchimista 8y agoOn the other hand, global imperialism has always played a role in forging a lingua franca in many ages, just like Classical Greek in the Hellenistic period and Latin in Roman Empire. (Disclaimer: I'm not judging the morality of imperialism, just stating the fact.)
- oh_sigh 8y agoDuring the peak of British colonialism, French was the...lingua franca... of the diplomatic and academic world.
- blt 8y agoyes, I agree British colonialism is not a sufficient condition for making English the dominant language. that does not invalidate my original statement.
- weberc2 8y agoI can’t imagine imperialism was a significant factor. Relatively few people need to interface with the imperialist power; but the new wealthy market imperialism makes available to you incentivizes you to learn the language of that market.
- jinder 8y agoImperialism was most definitely a huge factor - that's the sole reason so many countries have English as an official language.