Mcdonaldization_of_Society

The McDonaldization of society cannot be generally viewed as a good thing or a bad thing. It depends more on each individual’s perspective of how things work best. A technically oriented person may thing McDonaldization is a good thing. In the technical world, every individual problem has a definitive solution. If your computer gets a virus then you install a antivirus. If your keyboard is broken then you replace it. Most new personal computers go through the same steps (depending on software)- install antivirus, install drivers, install programs such as Microsoft office, etc. When we have an answer for every problem, issue and situation that may arise then there is no need to wander away from the standardization of society. As mentioned in the article, people now buy “vacation packages”. Is that necessarily a bad thing' If your capable of getting the most out of a vacation for the best value then why would you care if everyone else gets the same package' Why would it matter that multiple neighbors of yours have the same car as you when you know your getting 40 miles per gallon and therefore are able to save money which is much needed in today’s economy' Although standardization does make us much more predictable it leads us to live comfortable and happy lives. Think of shopping centers. As the author mentions it is a one stop shopping experience in a controlled environment. The majority of the US population is clearly in favor of malls and shopping centers and it shows in the volume of people that go to the mall. Shopping centers are becoming ever more popular in developing countries. How convenient is it that you can do your shopping, grab some dinner and then watch a movie' This type of standardization makes life a bit less stressful and more pleasant. McDonaldization can definitely have a negative effect on our population. Standardization can kill creativity and as mentioned by the author, “Predictability washes away spontaneity, changing the quality of our lives. It produces a sameness, a bland version of what used to be unique experiences.” Experiences would no longer create the same type of excitement that one might have felt before. Everyone would be taught the exact same thing therefore reducing the number of experts in any topic affecting life as we know it. Solutions to problems may not be the best solution due to the invisible barrier which would not allow us to view the problem itself with a broader perspective. The US is worldly renown for its creativity and innovation. If we were to allow standardization to be an emerging trait in our culture we would quickly begin to notice a change in entrepreneurship, international affairs, domestic dilemmas, political issues, etc. and would therefore enable McDonaldization to have an effect on our global community. Creativity and flexibility is what keeps life exciting. Think of standardization as watching a movie and already knowing what will happen in the end – there is no point in watching it. I believe that author is being a bit too drastic on his comments about the future of our educational system. No two major social issues are ever the same and therefore must each have different answers. While mass testing does take place and may encourage similar learning it gives us a way to rate and see where our students stand against other countries. Our educational system is designed in a way that while students learn the same things there is always room for critical thinking. While not all subjects allow creativity to take place such as mathematics (due to that there are formulas already in place and creativity would only occur in the instance of creating new formulas) students get to freely express themselves in others by participating in class discussions, group projects, etc. The educational system will not be a victim of standardization to the point that it will draw all the creativity out of our student population. The best explanation of corporate welfare is the conflict perspective. It demonstrates how the rich control the poor. In this case, it is major companies like Proctor and Gamble that use their power to force states to compete with on another. States compete for their business in order to create jobs. All that a company would care about is which State would give them more leniency when it comes to the law and which State would it be more profitable for them to operate in. While these major companies do create jobs for citizens they seem to have no corporate social responsibility (according to the article). They abuse their power due to that the State does not want to “seriously” hold them accountable in fear that they will take their business elsewhere and therefore cause a spike in unemployment which would adversely have a negative impact that can be felt around the state. This can very easily affect unemployment, mortgages, private debts and the quality of life which would therefore affect issues such as re-elections and political races. Major companies know this and use it to their advantage. They have no regard for the environment, health issues or tax payer dollars as long as they can result a higher earning per share for their stock holders which is a critical factor when it comes time for their bonuses. Corporations such as these need to be held accountable for the damage that they have on our environment and the regard that they have for our health. According to this article they seem to be operating with little or no regulation due to their size and power. While they do create jobs they need to understand that corporate social responsibility is extremely important in the development and evolution of our society and it need not be taken lightly.