The internet allows for retention of information without the nuance and context of an elder. In this model the information itself becomes more important than the vessel carrying it, which is a distinct and Eurocentric/colonizing approach to retaining the culture. Does the hybridization of the culture damage its authenticity or importance?

Richard Handler’s opinions on the importance of authenticity:

http://www.depts.ttu.edu/museumttu/CFASWebsite/H7000%20folder/Readings%20Heritage%20Tourism%202010/Dissimulation_Authenticity&Living%20history_Handler%201998.pdf

The connections between Culture, Id and contemporary paradigm:

https://www.ashgate.com/pdf/SamplePages/Authenticity_in_Culture_Self_and_Society_Ch1.pdf

Is authenticity necessary in post modern culture? It depends on your previous understanding and how you process knowledge, because if McLuhan is right, the authenticity of the message and the allegory therein (moral is how we build understanding about connections between self and society) have a direct impact on how the information is received.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImaH51F4HBw

Cultural Hybridization, whether intentional or forced is a direct result of a Globalized population and the inherent neoliberal capitalist belief structure therein. It is both Eurocentric and Colonial in its inception and practice. The embedded Darwinian methodologies of letting the strong aspects of the culture define the culture totally speak both to the offensive and romanticized ideal of “The Other”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_other (Look at the Imperialism section)

The environmental debate and it’s connection to “The Other”

http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~brullerj/env_politics-Brulle.pdf

Historically, not all cultures have approached hybridization from a negative point of view. Japan, India and China are three cultures that were forced into compliance and subsequent hybridization by Colonial powers but have since embraced it and flourished. The choice was not always theirs however. China and India were subjugated by Britain who controlled the Silver triangle through Hong Kong:

http://clairepetras.com/silvertriangle/

Japan have been forced by the Americans twice to open their culture for trading and the hybridization that occurs with it. First with their “Black Ships” 200 years after their first experiment  with hybridization ended poorly with worries of foreign power (The Portuguese) meddling in their culture and politics (converting their Daimyo to Christian through Jesuit missionaries). The second was after World war two when their culture and people were effectively decimated by the war and the atomic explosions that they produced. Left without a choice, they embraced the new culture of unregulated neo-liberal capitalism and effectively hybridized their culture.

Black Ships

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Ships

Tokyo Stock Exchange

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Stock_Exchange (see the post war section)

In the end, cultural hybridization being defined as positive or negative is entirely dependent on the opinion of the Authenticity’s importance and necessity to the culture. Japan, China and India’s cultures were strong enough to maintain their authentic roots while incorporating mostly beneficial aspects of the new culture despite colonial adversity, but the First Nations situation is a little different especially with regards to Japan, India and China because neither country were ever weak enough to be invaded completely in the way that the Americas were.

I think as a society we need to get away from the idea of “Growth” being the most important factor in economics. One of the questions considered for the indigenous educational goals section of Module 2 were the differences between Eurocentric and Aboriginal approaches to education. During my investigation, I kept coming back to the root motivations behind the two systems, growth and sustainability. While Eurocentric education focuses on the accumulation of knowledge (associate, undergraduate, masters, PhD degrees etc.),  and a need for more in order  to be successful (letter grades and standardized tests), Aboriginal education focuses on the retention and examination of existing education. Eurocentric education values the information itself, whereas aboriginal focused education values  the knowledge and the person who retains it. So with growth defining the origins of our understanding of how to learn any subject, is it really surprising that the idea is so entrenched in our understanding of Economics?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONXpaBQnBvE

The need for growth creates a system where greed is an acceptable and often desirable trait which is unfortunately in direct contrast with how a healthy society functions. If instead we focused on sustainable business structures where people and employees are valued involved it’s possible that we might have a system that doesn’t rely on exploitation to be successful.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/04/17/walmart-pays-workers-poorly-and-sinks-while-costco-pays-workers-well-and-sails-proof-that-you-get-what-you-pay-for/

I worked at Costco for most of my college career and was always impressed at how seriously everyone took their job there. People worked harder than most of the other places that I had previously worked and were happy to do so. Although this is admittedly not the best example because Costco, like most successful companies in the capitalist world function on a growth model when I worked there people appreciated that they were valued and I’d like to believe that it’s a step in the right direction.

The following is an article about the ethics behind the Enron debacle:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1024194519384#page-1

The following is an article about how one would go about changing a destructive business culture from within the company:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1006093713658#page-1