The most effective attacks against globalization are usually not those related to economics. Instead, they are social, ethical and, above all, cultural. These arguments suced amid the distce of Seattle in 1999 and have resonated (产生反响) more recently in Davos, Bangkok and Prague. They say this. The disappearance of national borders and the establishment of a world interconnected by markets will deal a death blow to regional and national cultures, and to the traditions, customs, myths and mores that determine each country’s or region’s cultural identity. Since most of the world is incapable of resisting the invasion of cultural products from developed countries--or, more to the point, from the superpower, the United States--that inevitably trails the great transnational corporations, North American culture will ultimately impose itself, standardizing the world and annihilating its rich flora of diverse cultures. In this manner, all other peoples, and not just the small and weak ones, will lose their identity, their soul, and will become no more than 21st century colonies modeled after the cultural norms of a new imperialism that, in addition to ruling over the plant with its capital, military strength and scientific knowledge, will impose on others its language and its ways of thinking, believing, enjoying and dreaming. Even though I believe this cultural argument against globalization is unacceptable, we should recognize that deep within it lies an unquestionable truth. This century, the world in which we will live will be less picturesque and filled with less local color than the one we left behind. The festivals, clothing, customs, ceremonies, rites and beliefs that in the past gave humanity its folkloric and ethnological (民族的) variety are progressively disappearing or confining themselves to minority sectors, while the bulk of society abandons them and adopts others more suited to the reality of our time. All countries of the earth experience this process, some more quickly than others, but it is not due to globalization. Rather, it is due to modernization, of which the former is effect, not cause. It is possible to feel deep sorrow, certainly, that this process occurs, and to feel nostalgia (怀旧) for the past ways of life that, particularly from our comfortable position of the present, seem full of amusement, originality and color. But this process is unavoidable. In theory, perhaps, a country could keep this identity, but only if like certain remote tribes in Africa or the Amazon--it decides to live in total isolation, cutting off change with other nations and practicing self-sufficiency, a cultural identity preserved in this form would take that society back to prehistoric standards of living. It is true that modernization makes many forms of traditional life disappear. But at the same time, it opens opportunities and constitutes an important step forward for a society as a whole. This is why, when given the option to choose freely, peoples, sometimes counter to what their leaders or intellectual traditionalists would like, choose for modernization without the slightest ambiguity.

Which of the following is the argument against globalization