As the discussion of globalization continues, and, consequently, the globalized world itself expands, one thing that seems to repeat is the concept of homogenization.  Debates between scholars of globalization surround this idea; we question what happens to culture worldwide as connectivity increases–are the threads of communication and stream of information bringing the world of individuals to a level field of understanding and interaction, or does it solidify or even encourage a state of hierarchical displacement between people and societies across the planet?

            I don't think it is prudent to advocate one particular answer to this question, as hindsight will unmistakably support valid arguments of either side.  However, consideration of the many perspectives on global homogenization certainly makes the discussion of specific global issues much more colorful and provocative.  Moving forward, it definitely seems as though the world is increasing it's state of entropy.  Cultures and ideas are blending in huge concentrations of humans around the globe, and whatever institutions and ideas are remaining relatively partitioned can still be seen bleeding their flavors into the grapevine of worldwide communication.  One example of an attribute of society that has been particularly impacted by global homogenization is the institution of food and cuisine.

            Many staples of cuisine, particularly American cuisine, pass through many nationalities and origins.  Waffles, for instance, are traditionally thought of as a Belgian property, although no one needs to go to Belgium to learn how to make a waffle, or even acquire the tools for waffle making.  I would be very surprised if many people got their waffle irons directly from Belgium.  The integration of the waffle into American culture, even though it is recognized as an item of a distinct separate culture, paints a depiction of the arguments around global homogenization in cuisine.  On one hand, the element of "integration" makes homogenization self-evident.  On the other hand, the distinction of Belgium from America in the context of the waffle could suggest that the situation is more heterogeneous, and in order to solidify the argument of homogenization, the waffle must un-become Belgian.  Still, on another hand, since there are at least three hands, you could argue that the waffle isn't an example of two or more cultures combining, but rather one item being adopted and separated by multiple cultures.

            All of these arguments are valid, and probably someone could think of more valid arguments.  The difficulty of making a conclusive argument for just one item under the broader subtopic of cuisine is indicative of just how complex the topic of global homogenization is.  Other topics, such as fusion cuisine, introduce entirely different and unique arguments regarding globalization.  What's particularly interesting to me however, is that whatever discussion surrounds topics such as waffles cannot lead to any conclusion on the overall merit of globalization.  Considering these topics, and the many perspectives from which to analyze them, can give people the tools to look at the more dramatic issues of globalization.