Let's go to McDonald's - there we know what we get

… there we know what we get

This article is about americanization, about why it is good or why it is bad.

What is americanization? The term describes the change in culture, economy, society and the people created by globalization. In a globalised world, the most developed nations with the most power will influence those who are not as developed. Americanization is the term used to describe the influence of America globally. The most obvious and easily overseen phenomenon are global brands such as Mcdonald’s, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, KFC, Google, Microsoft, Apple and so on. Those companies are American. When they enter our market, our market gets influenced by America. Voilà the americanization of other economies through American brands. Of course, this is also a highly important topic to talk about in other sectors, but here we want to talk about brands.


14.172 Mrd. US$
24.075 Mrd. US$
23,223 Mrd. US$



These numbers should emphasise how many locations McDonald’s has. With its restaurants across the world, Mcdonald’s is one of the FastFood chains with a global impact. Now, we can argue if FastFood is good for you or not. But put that aside for now

Sidenote: Noticed in the past how FastFood chains wanted to make their food seem healthy? Well as it turns out, it did not quite work. Mostly because … Join the TBA Family and be the first one to read it.

I and my Family were shopping. We were hungry and wanted to eat. There were plenty of restaurants offering food that could not be more different from each other. Eating at a local restaurant would be a gamble on the quality of the food. My Brother said, “Let’s go to McDonald’s, there we know what we get”. Despite it not being the most healthy choice, he had a good point. This point changed my perspective.

I believe that in order to challenge climate change, we need to think more locally. We need to eat and consume more locally. This means diversity in food, merchandise and culture. The total opposite of globalisation.

Yeah… so change of perspective. We immediately discussed how we could not eat at local restaurants in Sri Lanka or other countries. Not because we did not want to but our European stomach was accustomed to other hygiene standards This can have resulted in diarrhoea and other bad stuff. So we stayed away.

So what would have happened if we would have seen a Mcdonald’s. Well… Yes, we would have known what we would get but also what the hygiene standards were. We could have safely eaten there.

Globalization and the spread of big brands in different sectors have different ups and downs from different perspectives. If we take a clothing brand, for example, the upside of safe consumption in foreign countries does not apply.

One perspective is about the benefit of the individual and the other is about the possible downside of diversity. Yes, FastFood chains such as Mcdonald’s might influence the local restaurant sector, but I dought that it will kill the local culture. The same as with big clothing brands. I think culture can not be destroyed by brands that just offer an alternative. But I believe that the preservation of culture and diversity does not happen without us doing something for it. We need to find future solutions to how maybe these big brands can support local culture instead of overseeing them. Why can´t we have a Mcdonald’s that also offers local dishes on a separate counter? Maybe we need to find a way to standardize in the context of culture.

What perspective is more important to you? Let me know.

WordPress Cookie Hinweis von Real Cookie Banner