The increasing similarity of shops and products across countries has sparked a polarizing debate: some stress its positivity, while others oppose this view. Though it may offer some advantages to some extent, I believe this trend does more harm than good.
With globalization came international expansion of elite brands, which often result in adoption of the same and risk-averse products. Unlike the past when certain products were off-limit for most, individuals today are blessed with the ever-increasing range and variety of goods. Cars can be a classic example in point: it is now possible to witness a Mercedes in almost all parts of the world. Rather than innovating different car models for each country, such brands have specialized their production, demonstrating how similarity in products can facilitate accessibility.
Beneficial at a glance, this occurrence may come at the cost of cultural identity. So fast has the cultural homogeneity become that it now takes toll on cultural uniqueness of countries. The food we consume or types of movies being watched, in general, has become similar, affecting our cultural traditions. For example, while Asian nations are unique in their own way, the younger generation has started celebrating western holidays out there, given that this may lead to a loss of culture. Although wide accessibility is a positive aspect of this, it undermines the significance of minor cultures in the long-run.
In conclusion, despite the fact that most products and shops have become identical offers accessibility, negative aspects are far great to ignore, not least the cultural erosion, as seen in the case of some Central Asian nations. Even though individuals can reap the benefits of accessibility, I assert that it should not be perceived as a total positive development.