Tourism has been thriving since the 1990s in many regions of the planet. Some aver that following local mores and conduct is a necessity. Others argue that locals ought to praise newcomers with their culture. Below both prospects will be discussed in details and author’s opinion will be stated.
On the one hand, accepting local customs and behavior brings some benefits. Firstly, it allows a commuter to submerge in a foreign, even alien culture and for many, this is the main goal and attraction of travelling overseas. Secondly, merging with local culture gives an indispensable opportunity to understand it. Today when hundreds of thousands are travelling in the world every day, it may be exceptionally useful because comprehension reduces hostility and biased attitude toward those who represent other cultures. In other words, having new experiences and thrill as well as deeper acceptance of others are the main gains of the prospect.
On the other hand, the position that visitors ought to be welcomed by locals has some merits as well. Primarily, tourism is an important source of money for many states. Demonstration of willingness to accept abroad cultures and friendliness toward guests may attract crowds of people and consequently, their money that will fill government’s coffers with dollars and euros brought by foreigners. Additionally, looming globalization requires countries to be more open. In fact, the trend is strong and the process seems to be unstoppable and inevitable. If states refuse to adapt and embrace newcomers’ cultures, they may be thrown aside by the developing world and that means facing economic decline and even complete devastation. Accordingly, the stance allows host countries to attract travelers and their money as well as to evolve into modern and cosmopolitan states.
In my opinion, both points of view have their considerable gains and thus conduct of visitors, as well as states' policies, should derive from their motives and reasons.
Tourism has been thriving since the 1990s in
many
regions of the planet.
Some
aver that following
local
mores and conduct is a necessity. Others argue that
locals
ought to praise newcomers with their
culture
. Below both prospects will
be discussed
in
details
and author’s opinion will
be stated
.
On the one hand, accepting
local
customs and behavior brings
some
benefits.
Firstly
, it
allows
a commuter to submerge in a foreign, even alien
culture
and for
many
, this is the main goal and attraction of travelling overseas.
Secondly
, merging with
local
culture
gives an indispensable opportunity to understand it.
Today
when hundreds of thousands are travelling in the world every day, it may be
exceptionally
useful
because
comprehension
reduces
hostility and biased attitude toward those who represent
other
cultures
. In
other
words, having new experiences and thrill as
well
as deeper acceptance of others are the main gains of the prospect.
On the
other
hand, the position that visitors ought to
be welcomed
by
locals
has
some
merits as
well
.
Primarily
, tourism is an
important
source of money for
many
states. Demonstration of willingness to accept abroad
cultures
and friendliness toward guests may attract crowds of
people
and
consequently
, their money that will fill
government
’s coffers with dollars and euros brought by foreigners.
Additionally
, looming globalization requires countries to be more open. In fact, the trend is strong and the process seems to be unstoppable and inevitable. If states refuse to adapt and embrace newcomers’
cultures
, they may
be thrown
aside by the developing world and that means facing economic decline and even complete devastation.
Accordingly
, the stance
allows
host countries to attract travelers and their money as
well
as to evolve into modern and cosmopolitan states.
In my opinion, both points of view have their considerable gains and
thus
conduct of visitors, as
well
as
states&
#039; policies, should derive from their motives and reasons.