f life in small communities is threatened by the urban one-stop shopping culture of the giant. The population in regions does not want a store where the atmosphere is cold and artificial. In essence, the anti-Wal-Mart activists want to stop the store from establishing itself in rural communities because they believe that it would destroy their economic and cultural identity.On the opposite side, the population in favour of Wal-Mart thinks that the creation of new stores in rural regions stimulates the economy and that the local businesses are responsible for the problems faced on Main Street because they are not adapted to the modern retailing market. First of all, the opening of a mega discount store in a region attracts people from other small towns. This affluence of customers is beneficial to the local businesses that sell complementary products near the Wal-Mart. The advocates of the store also affirm that the company creates jobs. But if local merchants want to benefit from Wal-Mart, they have to evolve with the market and change their way of doing things. As said by Jo-Ann Johnston, adaptation is the key element: ``People are beginning to realize that small town merchants need to adapt to changes in their communities, the economy, and their industries instead of chastising an outside company`` (1995, p.222). The businesses of rural downtowns are obsolete and do not reflect the real needs of customers. Therefore, to keep their stores viable and worth keeping, they have to create stronghold and evolve, even faced with huge competition (Jo-Ann Johnston, 1995). If they want to compete, the rural merchants have to improve their products, marketing and service. The advocates of Wal-Mart believe that coexistence between the giant retail store and local businesses is for the best, but rural downtowns have to change with their time.The Wal-Mart conflict is deeper and more important than a simple competition among retail stores. T...
