Jihad Vs Mcworld Analysis

Jihad vs. McWorld Review

Jihad vs. McWorld is an article written by Benjamin R. Barber. This article talks about the concepts of tribalism and globalism and how they may be threat to democracy. He begins to explain what McWorld and Jihad mean. Jihad is essentially the tribalism and the McWorld is globalism. Basically both forces are operating in the same regions with equal strength in opposite directions. Neither forces needs or promotes democracy. One force is attacking social cooperation, interdependence and civic mutuality, which pushes apart the world.” The atmospherics of Jihad have resulted in a breakdown of civility in the name of identity, or comity in the name of community” (pg 6, Barber) On the other hand, the other force is working …show more content…
McWorld resembles Cosmopolitanism In different aspects. An example of this is the Market Imperative. He explains that common markets demand uniformity. This uniformity is seen in international laws, common language of the market, the signature of shopping and even common currency. Moreover I feel like the Resource Imperative shows how we are moving from a more nationalist view of life. Barber states that “human nature is dependency” and “Every nation, it turns out, needs something another nation has: some nations have almost nothing they need.” (pg. 2, Barber). The Information –technology imperative is the dependency of on the flow information and new communication methods. Barber feels that this is all a cover up for power-mongering elites. The communication accessibility has become a threat because it does not respect nation boundaries. His example is satellites and telephones. The Ecological imperative deals with increased awareness but also with increased inequality. This means that modernized nations block off the roads to developing nations. All the forces in the McWord are a direct reflection of the forces in …show more content…
What I found the most interesting about these “forces” is that they work in the same space but are unifying and pulling apart countries at the same time. While the world may be unified by new gadgets and social media, it is simultaneously being pulled apart by cultural and ideological difference that will probably never be settled. I think because people are so different that the neither force will successfully take over and neither will gain enough traction to be able to be a real threat to democracy. Jihad seems like the less prevailing of the two forces to me. His explanation of the McWorld is very interesting because of the sections he breaks them up into. The example he gave of the master and slave co-dependency was very illustrative. It showed how dependent the McWorld is. The world is moving more towards cooperation and unification but not much as to suggest that there will never be forces of “Jihad” at work. I find it very strange that he focus on certain similar cultural groups to explain the forces of Jihad. It almost makes it seem as though culture is a dire threat to democracy while the other is not. I doubt that it will stem so far as to be out of control and create