Globalization of Religious Conflicts - Essay Example

The book Jihad Vs McWorld, by Benjamin R. Barber, and the essay of the same describe why so many problems exist between countries that have embraced globalization and corporate expansion, and countries that still hold traditional values, which often include religious and national extremism. The reason why this occurs is because as globalization expands, it begins to threaten other cultures around the world. This can include the threatening of religions, traditions, and even ethnicities, which causes for the tribal entities to feel threatened. When people feel as though they are being threatened, they will often react with violence in order to rid themselves of this threat. Neither of these two sides wishes to compromise, as the corporations are only worried about expanding their company in order to maximize profits and the tribal communities are only concern with keeping the corporations away, so conflict will always exist. Also, neither of these two sides is interested in democracy, so a battle of wills is taking place in these regions. This book does an excellent job of describing the problems that have occurred since globalization became a reality and the ideas that are presented here can be applied to a number of present day issues in society. The most obvious place where this ideology can be applied is in the Middle East, where militants have become tired of the Americanization of their economies and have decided to do something about it. In these places, war has always been a common answer to problems, as the various tribes in these areas have been feuding for centuries. Conflict is nothing new in the Middle East, so it should not be surprising that there has been a violent uprising in response to the globalization that had been attempting to sweep through the region. Since the region is very rich in oil reserves, corporations feel as though there are ways to make money off of the situation. This greed has made the area very attractive, but this attraction has come at a price. Different groups of people lay claim to various regions in the Middle East, even to the point where the present day borders are disputed regularly. Jihad and McWorld are moving in completely opposite directions, with one siding wishing to make the world a smaller place and the other side wishing to isolate the various tribes so that they each have their own space and are left alone. The problem, according to Barber, is that neither of these sides act democratically, which will causes for the current problems to last well into the foreseeable future. This argument by Barber is based on the ideology that capitalism is currently dominated by corporations that are only looking out for their own best interests and that this system cannot hold up because it is undemocratic and it creates a society that is not equal and just. These are described as “unintended consequences in which the seemingly innocuous market quest for fun, creativity, and profits puts whole cultures in harms way and undermines autonomy in individuals and nations alike” (Barber 81). The current system is based entirely on making money, which goes against human rights and simple ethical behavior. Making money has become the driving force behind these corporations and they do not care if they ruin other cultures or religions along the way. The corporate world is one of the most selfish entities in history, as its greed has become more important than the welfare of mankind. Because of this, the claim could possibly be made that corporations are pathological. This is like comparing corporations to a serial killer, as these murderers are often described in the same manner. They do not think about the human element in any of their actions, but rather are only concerned by their own interests, regardless of the affect this has on others and “worships neither Buddha nor Jesus, and cares neither for the family nor the state. Finally, it trades in dollars, and profit is its only judge” (Barber 111). This trend has grown because of the fact that the shareholders are no longer legally responsible for the actions of the corporation. This is because the government sees corporate growth as a positive for the economy, as it raised the gross national product. This is not true in reality, however, as most of the money is going into the pockets of the elites who are at the top of the corporations. The entire system is now corrupt, as companies can now own shares in rival corporations without creating a conflict of interest. This is unfair because it means that there is no competitive balance. Basically, the elites have gotten to the point where they control the economy completely, which means that the world is dangerously close to going back to the feudal system which Barber would rightly state is undemocratic. The goal of the corporation is to make money at all costs, even if these costs make the world much worse in the long run. In fact, the corporation is legally obligated to increase its profit as much as possible, which shows a complete disregard for the interests of the people. Jihad, however, does not agree with the privatization of the region, which basically means the Americanization. The Middle East has always been a region of interest for foreign investors because of the large amounts of resources that are available in the area. Egypt is a country that was previously an isolationist nation where nearly everything was state controlled, but it has recently moved away from these policies in order to spark interest in foreign investment in the country. By allowing for things to become privatized, Egypt has opened up its borders for international investment. Egypt now enjoys a trade relationship with the United States that has made the country important to the international trade community. Syria, however, is very new to liberalization. When the Ba’ath Party was in power, the elites held nearly all of the economic power because of their relationship with the government and these elites have been very reluctant to give this power up. Since certain groups in Jihad countries do not wish to give up their economic viability, it is easy to see why they do not wish to see corporate expansion into the region. These sectors within countries can be considered nation-states, as they do not wish to adhere to the current national boundaries, nor do they wish to be under control of any government other than their own. These factions “are cultures, not countries; parts, not wholes; sects, not religions; rebellious factions and dissenting minorities at war not just with globalism but with the traditional nation-state” (Barber, “Jihad Vs. McWorld“, Atlantic Monthly). Jihad, therefore, wishes to not only stop the effects of globalization, but also reverse it back to the era where tribal cultures were much more common. With these two powerful forces pulling the world in two very undemocratic directions, it can be difficult to see how things will turn out. Barber argues that “the forces of Jihad and the forces of McWorld operate with equal strength in opposite directions, the one driven by parochial hatreds, the other by universalizing markets, the one re-creating ancient subnational and ethnic borders from within, the other making national borders porous from without” (Barber, “Jihad Vs. McWorld“, Atlantic Monthly). This is shown to be true over the course of Barber’s essay and his book, as well as in contemporary society, because neither side is moving away from the beliefs that they hold. Perhaps the most important aspect of Barber’s work is what it says about democracy. Neither side in this conflict wished for the people to have any say in a democratic process, essentially making each of them a dictatorship. Jihad would like to see a return to the tribal system, which would mean that one tribal member is in power of the people and the rest are expected to follow him. This leader would most likely have to be born into the position or take the position by force. Those who were not in a leadership position would be forced to follow along, as there would be no democratic dialogue whatsoever. The corporate world is much the same, as they do not want to have to answer to anyone. McWorld wishes to have full control of the economy, allowing for it to maximize profits while making decisions about the economy. Barber is right when he says that there is no way to know how this will turn out, but that “the outcome is unlikely to be democratic” (Barber, “Jihad Vs. McWorld“, Atlantic Monthly). In his essay and book, Benjamin Barber is able to effectively argue about the conflict between Jihad and McWorld, or globalization and tribalism. These two opposing sides wish to move in entirely opposite directions, but are seemingly tied to each other, due to their different goals. While very different, each of these sides wish to have control over their population, which leave the average citizen in a undesirable spot no matter how things turn out in the end. McWorld will always wish to control the economy, while maximizing its own profits, while Jihad will always wish to control its people, while ignoring the boundaries that have been set forth by governments. The only thing that is certain in this situation is that neither side is supportive of democracy, which is what the population of Earth should be worried about. Works Cited Barber, Benjamin R. "Jihad Vs. McWorld. Atlantic Monthly. March 1992. Viewed 17 April 2008. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/199203/barber Barber, Benjamin R. Jihad Vs. McWorld: How Globalism and Tribalism Are Reshaping the World. New York: Ballantine Books. 1995. Read More