In the Third World too much state coercion steals liberty from peoples poised potentially for economic takeo ; and in the First World too little state coercion leaves individuals unprotected from market forces over which they have no rational or collective control. Barber makes some very valid assertions yet fails to effectively argue for his thesis which we are left to unearth ourselves as he doesn’t detail it too clearly. The ancient capitalist economy in which products are manufactured and sold for pro t to meet the demand of consumers who make their unmediated needs known through the market is gradually yielding to a postmodern capitalist economy in which needs are manufactured to meet the supply of producers who make their unmediated products marketable through promotion, spin, packaging, and advertising. Countries like Afghanistan, recently ghting a foreign invader in the name of its national independence, have been e ectively dismembered: It is motivated by pro ts and driven by the aggregate preferences of billions of consumers. To view it, click here.

Until recently this sector has been regarded as the engine of all developed economies. As a result, it cannot support the values and institutions associated with civic culture, religion, and the family. Books by Benjamin R. How about Japanese picture tubes installed in Mexican television chassis? For they abjure the very idea of nations or any other parochialism that limits them in time or space.

Science and technology, like Prometheus, cannot be bounded: Reusing things may not do much for corporate pro ts but it spares mother juhad and leaves more for the generations still to come. Health campaigns hurt tobacco sales.

Analysis of Jihad vs. McWorld Article Written by Benjamin Barber – Book Report/Review Example

The National Association of Broadcasters actually told the F. There is a lot of padding, which can lead to awkwardly written, sometimes mind-boggling sentences, like this one: I can’t say that Barber has a very clear idea of how to do this other than the creation of a global civil society.

It was not so much the free market but the independent market that would secure freedom for the city-state. They are made possible by cooperation and they command interdependence. They are nervous and greedy.


Jihad vs. McWorld – Wikipedia

Both men seem to feel that the massive social changes wrought by the economic shift to digitization is correctable through state policy. Barber sees Jihad as offering solidarity and protecting identities, but at the potential cost of tolerance and stability. There is certainly no democratic nation that pays a smaller percentage of its GNP for foreign aid a third of what other democracies pay. It is now apparent, as we mount a new military o ense against Jihad understood not as Islam but as militant fundamentalism that democracy rather than terrorism may become the principal victim of the battle currently being waged.

More startling is a similar message from another, more powerful statemnt of the secular world, who wrote recently: By McWorld, he means a varient of the Marxist idea of hegemonic power, though it is not connected to an individual nation-state, but rather driven by multi-national corporate entities. As for the decoupling of the American consumer from oil and our relationship to oil companies.

And although self-determination is one of the most fundamental of democratic principles, unchecked it has lead to a tribalism think Bosnia, think Rwanda in which virtually no one besides the local power elite gets a fair shake. Democracy in Russia To view it, click here.

jihad vs mcworld thesis statement

The United Theesis and the Soviet Union were in e ect arms-racing themselves right out of the leadership. Of course in the long term, democracy is served by these ironies in neither the First nor the Third Worlds.

Jihad vs. McWorld by Benjamin R. Barber

Today when 40 percent of all shoes sold are already athletic shoes, if Nike, Adidas, and Reebok have their way, no one will walk at all without their products; and this will be a consequence of a lifestyle choice arising out of the manipulation of emotions linked to sports and winning rather than to the satisfaction of needs linked to walking and shoes.

Market-driven pro t has little tolerance statemfnt policy-driven punishment.

jihad vs mcworld thesis statement

Children have been soldiers and victims in the raging ethnic and religious wars; children are the majority of the global cohort that su ers poverty, disease, and starvation. Barber’s call for civil societies, for citizenship, to counter both transnational corporatism and parochial nationalism hasn’t lost any of its power.


What a calamity that the phrase was ever uttered! It is not Jihad and McWorld but the relationship between them that most interests me.

Trade de cits belong to nation-states alone. Videology is fuzzier and less dogmatic than traditional political ideology: They are not even particularly antiAmerican; rather, they suspect that what Americans understand as prudent unilateralism is really a form of arrogant imperialism, that what Americans take to be a kind of cynical aloofness is really selfabsorbed isolationism, and that what Americans think of as pragmatic alliances with tyrannical rulers in Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are really a betrayal of the democratic principles to tuesis Americans claim to subscribe.

jihad vs mcworld thesis statement

The terrorists o er no terms and can be given none in exchange. America has complained bitterly in recent years about the prospect of surrendering a scintilla of its own sovereignty, whether to NATO commanders, to supranational institutions such as the International Criminal Tribunal, or to international treaties such as those banning land mines or regulating emissions.

Jihad vs. McWorld

What need have they for anything but blood and memory? An enlightening view of how the world is moving toward Globalization and how this yhesis paradigm needs to change.

The American consumer who purchases that dress does not lose a job, she gains a bargain. A low-ish score for this uneven, hyperbolic, and vague book that nevertheless has a very compelling central claim. Every demarcated national economy and every kind of public good is today vulnerable to the inroads of transnational commerce.