Jihad Vs. Mc World

Barber presents us with two opposite but equally strong forces that dominate the dynamics of today’s international affairs. The first is a globalizing and conforming force that penetrates national boundaries. This is called the McWorld phenomenon according to Barber. This force operates by unifying, and conforming the world and its cultures into a multinational web of interconnected economies, all interdependent. International law and order are a requirement for the growth of this force. Although this force will dimini

sh the ability of old ethnic, religious, and national identities to present tension it will not create an atmosphere most effective for nourishing democracy. It does not need democracy as a prerequisite or ingredient for its growth. Furthermore, it does not address the growth and advancement of currently developing countries nor address the concern of diminishing resources in an ever-expanding global economy. The second force is exclusionary, intolerant, and inadaptable. It plays a divisive role by re-instigating and inflaming old ethnic and national tensions through fragmentation and redrawing of borders. It is a byproduct of the cultural anxiety created by the societal vacuum of McWorld’s uniformity. Again, although this force creates a local identity and “solidarity among kinsmen” it does not need or promote democracy. International order and law are irrelevant to its existence. The future for democracy as stated by Barber is bleak either way since neither force needs or fosters democratic ideals.

This is where the influence and power of the elite plays a major role and Snyder’s view of the elite’s role can help in understanding the situation. To present some background to this part of the essay I will briefly discuss Snyder’s work. The author gives many of the ingredients needed for the democratization of countries. In contrast to Barber he has a more optimistic view of democratization although he sees and mentions problems. He also sees McWorld as the victor in the struggle with Jihad because of its inherent and uncontrollable ability to permeate national and ethnic borders in a manner less intrusive. His overall prescription calls for a more vested interest of the public in the government without alienating the elite. The establishment and nurture of civic establishments as well as a gradual increase in freedom and protection of speech are also mentioned as necessary but not sufficient requirements for a transition into democracy. In his book the author emphasizes the role of the most powerful group in every nation, the elite. His work resonates that of Barber in the sense that he also takes interest in exploring the ramifications of current trends on democracy. Where he and Barber diverge is the idea of Mcworld and Jihad’s inevitable clash. Snyder seems to make more pragmatic and rational observations by taking into account the dom

Some topics in this essay:
Middle East, World War, Barber Snyder, Iran Syria, Snyder Barbers, Mcworld Jihad’s, Saudi Arabia, Jack Snyder’s, , Benjamin Barber, middle east, middle east conflict, east conflict, national ethnic, power elite, international law, arab nations, influence power, provides means, macworld’s uniformity, conflict analyzed,