Role-Play Debate for course EngC 1015

I think a reason why people are so apposed to it is because they look at American as being "the man". The Jihad see a nation that has pretty much gotten their way no matter what the circumstances are. We are the team to beat, like the yankees with their dominating payroll. Everyone wants to take down the man. America is always knocking on your doorstep in some influencial way where ever you go. They can remember a time where it wasnt that way and hope to bring it back maybe. The reason some of these people might actually wear these products is still a little fuzzy. I think maybe they look at our american products as being made everywhere, but American. With every major American company most all manufacturing is outsourced. So they look down on their feet and see some nikes and eat a hamburger from McDonalds. Well that hamburger was prolly made from cows from South America and those nike's were made in Mexico. Still its very hypicritcal and I dont approve of any violent ways to challenge McWorld.

I'm definately going to post a long entry to clairify what I think needs to be clairified, and I'm probably going to tick everyone off in process.

I think that the main reason people oppose globalization is because they fear that it is another form of western "imperialism" thru "cultural colonization" in which Western ideologies dominate and influence their own culture, resulting it the decline and eventual demise of their cultural/national identity. I think that those that oppose it only resent the cultural westernization brought by the phenomenon. However, they recognize the benefits of advanced technology and medicine so they accept those things brought by globalization, while still keeping a weary eye so as to not become "Americanize" and lose their identity.
In another topic, an example of people opposing globalization or at least the West that simultaneously use their “enemies” goods is the al Qaeda network. Even though they preach anti-Western propaganda, the use western technology to communicate their messages to the masses. First, the use western technology by using cameras to record their messages, they use western software to develop videos, and the use the Internet to make it available internationally. So even though they hate the West, they still benefit from its technology, otherwise they wouldn’t be able to communicate their evil propaganda around the world.

The people who everyone is classifying into "Jihad" are not opposed to "globalization" by definition. Nor should anyone be. They are opposed to the very specific economic integration that everyone now wants to link to globalization. The term "globalization" in recent years has become sort of a technical term that doesn't refer to globalization by definition at all.

Like the recent "anti-globalization movements". There is absolutely no possible way these movements could be against globalization. Many of these movements, including those by the World Social Forum, are comprised of people from a variety of different countries who have the same set of interests and concerns, that's globalization. So how can these people be "anti-globalization" when they are very clearly illustrating what it is defined as.

I think that it's not the people who are opposed to the western form of government and ideas. I believe that it is mainly the leaders and more powerful people in the countries that are. Because as you said the people are embracing western culture and are trying to become part of our culture but the government or ruling people are preventing these countries from doing this. They don't want the countries to have a different style of government because they will lose their control in the government the and their ability to control those who are "below" them in the social class system. So I guess that what I'm trying to say is that the number of people who are against democracy isn't as high as most people believe.

Many cultures that claim to be opposed to globalization are more opposed to Americanization of the whole process. Throughout the world many see American as a pushy big brother who tries to push its ideals, one being globalization on everyone else in the global family. I see the jihadists as there own counter-culture that tries so hard to distance themselves from globalization (McWorld), that they seem to get closer to it. Its almost impossible to distance oneself from globalization. As stated in the article and above, even the anti-globalization people rely on tools that globalization has helped strengthen such as the internet. Those opposed to globalization must realize without it they’d never be able to effectively share there views about how evil it was, nor would anyone care.

I think the conflict here is not Barber's "McWorld vs. Jihad," rather more of a Jihad vs. America itself. Globalization does not necessarily mean, though can rightfully be argued, pure Americanization, as stated so many times before. I think these Jihadists are willing to except technologies and ideas that the rest of the world has accepted, but they're basing their hatred off of American capitalism, American values, and historical American engtanglements.

The United States has done some pretty awkward things, as most would realize in looking back just a few years. In the 80's, we helped Afghanistan fight the USSR, only to leave them wandering when it came to establishing their own government. This creates a sense of abandonment. When someone says, "I'll help you clean the table," sprays it with cleaning solution and walks away, you'd be frustrated too. Where's the rag? Not that this has much to do with cleaning tables...

I think that they're opposed to it because they want to follow in America's footsteps. The other countries want to do things their way yet they can't really get anywhere if they can't use all the new technology. I think the story of Admira and Bosko is so sad, beca

It is difficult to imagine that two polar opposites could be influencing our daily life. I appreciate all that Mcworld offers in terms of products and shallow happiness, yet I yearn for an identity that is provided by Jihad. Are these two really going to split democracy in half or wage war on nation states? Is it entirely necessary for the world to being connected and the world to be run by corporations?

It is difficult to imagine that two polar opposites could be influencing our daily life. I appreciate all that Mcworld offers in terms of products and shallow happiness, yet I yearn for an identity that is provided by Jihad. Are these two really going to split democracy in half or wage war on nation states? Is it entirely necessary for the world to being connected and the world to be run by corporations?

Globalization is everywhere and all cultures use it and benefit from it, save the undiscovered tribes in the Amazon and Congo. McWorld connects everything and Jihad seperates it, but each uses eachother. That is the main point of his essay, and he supports it well.

Commenting on Jared's comment, as Sen said, globalization is not americanization, it has been going on for a longgggggg time. Also Jihad is an idea of tribalism not actually the Muslim Jihad.