| Notes: |
Pirages
"Let me first say that I do not hate Thomas Friedman."- Pirages
- Globalization and it's Many Facets:
-
- Why is globalization taking place now?
- Free market ideologies; a free world market enables trade, a 'flat world' encourages trade.
- Global division of labor in a 'flattening world"
- Why now? Technological change, world now is diff. than 50yrs ago, in terms of transportation, which has facilitated the movement of goods throughout the world.
- Telecommunications has vastly improved, with satellites, cell phones, Internet, fiber optic cables, etc. Density of communications has improved.
- Globalization has 4 aspects:
- Economic- Properly carried out, we all benefit. How it's carried out, in terms of rules. Globalization doesn't work for everyone; it depends on how it's carried out. Specialization in certain trades and cooperation throughout countries will aid globalization. Economies around the world are closely linked. Currencies can be regulated by spectators. Global corporations seek the cheapest places to make their goods; it will be where the companies set up shop and move their industries. Job losses will be incurred in country hopping.
- Socio-Cultural Globalization- Cultures can be improved by globalization, such as shared cultures, customs, and norms. However, a clash of cultures will be seen as well. Some cultures resist sharing of cultures and foreigners. The questions of 'which culture will dominate' will also be brought up. It's unclear how or if they'll integrate, however, globalization period will allow very few cultures to avoid being touched by the phenomenon.
- Biological and environmental globalization- Due to the current processes of globalization, plants and other biological factors are being transported around the world, intentionally and unintentionally. Diseases are also included in this category, including microbes and pathogens. Avian flu is a current threat, a possible pandemic is 'rather frightening', being able to 'move around the world faster than the incubation period.' 15% chance of an avian flu pandemic.
- Questions to think about:
-
- Globalization is necessarily a win-win gameÉ? There are winners and losers in this process. Friedman makes mention of the Chinese making $1 a day in some regions. Are workers who are forced to live in corporate dormitories making $1 a day really making profit, or would it better for them to stay on their respective farms. Blue collar workers in the US have been impacted as well, due to outsourcing. The 'race to the bottom'É
- Does globalization lead to a vast middle class? Or is it leading to a small cosmopolitan world? His visits to Russia and China, for example, showed him that many countries are also profiting from globalization. The United States is becoming a more stratified society.
- How does a globalizing society accommodate countries like China and India, often more affectionately called "Chindia" ? (esp. with the population growing)
- The future of the United States: Exponential expansion of opportunity, according to Friedman. Are there such opportunities in the United States? In a flat world, science, technology, know-how travel all over the world.
- We are, by far, not the smartest country in the world. In a world of outsourcing, a flat world, what comparative advantage will be left for the United States?
- Global governors: Globalization is accelerating. The institutions that we have developed haven't done a good job of governing.
Michael
Friedman offers a unique perspective. However, there are things he omits.
Prerequisite for a flat world: Friedman is for more trade, for sure. He understands the need for social safety, flexible labor laws, etc.
Your society must have a willingness to join together to enjoy economic prosperity. Also, one must have leaders that can lead them to enjoy a flat world. Cannot be distracted by culture or politics. However, Friedman never discusses poverty. Poverty is keeping people down, millions, according to Friedman, but it's actually a low millions. And giving one a cheap PC will not ensure economic prosperity, as Friedman believes. Friedman, also believes that people are inherently lazy. By not being lazy, they could successful, according to Friedman.
Is the world flat?
"Most definitely. But the playing field is only becoming flat for those who are skilled and economically successful, such as high-roller countries. Almost 60% does not have access to adequate sanitation.
Many are talking about vastly increasing global and social inequality. The world can be seen as more uneven, and less 'flat.' ex. WTO- Intellectual property rights. Patent/copyright enforced by the US, giving the US an advantage in technology.
Pg. 375. Friedman says that 'I believe that the world isn't flat.' However, he mentions this too late.
Discussion
World agricultural problems: The US doesn't believe in it, the flat world, when it comes to agricultural trade.
Who controls the flat world? So far, the US has controlled the flat world. The flat world concept allows us to set the agenda.
Economics of China: 'Big kid on the block'; 1.3 billion pop., lots of economic clout. China is accumulating capital, more than 1 trillion dollars in US treasury bills.
We have the technology but we can't regulate it; an example is like the Internet.
|
| About the Speaker: |
Dr. Mark Juergensmeyer is director of the Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies,
professor of sociology, and affiliate professor of religious studies at the University of California,
Santa Barbara. He is an expert on religious violence, conflict resolution and South Asian religion and politics,
and has published more than 300 articles and 20 books, including Religion in Global Civil Society and Global
Religions: An Introduction. His widely-read Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence,
is based on interviews with religious activists around the world--including individuals convicted of the 1993
World Trade Center bombing, leaders of Hamas, and abortion clinic bombers in the United States--and was listed
by the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times as one of the best nonfiction books of the year. A previous book,
The New Cold War? Religious Nationalism Confronts the Secular State, covers the rise of religious activism and its
confrontation with secular modernity. Dr. Juergensmeyer presented the 2006 Stafford Little Lectures at Princeton
University, which will be published as a book entitled God and War. He is currently co-editing The Encyclopedia of
Global Religions and The Oxford Handbook of Global Religions. Since the events of September 11, 2001,
Dr. Juergensmeyer has been a frequent commentator in the news media, including CNN, NBC, CBS, BBC, NPR,
Fox News, ABC's Politically Incorrect, and CNBC's Dennis Miller Show.
Refreshments will be served.
For directions to the Alumni Center, please go to http://www.riggs.umd.edu/map.html.
|
| Notes: |
Mark Juergensmeyer- Terror in the Mind of God
- Beirut: His visit is quite fascinating; on the slideshow, he shows pictures of Beirut's glorification of Hezbollah martyrs in city life.
- Movement in the 80's in India, movement of separation in Punjab region. He notes their friendliness, Ôgregarious' nature. Talks of the nature of the Indian preachers who spoke of war and the defense of Ôgood against evil.' Indira Ghandi was viewed as evil in some regions such as Punjab, the use of politics in defense of religion.
- Master Shoko Asahara- executed militant Buddhism in Japan. Released nerve gas in Japanese subways. Dozens killed. While we saw it as terrorism, it was seen as a story woven on his part.
- Timothy McVeigh- Oklahoma City bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. Domestic terrorism. Tried to demonstrate the apocalyptic war within the United States
- In every religious tradition, there is a sense of telling tales and fulfilling a moral purpose. Carrying out the human imagination is often a dream of these terrorists, in hopes of being hailed as a hero.
Reverend David Hill
- Meir Kahane, author of They Must Go!- American Orthodox rabbi
- He killed the prime minister; later assassinated.
- From terrorists view, they are on a God given mission, to carry out God's orders.
- Sheik Ahmed Yassin
- Killed Muslims within a mosque.
- Choose to martyr themselves for a great cause
- Dr. Rantisi and Sheik Yassin
- Their struggle is mostly for the sake of Ôpride'
- "How does Hamas think it's going to win against Israel's tough ranks?" Jurgensmeyer asks Rantisi. He responds, maybe in my lifetime, or my children's lifetime, but in my children's children's lifetime, it may happen. It is not our war, its God's war."
- Osama Bin Laden
- Hamas doesn't really understand Bin Laden and his cause. Bin Laden's Al Qaeda doesn't have a goal at in hand in terms of a homeland, like Hamas.
- Bin Laden sees that Western values are infiltrating and harming Arab countries.
- Doesn't like America's hegemony and globalization goals.
- What does religion have to do with terrorism?
- His interviews suggest patterns of religious terrorism.
- Cosmic war-internal logic and religious violence, the world is a struggle. The forces of good and evil. Provides all encompassing view, explaining why bad things are happening. Overcomes humiliation and sense of empowerment. Offers a way of participation as soldiers in the struggle.
- Religious terrorists see themselves as soldiers carrying out a mission against struggle
- Terrorists acts are acts of war. Meant to demonstrate a view of t world, a world of war.
- Global Jihadi war
- How should governments respond to conflicts involving religion?
- "Cautiously." War is exactly what the terrorists want.
- The forest fire of violence-Religion is often the spark
Discussion
- Terrorism and testosterone driven connections?
- Disrespect and humiliation is the huge motivation for attacks
- Role playing (such as video games) are sometimes made reality
- Guy Fawkes mention; attempt to assassinate King James in the Gunpowder Plot; terrorism in the name of the Catholic religion.
- Negotiation with terrorists
- Northern Irish terrorists; one must talk with their enemies; however, in this case, talking is wasting time. Same with Osama Bin Laden. There are those where attempting to talk with some terrorists is a dead end. Their "megalomaniac" ways hinders one from doing so.
- Is there a way of turning back from religious terrorists? Can it be done, is it worth the effort? Is prevention possible?
- His response: Yes, it can be turned back. Illusionary war, requires a shared experience. Videos taken before the death of martyrs' suicide moments gives an air of being a hero. His experience in a small Palestinian village found the best and brightest of the village giving themselves up for suicide bombings. Hamas, for example, has always lost credibility when they peace negotiations have become successful.
- Theological beliefs come into play, but they do in the manner that the person wants them to come into play. Example, killing in Buddhism is wrong, but the way it's twisted, it can be justified back religious terrorists.
- Iraq: Allowing the old armies to dissipate and in effect, allowing them to join militias.
- Iraqis were hopeful that they could figure out their problems on their own, such as the Kurd issue, and the Sunni/Shiite situation.
- American press in Iraq has been wildly successful, with Americans taking over a Muslim country. The insurgency, the Muslim clerics (who do not recognize American government in Iraq), continue in Iraq...
- Willingness to help globalization? Military solutions?
- No question that there is military role, in terms of apprehension of terrorists, but one must be careful in the way it's perceived. It's like "dousing a fire with gasoline." Statement of people as our global enemy, such as the "Axis of evil" doesn't bode well with the world, allies, and especially those targeted. We also ignored religious connections in attacks in acts such as the Oklahoma City bombing.
|
