Rating: 
Summary: What a World we live in!
Review: ... The book, written in 1996, is still relevant today. Benjamin Barber is a political science professor at Rutgers University, and has written several books.The central theme of the book is that there are two competing worldviews in the post Cold War world. The first is what Barber calls 'McWorld,' which is essentially the economic consumption system based on control of information systems, and 'Jihad,' a nationalistic view that rejects McWorld and its consumption ideals while seeking to create autonomous ethnic enclaves. It is Barber's contention that these two competing views are endangering both the maintenance and spread of democratic institutions throughout the world. The reason this examination is essential, according to Barber, is due to the fact that nations facing Jihad contain most of the world's supply of oil. If Jihad is not contained or dealt with, the world could be faced with some sort of economic terrorism. Barber spends a lot of time discussing McWorld and all of its aspects. He discusses advertising, television influence (with a special emphasis on MTV), and media mergers. If McWorld is not contained, or at least made subservient to democratic ideals, it threatens to overwhelm and destroy democracy everywhere. Jihad is just as bad. Barber uses Russia and East Germany as case studies, where the violent insertion of McWorld and its value system (essentially Western culture) caused chaotic economic upheavals that left these two areas in serious economic depressions. The rise of a figure such as Zhirinovsky in Russia points to a potential fascist backlash against McWorld and its twisted values (this is dated, as Zhirinovsky is long gone from the Russian political scene). My problem with the book certainly doesn't come from world opposition to McWorld's use of Western values; I don't like the garbage spread about through ...TV anymore than an imam in Iran. I guess I take exception with his arguments about democracy. Who says democracy should be a world goal? Successful democracy involves an intricate series of temporal and geographical situations. What works here most likely won't work in Kuwait or Laos. Also, democracy eventually leads to tyranny when vigilance wanes. It did in Greece and it will here, too. Wasn't it democracy that gave rise to the very McWorld that Barber is railing against? In many places in the world, they will be better off without democracy. I don't think this book is too hard to get through,... Barber has a tendency to be glib with some of his word play, especially during his examination of McWorld. I'm still surprised that I enjoyed a book with a Barbara Ehrenreich blurb on the front cover.
Rating: 
Summary: A powerful commentary
Review: In light of the recent past and the oncoming future, this book seems prophetic. Especially given that Benjamin Barber (BB) is not speaking of the Islamic Jihad alone in this book. The book is a scholarly erudition on the state of global affairs today, and raises some very serious and pertinent questions, which are truly un-ignorable. The central theme of the book is the interplay of the forces of tribalism/sectarianism and Capitalism; and how this interplay impacts democracy. BB has structured the book wonderfully - The first part of introduces the concept of McWorld. Its easy to read and the language used is acerbic and pointingly sarcastic at times, which makes it a very delicious read to start with. But nothing prepared me at least for the sudden explosion of ideas in the second part, where its as if BB says "enough of banter, now lets get serious" - and here is where the book translates from a hip-hop criticism of Capitalism to a very powerful dissection of political states and the developments thereafter. BB analyzes the various elements and forces and features, of what he calls Jihad; in various parts of the world. In doing so he shows what forces create Jihad, and the inextricable link between Jihad and democracy on the one hand; and Capitalism on the other. The third and final part of the book is the actual commentary where BB leaves you blitzkreiged with the force and thrust of his ideas, which I shall be humble enough to not try and summarize here! This book is definitely worth a buy...
Rating:
Summary: good, but...
Review: It was a good book. It brings to light the idea that a free market does not equal democracy. However, the book was too long in some parts and too short in others.
Rating:
Summary: Capitalism is Evil
Review: I bought this book after September 11 because the cover describes it as being about the clash of cultures that culminated in September 11. If you've read any of the other reviews, you know that it's not that at all, really, certainly not specifically with regards to Islamic terrorism, in spite of the title. The book is instead about consumerism and capitalism (McWorld) penetrating to the far reaches of the globe, and the response from indigenous traditional cultures (Jihad). This jargonizing of the two movements he sees in the world are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the problems this book has. For one thing, while the author takes a great deal of time praising democracy, he clearly despises capitalism, though he denies this in the afterword (written the year after the book was originally published). Since he despises Western consumerism so much, he asks such profound inanities as "We are free to choose, but are we free to choose not to choose?" The problem with this is that Barber and those like them believe fervently that consumers are helpless before the advertising media, and that most people are therefore hypnotized into eating at McDonald's or Burger King because they saw a TV commercial. My guess is most of the customers of such places go there because of convenience and price. You get the idea that Barber's a closet communist, or at least a socialist. He includes chapters towards the end of the book on the advance of "McWorld" into two former Communist countries, East Germany and Russia. In both cases there are sly references to people deciding that things were better when the communists were running things, and of course no one is happy with capitalism because some of the people will fail economically, and wind up bankrupt or impoverished. Barber's disdain for McWorld and consumerism in general is highlighted by his penchant for jargonizing everything to do with the movement. So we have Hollyworld, videology, and my favorite, the dread infotainment telestructure. When he writes of Jihad (traditional culture) challenging McWorld, he jargonizes nothing beyond the movement, and is much more sympathetic. There's much of the old "we need to understand them and their culture, so we can learn from them" attitude when he discusses how McWorld is corrupting the culture that's currently for the most part run by dictators and corrupt monarchs. It's all a bit much. The sad part is that some of the material here is actually intelligently presented, and I believe Barber makes a few good points. His general observations about the clash between consumerism and culture are sometimes good, if left-leaning. The problem is that he's so relentlessly opposed to capitalism that, towards the end of the book, he insists that he's not anti-capitalist, recounts one thing modern capitalism has done in world society, and then turns around and goes back to bashing it for despoiling the world, almost in a single sentence. That one thing (the amount of money capitalism generates) he has no idea how to replicate without capitalism, though of course he and every other socialist needs money if they're to pay for all the neat stuff they want to do for society. One last word: the prose here is very dense. Barber has a good vocabulary, and isn't at all afraid to use it. I'm a very well-read individual, and I had a merry time getting through this book. I would recommend it only for those who are deeply interested in the topic.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting ideas, works as an introduction....
Review: ...to certain ideas about our world. He reminds me of the guy who wrote Corporation Nation: Not a bad idea, but can't seem to decide if he wants to make accessible, bestselling books or write a serious, insightful study (although Corp. Nation was completely worthless). The dialectic he's describing is powerful (unless you're an academic, in which case you yawn and say "oh, how quaint") and it's certainly interesting, but Barber kind've rolls through this book with too many general statements and not enough good, hard data. It boils down to a rant that a) sounds like it probably makes sense if you agree with it, and b) sounds a little ridiculous if you don't. Don't read it if you expect a tight analysis of globalization/corporatization, or a tight analysis of the Islamist/Western conflict. I'd recommend it for people who want to get into politics, etc, but aren't ready for anything too comprehensive. Check out "Arab and Jew", or "Globalization and its Discontents," or better yet, find some original stuff from the World Bank and the Islamist writers, and put that critical thought to work. And don't write a bad review just cuz it wasn't about what you thought it was about. Read the dust jacket, dopey.
Rating: 
Summary: Nothing new or profound here...
Review: Nothing particularly new or profound is presented here, except for the author's brashness and inflammatory language.
"Globalism" and "Tribalism," as they are presented in Jihad vs. McWorld, represent a dichotomous worldview with capitalism and factionalism as their respective banners.
Globalism is portrayed as trans-national, capitalistic, and incorporated. Globalism is a powerful force driven by those with deep pockets that act in the interest of protecting their coffers, which puts them at odds with principles of civic duty and public participation.
Tribalism, it is argued, results as a reaction to Globalism. Nationalism, traditionalism and parochialism are defining attributes of the notion of tribalism. While tribalism can exist in a democracy, tribalism itself is not particularly democratic, as it tends to fragment and divide people.
It is interesting to note that in the conflict between the two ideas, neither of them is particularly supportive of democratic values.
It's worth a read, but there are other books out there presenting some of the same thoughts in a better way.
Rating: 
Summary: McWorld? More like McMoron
Review: This work is hardly groundbreaking theory. Even for 1995. The fact that Barber can argue that McWorld (basically capitalism) is detrimental to democracy is ridiculous. Also, Jihad hates McWorld, not because of its global market economy but because of who we are. Jihad hates America because we are a "Christian" nation. Read the Qur'an.
Rating:
Summary: Just a Catchy Title and No More
Review: This book is just a catchy title and nothing more. The title was probably conjured up after someone at the publishing company had seen an Arnold Schwarzenegger movie. ("True Lies" was good; this book is valueless.) The message of the book is not new. The blurb on the back cover calls the book "groundbreaking work," but the authors say "neither Jihad nor McWorld is in itself novel." Somehow I had gotten the wrong idea that I was buying a book about the relationship between the US and the Middle East. This book goes in the giveaway stack in five minutes.
Rating:
Summary: Don't be misled by the title
Review: The first part of the book is true, but what did I learn from it that I didn't already know from experience? The second part is unconvincing: too much propaganda and too little hard analysis. The aim of the book is certainly worthwhile, but the book itself is so poorly written that I hesitated for over a year before reworking and posting this review. A far more useful and reliable source of information, based on real experience with the IMF and world Bank, is Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz's book „Globalization and it's Discontents". The choice of title is very catchy (Coca Cola und Heiligerkrieg, in the German translation) but the title will turn some readers off automatically, post 9/11. The theme, however, is not at all Islam per se, but more generally tribalism and fundamentalism vs globalization of capital, labor and production via deregulation of markets. By tribalism in this context is meant any ethnic group that still is bound together culturally and geographically, in contrast with the destabilizing influence of unregulated free markets on a global scale where the dominant idea is that everything should be for sale with as high liquidity as possible („deregulation"). E.g., I live most of each year in a relatively tribal area, Tirol. I see "tribal" as something positive, as a synonym for cultural stability. Much of Europe is still tribal in this sense, in contrast with the US where, since the Reagan-Friedman era and the consequent right wing revolution of 1994, everything goes. Maintaining tradition („social stability"), in contrast, requires the drying up of liquidity. It requires rules (either written or understood) against unlimited trading and therefore against unlimited development. It requires rules stating that a meadow or beach cannot be sold to a hotel or to a condo developer. Simply ask yourself: why do Houston and Gatlinburg look and feel so different than Oslo and Garmisch-Partenkirchen, e.g., or (closer to home) why do Telluride and Ruidosa look and feel so different than Silverton? The answer is: some degree of tradition has been maintained in the latter places via rules against development. People who think that Gatlinburg is „normal" and that Silverton is „backward" will not understand the main point of Barber's book, or of this review. Globalization via deregulation (or, simple, "globalization") based on rapid communication has led to the abdication of responsibility. E.g., I suggest trying to reach Ford with a question about your car. You will reach a woman who can answer the telephone, but who cannot answer any technical question whatsoever, nor can she find anyone else who can answer your question. She represents a dead end, anaolgous to Kafka's „Castle". Global capitalism is like „The Castle", or like a huge thermodynamic heat bath: it influences and controls everything that it touches but is itself subject to no reactive influence. This lack of responsiveness, which also feeds on economic ignorance, is the breeding ground for religious fundamentalists to become terrorists. The propagation of globalization via deregulation as „progress" is based on an implicit belief in the reliability of Adam Smith's Invisible Hand. The Invisible Hand purportedly stabilizes markets and brings them into equilibrium. We know now, empirically, that unregulated free markets are dynamically unstable. In contrast with reality, textbook economics still successfully propagates the mythology of ‚equilibrium', the absolutely noncomplex idea that supply can generally rise to match demand. Were this true, then in the absence of all regulations there should be no unemployment, e.g.. Real markets are not like that. Real unregulated markets are lawless because there is no social-economic analog of physics, of natural mathematical law. The only law of the marketplace is man made law. Deregulation therefore leads to unexpected new problems that are worse than the ones it purports to solve, as is illustrated by the recent economic histories of Russia, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and a host of other Third world countries. Unfortunately for Europe, the EU is a relatively dictatorial, mainly financial, body whose main function is apparently to replace globalize the EU countries, but this is not adequately discussed by Barber either. And the US? The outlook is hopeless until people wake up and realize that they've been taken for a bad ride, that they''re on a collision course led by ideologues who want that collision.
Rating:
Summary: Insightful
Review: Good look at modern political science. Has been used as a text in two of my courses in political thought.
|
