Jihad vs. McWorld: How Globalism and Tribalism Are Reshaping the World | 
| Author: Benjamin Barber
Publisher: Ballantine Books
Category: Book
List Price: $15.00
Buy Used: $0.01
You Save: $14.99 (100%)
New (64) Used (174) Collectible (2) from $0.01
Avg. Customer Rating:  71 reviews
Sales Rank: 30776
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 432
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.9
Dimensions (in): 8 x 5.5 x 1
ISBN: 0345383044
Dewey Decimal Number: 909.829
EAN: 9780345383044
ASIN: 0345383044
Publication Date: July 30, 1996
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: With pride from Motor City. All books guaranteed. Best Service, best prices.
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com
As soon as you hear the conceit of this book--that there are two great opposing forces at work in the world today, border-crossing capitalism and splintering factionalism, and that they are the two biggest threats to democracy--you know it rings true enough to be worth reading. Although capitalism could have only grown to current levels in the soil of democracies, Benjamin Barber argues that global capitalism now tends to work against the very concept of citizenship, of people thinking for themselves and with their neighbors. Too often now, how we think is the product of a transnational corporation (increasingly, a media corporation) with headquarters elsewhere. 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. The antidote, Barber concludes, is to work everywhere to resuscitate the non-governmental, non-business spaces in life--he calls them "civic spaces" (such as the village green, voluntary associations of every sort, churches, community schools)--where true citizenship thrives.
Product Description
"An important new book."
--Newsweek
"Mr. Barber is. . . the first to put Jihad and McWorld together in an inescapable
dialectic . . . . [It] stands as a bold invitation to debate the broad contours and future of society."
--Barbara Ehrenreich
The New York Times Book Review
"COMPELLING. . . IMPRESSIVE. . . A thorough, engaging look at the current state of world affairs."
--The American Reporter
Jihad vs. McWorld is a groundbreaking work, an elegant and illuminating analysis of the central conflict of our times: consumerist capitalism versus religious and tribal fundamentalism. These diametrically opposed but strangely intertwined forces are tearing apart--and bringing together--the world as we know it, undermining democracy and the nation-state on which it depends. On the one hand, consumer capitalism on the global level is rapidly dissolving the social and economic barriers between nations, transforming the world's diverse populations into a blandly uniform market. On the other hand, ethnic, religious, and racial hatreds are fragmenting the political landscape into smaller and smaller tribal units. Jihad vs. McWorld is the term that distinguished writer and political scientist Benjamin R. Barber has coined to describe the powerful and paradoxical interdependence of these forces. In this important new book, he explores the alarming repercussions of this potent dialectic for democracy.
A work of persuasive originality and penetrating insight, Jihad vs. McWorld holds up a sharp, clear lens to the dangerous chaos of the post-Cold War world. Critics and political leaders have already heralded Benjamin R. Barber's work for its bold vision and moral courage. Jihad vs. McWorld is an essential text for anyone who wants to understand our troubled present and the crisis threatening our future.
"CHALLENGING AND INSTRUCTIVE."
--San Francisco Chronicle
"BARBER IS WELL WORTH READING. . . FOR AN INTRODUCTION TO THE REAL WORLD, LOOK AT JIHAD vs. McWORLD."
--The Nation
"STIMULATING, TARTLY WRITTEN."
--Publishers Weekly
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 66 more reviews...
Overrated. March 22, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Barber's ethics clearly do not embrace contemporary commercialism, and it is also clear that he'd rather not see society enthralled in a continuous cycle of working endlessly in order to support a consumerist appetite for goods that contain no tangible value. His premise is that such an economic system is a sort of quiet tyranny, a despotic commercialism. I can agree in principle to an extent, but what is it that this commercialism has replaced? A subsistence, hand to mouth lifestyle. Yes, many "McWorld"ers live paycheck to paycheck in an enormous amount of debt, but rather than work to subsist in the way that previous generations did, they're working to subsist in a world in which the latest gadget such as the iPhone is seen as a necessity. Barber talks as though he's giving the authoritative word on the subject, but I tend to believe that it is a question of personal values as to which sort of system of subsistence living is preferable to the other. That being the case, I honestly believe that if a poll were conducted of the world's six billion inhabitants a decided majority would vote for the superfluous life of "McWorld," a life in which they're worried about making enough to buy the latest C class or 3 series, as opposed to the one in which their driving concern is whether or not they are going to be able to eat dinner on a given evening. The fact the "need" for the latest gadget is contrived by marketing firms in New York rather than the yearning of our biology does not matter to me, and I would argue that it matters little to many others.
He talks about Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson as forces of "internal jihad" in America. I think Mr. Barber shares with them some of that conservative lust for a bygone era when times were simpler and life was easier. I still plan on reading Consumed. Hopefully the intervening ten years have given him a better perspective.
interesting, but a little preachy June 30, 2007
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
First of all, the cover art has been changed. Originally, it was a relatively prosaic cover, full of logos of religious symbols, corporate logos, and military equipment. The picture of the burka-clad lady sipping a Pepsi was undoubtedbly added after 9/11, to capitalize on world events. But the text has not been changed or revised, as far as I can tell....
On to the content. Almost half of the book is taken up by a description of "McWorld" (i.e. the multinational, comsumerist culture that would have us all drinking a Coke, going to McDonalds, wearing Nikes, etc., possibly to the detriment of local culture). Nothing I haven't really heard or read before.
Next, the author tries to describe "Jihad". (As an aside, although I am not a Muslim, I do know that Jihad is a specific Islamic term roughly meaning "struggle", but actually meaning different kinds of struggles, of which the violence that we hear about in the West is only one). In the book, the term "Jihad" is used to mean any opposition to "McWorld", or perhaps modernity or other cultures in general. I'm not sure that's appropriate; maybe another term, such as "neotribalism" (which actually is used in a few places in the book) might be more useful? Only a relatively short chapter talks about religion at all; it mostly tries to compare the Christian right (and far-right) in the US with the Islamic extremists.
A couple of chapters go over the "failure" of post-Communist Russia and East Germany; another describes the effects of "McWorld" on China and Japan. Also described in several places is the intersection of "McWorld" and "Jihad"; as "Jihadists" use the products and technologies of "McWorld" ,not only to propagate their ideas, but also as products for everyday living. (Maybe the new cover with the burka-wearing woman enjoying a Pepsi is more appropriate than I thought at first!)
According to the book, neither "McWorld" nor "Jihad" is a replacement for democracy. There are a number of social goals that are not met by either. Further, the current system of nation-states is no match for the power of the multinational companies; some sort of supra-national, global, democratic institution with power comparable to that of multinational capitalism. (Actually getting to that point, however, would require imposing democratic ideals on countries and communities that are now decidedly anti-democratic--this is not a task done overnight).
What I didn't like is that the book overestimates the power of "McWorld", portraying the multinational corporations worrying that some third-world kid is drinking tea rather than a Coke. Like all stereotypes, there is a kernel of truth in it, but that doesn't make it any less of a stereotype. The author plays favorites; the word "jihad" appears nowhere in the several pages on Hollywood domination of the movie industry in France; yet, right-wing American evangelicals, (rightly or wrongly) questioning changing societal values get dumped on the "Jihad" heap with the neo-Nazis and Islamic terrorists. The FCC gets dinged for not forcing a radio station for keeping its classical format (although setting formats wasn't, and isn't, a function of the FCC to begin with). And so on.
Then there's the out-and-out fingerwagging; the aside on (American) slavery seems to lacks any real tie-in to the theme of "McWorld and Jihad", but more like the author coming out and telling us how we should think. This is true to a lesser extent of the "Bowling Alone"-type material in the "Global Democracy" chapter. (It's a big step from leaving one's comfortable suburban home and joining a bowling league with one's fellow suburbanites, and forming a global government with people halfway around the world who believe in who-knows-what!)
There are also a number of lists; media mergers and top films (relevant, since it shows the domination of multinational over local media) and energy use per country (less so, since equality of energy usage could theoretically be imposed by a non-democratic global system as well as by a democratic one).
To his credit, the author doesn't present "McWorld" as an evil conspiracy, but more like a natural market force that really ought to be checked by some theoretical one-world government. The "Jihad" side, however, is more of a minefield of the author's personal biases and "Things-That-Must-Be-Defended/Derided-At-All Costs".
 The unity between religious fundamentalists and big business elites EXPOSED ! June 23, 2006
6 out of 12 found this review helpful
It's amazing how despite all the tragedies and wars, big business elitists are able to cash in on the damage while religious fundamentalists never get caught, much less held accountable. The idiots who show their hate of this book are from terrorist nations that have a knack of socializing poverty and terrorism while at the same time privatizing wealth. Despite all the big talk about winning the so-called war on terrorism, the ugly truth is wars have not taught us anything. If it weren't for Big Business funding Hitler, Hitler would have had a harder time killing the Jews. Sadly though, even after World War II ended, the Big Business elites that funded and continue to fund dictatorships like Hitler, Stalin, and the modern ones are not only not held accountable but often end up walking away as "heroes". If we're really going to win the war on terrorism and/or poverty, we're going to have to stop supporting big business elite and stop allowing our uber-corrupt politicians from exploiting peoples fears on terrorism even while maximizing poverty.
 An Important but Very Flawed Work on Socio-Economics April 3, 2006
12 out of 14 found this review helpful
I tried to embrace this book--I really did. It was tempting to want to have at last found a piece of academic writing that deftly encapsulates and explains this clash of titans: jihad and globalism. Barber's main title is, however, more tantalizing than explanatory. This book demonstrates the dangers of allegiance to dichotomies; there are other forces at work in society that grapple with the headline-stealing titans.
This is an important book at least insofar as it captures a growing sentiment among academics interested in the socio-economic forces that compel current events. It is not, therefore, an easy read for the layman (particularly the last part of the book) which is ironic given his call to grassroots citizen action.
Barber asserts--really insists with an uncomfortable brand of academic arrogance--in almost narrowly political overtones that the world is immersed in a battle of opposing ideologies: the corporate, amoral and homogenized one that really is without ideology and the local, or tribal, and rigidly moral and fragmented one that is part ideology, part myth-making.
Unfortunately, in his earnestness to construct and defend his convenient dichotomy, he conforms exceptions to his rule. The jihadists--whether ethnic hatemongers or terrorists--have for Barber retained some residue of moral dignity while the globalist--whether gullible, materialistic and indifferent consumers or manipulative, multinational executives--have altogether lost their moral compass.
His solution (which he fails to outline, thus making his work more of a polemic and manifesto rather than manual for change) is an activist citizenry fully appreciative of their need and ability to shore up the civil sector of modern societies. Here again Barber is remiss, revealing that writing from one's desk rather than the field has its limitations. He fails to acknowledge, for example, the extent to which the lack of a civic tradition in such nations as Russia and China impedes social progress of the sort he pines for. And the following further indicates his lack of awareness of Chinese cultural resiliency: "What is striking is that even here where a native culture might be thought to have its greatest chances against the children of the Western Enlightenment, McWorld seems irresistible."(190)
Aside from this concern, and his lack of concrete solutions and elusive, often inaccessible writing style, Barber tends to exaggerate the extent to which corporate influence is mitigated by both government and civic organizations, especially in the Western democracies. He is undeservedly far too pessimistic in this regard and fails to note the many ways in which a bygone American lacked a collective sense of civic duty. Moreover, his analysis is flawed, as I believe you will also discover, by his apparent aspirations to global citizenship. Nor, as other reviewers have noted, has he given due credit to the government and business sectors in creating a climate for a civic society to exist, must less flourish with some degree of autonomy. The symbolic assault on McDonald's is both tedious and unfair. While guilty of promoting unhealthy diets to some extent, it is a zealous stretch to accuse this and other multinationals of single handedly distorting the cultural landscape of developing nations. And even in the U.S., McDonald's has played a civic role via the Ronald McDonald House, it's management hiring practices and provisions for inner-city employment.
This book, perhaps like this review, could have been thought out more and condensed considerably. For a far better articulated review of this book see Gary Rosen's piece online from the journal First Things.
Provactative but lacking in substance. March 9, 2006
8 out of 12 found this review helpful
I read Barber's book in 1995, shortly after my return from my dissertation research in Indonesia. I was dismayed but what were clear errors in Barber's treatment of Indonesia. He talks about the marketing succes of Coke to sell the sweet syrupy beverage as a substitute to the more "native" tea. What he fails to see is for many if not most ethnic groups of Indonesia tea is served very sweet -- with what I hyperbolically refer to as "equal parts sugar and water." He also bemoan Indonesians taking up blue jeans in favor of saris. Saris? I know of no Indonesians who wear saris -- this is a garment better associated with India. Ok, I know these are perhaps trifiling errors. However, Barbers evidence is composed exclusively of little vignettes and reference like this. I do not know of the accuracy of his specific examples for other countries. However, if the problem he has with understanding the basic facts of Indonesian culture are replicated through all his examples, the argument he tries to support by them must be suspect.
That said, I found the book intriguing. I find the proposition that either the world will become a huge pave parking lot full of McDonald's Hard Rock Cafe's, and discos pumping MTV or it will be torn apart by attempts to assert local identity ludicrous. This idea of Barber's inspired me to write an article specificaly examine McDonald's in the Indonesian cultural landscape. In many important ways, McDonald's Indonesia is more Indonesian than it is anything else. And, it actively seeks to be so.
It came out shortly after the time I had Samual Huntington's Foreign Affairs article "The Clash of Civilizations" pointed out to me by my Indonesian Muslim interlocutors. I find Barber's argument interesting in regard to the Clash of Civilizations debate. Barber does not deal with either Bernard Lewis (who coined "Clash of Civilizations" or Huntington (who popularized it). However, I find in his work, the important corrective that the clash is not limited to Muslims but to all efforts to oppose global capitalism by emphasizing local identity. Also to the degree that there is such a clash, Barber's book can supply an understanding of its mechanism. Again, this was not Barber's point, but it can be drawn from his book.
With my critiques of this book, you might think that I discarded it shortly after reading it. I still have my original copy. I think that the book will make the reader think and if readers actually do that rather than accept it as gospel, then the book is very much worth the read. In fact, I will be assigning it as a test in course I will teach in the Fall of 2006.
Ron Lukens-Bull, PhD
Associate Professor of Anthropology
University of North Florida
|
|
|
