Understanding the book written by Thomas Friedman titled "The Lexus and the Olive Tree", current relationship between globalization and international terrorism is unconstructive and rather depressing. Furthermore, I completely concur with Mr. Friedman's interpretation of globalization with its backlash. Maintaining our geographic, historic, spiritual and linguistic expressions of whom we belong is an ultimate struggle against the technological revolution and modernization which globalization greatly offers. (Friedman, 2000) In addition, the opposed to globalization are indeed threatened by their loss of power and influence over their own valid territories. A response for such crippling factors is loosely organized international terrorism, whose leaders miserably use the religion of Islam as a uniting cause for their fight against globalization.
Thomas Friedman defines globalization as "the inexorable integration of markets, nation-states and technologies to a degree never witnessed before-in a way that is enabling individuals, corporations and nation-states to reach around the world farther, faster, deeper and cheaper than ever before, and in a way that is enabling the world to reach into individuals, corporations and nation-states farther, faster, deeper and cheaper than ever before."
(Friedman, 2000, 9) Globalization is the dominant international system whose main weapon is the free market capitalism; therefore it has intents of expanding the market worldwide. Globalization is global because all countries feel the effects of it, negative and positive, directly or indirectly. Globalization, as the enormous worldwide concept, exists thanks to the evolution of technology in our time, which is divided into "computerization, miniaturization, digitization, satellite communications, fiber optics and the Internet". (Friedman, 2000, 9) The democratization of communications enabled more and more people to communicate and learn about each other's lifestyles. This technology makes it possible to see graphic images from one end of the world to another, spread the messages and ideas through the...
Another narrow-minded American?
Don't get me wrong, I liked the essay, it was well-written and presented. But it was biased towards favouring American policy, and that religion and nationalist countries are the cause of anti-globalist movements. How do you define anti-globalist movements? Tarrifs and trade-barrier, as correctly mentioned in the essay. But the true anti-globaliser recently seems to be the USA herself! Steel-tarrifs, farm-subsidies, all these give inefficient industries an unfair advantage, rather than letting other countries, that could provide the service much better. There is a lot of sceptism towards globalisation in third world and US's recent moves might lead those countries to put up trade-barriers as well, and it is a step back! Furthermore, the Islam-religion states "accept all people of all religion and live in peace." Terrorism has recently been provoked by 1. the US putting a military base down in Saudi-Arabia without the consent of the people, and 2. Israel enslaving the Palestinian people, as they have done for the last 20 years or so, but this has been ignored by the western world. In addition when the author writes: The level of such struggle is highly present in all countries worldwide (except the States), I think there is a fair amount of examples that state the opposite. Take Bush's last election-fiasco for example.
10 out of 13 people found this comment useful.