According to Roy (2004, xi), “[g]lobalised Islam refers to the way in which the relationship of Muslims to Islam is reshaped by globalization, westernization, and the impact of living as a minority.” Roy (2004) defines global Muslims as those who have either settled in the West permanently or are trying to distance themselves from a local version of Islam by identifying with the worldwide Muslim community (the Ummah).

In studying Muslims in the West, one must take into account “the instances and places of reciprocal [historical] influence between the cultural constructs of the European and Muslim worlds” and the transcultural space created by this mutual influence in “the context of globalization, characterized by the mobility of cultures and religion” (Cesari 2004, 5). According to Cesari (2004), the Americanization or Europeanization of Islam cannot be separated from the space and time dimensions of global Islam, as well as its political crises. Cesari (2004) also posits that Islam should be examined as a process of the local, national, and international levels; it is the conglomerate production of cultural meaning and symbols. Hence, it is important to avoid the trap of essentializing Islam and Muslims based on assumptions on a single level, especially without considering Islam at all three levels.

All immigrants face challenges in their new countries. For Muslim immigrants or their offspring in the West, these challenges are heightened. How can Muslims successfully integrate without losing their rich, unique religious heritage?

“European Islam is connected with the stakes and political and cultural difficulties of the Muslim world, as demonstrated by September 11,” and key issues that are being debated about Muslims in the West such as pluralism, citizenship, and religious education cannot be limited to the national contexts of the West due to cultural globalization (Cesari 2007, 22). Although there is an interconnectedness of the Ummah, Western Muslims are not an exact reflection of issues elsewhere, since they are at the heart of religious and cultural developments connected to the Western context. Accordingly, cultural globalization has had an accelerating effect on the formation of a hybrid European or American Islam. This “hybrid” Islam is based on tolerance and respect for the other, which has been a product of Muslims living in the West (Cesari 2007, 23).

European Islam is a nascent phenomenon in that “the emergence of such an Islam does not imply the rediscovery of an Islam sui generis, but the invention of a new religious model, through the intensification of contacts among European Muslim communities, the confrontation of their uncertainties and the hybridisation of their practices” (Bougarel 2007, 20). This hybridi[z]ation is likely to grow stronger in the large cosmopolitan European cities as Muslims try to find solutions to their common problems, such as ethnic and religious discrimination, and requires a shared intellectual space where diverse communities can exchange ideas (Bougarel 2007). In its current form, European Islam “often encompasses phenomena that are quite distinct, or even largely opposed to one another” (Bougarel 2007, 1).

Pauly (2004) argues that a clash of identities takes place as a result of the establishment of minority communities in the West. Such clashes can be traced back to religious as well as broader cultural differences between the migrants and the majority populations, and integration can be a vehicle for bridging such identity gaps (Pauly 2004). Angenendt, Barret, Laurence, Peach, Smith, and Winter (2007) outline the integration strategies used by European states in recent years. These strategies have either generated mixed results or been criticized.

Dialogue with Muslim councils is one strategy that has been applied in Britain, Germany, and France – to mixed results, as the councils need to build youth participation, deliver tangible results effectively, and increase diverse participation.

Another strategy, primarily in Italy and Finland, has been a multicultural policy that promotes religious symbols. This approach encourages cultural differences and supports migrants in preserving their religious identities. Multiculturalism has its critics who claim that it promotes isolation rather than integration, all while creating economic disparities. In Britain, however, multicultural policy has fostered migrant social mobility in adults (no data on youth was available at the time of my research) (Angenendt et al. 2007).

In contrast to multiculturalism, France has attempted to transform migrants into French citizens first and Muslims second by diminishing their religious identities, specifically through a ban on religious symbols in schools. Similarly, in Germany headscarves were banned for teachers in certain states. Forced integration contracts and citizenship tests in countries such as Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Denmark require migrants to learn the native language and social norms. In general, such programs have been received negatively by Muslims, who view them as unwelcoming (Angenendt et al. 2007).

France is an interesting case of mixed approaches. Despite a tradition of harsh secularism, France also has proposals ensuring employers hire minorities – and a university actually started recruiting students using what the U.S. calls “affirmative action.”

In a similar vein, Britain and the Netherlands passed stricter anti-discrimination laws in an effort to extend equal opportunities to migrants. Spain, Germany, and the Netherlands have also attempted to teach Islam at schools.

Not all tensions in European Muslim communities are between immigrants and native citizens. According to Pauly (2004), Muslims in Europe suffer from a lack of political representation and cooperation between different communities. There are many divisions across heterogeneous ethnic, philosophical, and national boundaries. There are also clashes that emanate from countries of origin, such as the one between Turks and Kurds (Pauly 2004).

To create a Euro-Islamic identity at peace with the larger societies of their respective countries, instead of isolating themselves Muslims need to become active and get involved in all aspects of social life. There is no inherent conflict between such involvement and their faith or religious requirements (Ramadan 2004). Economic and political involvement is the way to a successful hybrid European Muslim identity that strikes a balance between the two extremes of total isolation from the larger society and abandonment of Islamic identity (Pauly 2004). Accordingly, Muslims should not be afraid to integrate into their European home lands. They should be able to blend their British, French, German, or American culture with their faith, shaping hybrid identities while enriching the cultures of their home countries.

In this respect, Gülen Movement (Hizmet) volunteers exemplify such an effort and could serve as an example for Muslims living in the West. In Germany, for instance, the Gülen Movement has worked on transforming the image of Muslims, focusing on reintegration of immigrant youth into the German education system. Furthermore, Hizmet has realized social engagement and dialogue with the German non-Muslim community by establishing cultural and dialogue centers to build bridges between cultures, all while offering a cosmopolitan and tolerant form of Islam. According to Hunt and Aslandogan (2007, 19-20), “[o]riginating in Turkey but becoming increasingly transnational, the [Hizmet] movement represents novel approaches to the relationship between faith and reason, peaceful co-existence in liberal democracies with religious diversity education, and spirituality.” As Yavuz (2013, 247) contends, the Gülen Movement “has the potential to be the beginning of religious Enlightenment in its Turkish and wider modern Islamic context where we are witnessing a new era of Muslim religious revival deeply embedded in modern processes of neoliberal market reforms and middle classes, open public spheres, democratic governance, modern education and technology-driven globalization.”

Moreover, Turkey’s membership in the European Union could have helped integrate Muslim communities living in Europe to their countries by buttressing the European Union’s credibility among Muslims. Given the current circumstances, this does not seem to be possible in the near future. Such an accession would mean redefining European identity as a more inclusive one. EU membership for Turkey would also help shape the evolving relationship between Islam and Christianity around the globe (Pauly 2004).

In sum, Muslims in the West face both challenges and opportunities in the countries in which they live. The challenges may emanate from cultural differences and identity clashes as well as the failed integration policies of the host countries. Nevertheless, Muslims living in the West can shape a brighter future both for themselves and the global Muslim community by becoming active contributors to their societies – and without any fear of losing their religious identities. There are many opportunities for Muslims living in the West to build bridges between the West and their homelands, as well as among the followers of different faiths. Embracing their host countries, while working as active contributors to society, is the key to building a peaceful future for all.

References

• Cesari, Jocelyne. 2004. When Islam and Democracy Meet: Muslims in Europe and in the United States. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Cesari, Jocelyne. 2007. “The Hybrid and Globalized Islam of Western Europe.” Portability and Exportability. 21.
• Hunt, Robert, and Yuksel Aslandogan. 2007. Muslim Citizens of the Globalized World. Kindle Edition.
• Roy, Olivier. 2004. Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah. Columbia University Press.
• Bougarel, Xavier. 2007. “Bosnian Islam as ‘European Islam’: Limits and Shifts of a Concept.” Islam in Europe. Diversity, Identity and Influence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Pauly Robert J. Jr. 2004. Islam in Europe: Integration or Marginalization? Aldershot. UK : Ashgate Publishing Limited.
• Ramadan, Tariq. 2004. Western Muslims and the Future of Islam. New York: Oxford UP.

Kasym lives with his grandson and daughter-in-law in the steppes. These steppes, native Kazakh land, can present challenges, particularly in winter. A harsh climate and specific geographic characteristics make life difficult. For those who are not born and raised there, things may be even harder. Daily life, work, travel, and other activities require struggles against nature’s routines. Kasym shepherds a herd of sheep on the steppes through winter and fights with the hardships of the season. On the other hand, some visiting hunters, equipped with advanced modern technology such as a vehicle, weapons, and a navigation tool, get lost; some even die.

Extreme cold weather and wild animals, mainly wolves, challenge the herd and the old man; they face fatal dangers. His grandson, Erali, having not heard from his grandfather for longer than expected takes off to search for Kasym. Although Erali and the old man do not seem to be on very good terms with each other, Erali’s efforts in looking for Kasym reveal his love towards his grandfather. Local folks, along with some rescuers, join Erali in his endeavor. Kasym is able to use his knowledge of the native land, where he spent all his life, to survive against the cold and the wolves’ attacks. Constantly moving, he manages to help a surviving hunter as well. Days later, just as his hopes are fading, Erali finds Kasym, who outwits nature while the visiting hunters lose their battle against the steppes.

Some critiques emphasize the parallels between Shal and Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea, about an old fisherman’s fight for a catch while fishing. This may be so on the surface as both plots weave an old man figure against nature. Both may convey a deeper message, though – the advantage of the native. Kasym’s refined local skills allow him to fight the great steppes, while a team of non-natives turn helpless. As a man of dala, the great openness, Kasym knows every trick the winter in the steppes will play on him and is ready to hit back. Kasym’s grandson, Erali, who helped initiate the rescue, may, on another level, be considered the heir to the local knowledge. Aware of the challenges in the steppes, despite his young age, Erali, a native too, is worried that the old man may be in danger.

Shal is a successful depiction of life in the dala, the great openness, of Kazakhstan. Stories such as Shal inspire thoughts on globalization and cultural identity. The artistic sphere reflects on global and local issues and provides insight into human experience. Globalization stands as one of the major issues affecting local cultures. As the world globalizes, it raises questions of a shared global culture versus local identity. A global culture comes into being through various social and cultural processes, sharing a worldview, language, opportunities, and even food (Bird – Stevens, 2003; Khondker, 2004). Cultural identity is defined by concepts of common history, and shared experiences, practices, and culture codes (Hall, 1996). Cultural identity, which may be shared by a nation, a people, or a community – as well as a diaspora – may provide people with the power for survival. It is alive and it is reshaped through new experiences (Fanon, 2007).

Many worry that the cultural identity of communities is threatened by globalization, since a global culture has been thought to be against the idea of local culture. Many questions have been put forward: Would globalization pose threats to local knowledge? Should the local be protected against globalization? Do global agreements respect local identities?

Financial gains as well as the social impacts of globalization have been the topics of many discussions and talks. Contemporary developments in internet technology and communication, through the outreach they provide, as well as improved transportation, seem to support globalization. Social media helps send messages around the globe in an instant. We are able to learn the news around the world with just a click. The globe “becomes flat” (Friedman, 2006), as multi-national companies turn borderless. Websites sell products to international customers.

Globalization, as threatening as it may sound to some, serves the common good in many respects. Smart phones, tablets, and other electronic devices accompany individuals around the clock, with apps constituting a globally shared environment where global and local characteristics interact. For instance, travelers around the globe are able to track international and local flights in an instant, no matter where they may be. International locations such as airports offer services available and known to travelers around the globe. Global aid organizations such as Kimse Yok Mu or Doctors without Borders reach those in need of assistance around the world. Policies about certain issues such as global warming cover millions, even billions, of people. Through global efforts to protect the environment, awareness is raised among many people. Global values such as human rights protect vast swaths of people (Castells, 2005). Global interfaith and intercultural dialogue efforts reach communities that are trying to avoid conflict. Various groups, communities, and nations may come to understand one another and resolve conflicts through global dialogue efforts. Different experiences are shared by the global community.

At the same time, what we consider global may help define its opposite, the local. Tomlinson’s (2003) approach to globalization and cultural identity brings along a broader lens through which to view globalization and identity. Contrary to perceiving globalization as the destroyer of cultural identity, Tomlinson puts forward globalization to generate identity. People may tend to identify with their own community the most in the event of globalization; their shared values, sense of space, and cultural identity empower continuity (Widdis, 2006). In a sense, awareness of globalization brings about awareness of local cultural identity. As in Thai educational reform (Jungck – Kajornsin, 2003), local wisdom is brought back to provide a larger living arena for generations to come. Local wisdom lives on as gleaned from a cultural existence in a local surrounding. On another level, Dupuis (2014) looked into cultural management issues between Canadian and French environments. What he concluded may be valid for localities around the globe. He emphasized the differences in local cultures and the variability of interaction between any global force and local elements. Thus, global contribution may rely on local wisdom.

In 1984, Kundera wrote in The Tragedy of Central Europe that the identity owned by a people is reflected in its culture and the culture becomes an increasingly-owned value for people if their shared identity is threatened. When global activities threaten local identity, it will be protected and emphasized more. The impact of globalization on local elements deserves longitudinal investigation. Yet, today, whenever there is some discussion of globalization, locality is invariably involved and the local elements affected by global activities are on the agenda of those interested.

Similarly, European Union regulations, when evaluated as documents with global characteristics, are almost always mentioned along with respect for local elements. EU legislation ensures respect for locality. Tomlinson (2003) stated that cultural identity, which will not be easily shaken by globalization, is a powerful dimension of community life. Global activities, instead of threatening, may be highlighting the local identities that represent various forms of belonging – belonging to a land, belonging in a particular culture, or belonging to a community or group. For instance, there is no doubt that locals seem to have an advantage in their own territories when extreme locations such as deserts, poles, or glaciers are considered. Populations living in or around these territories possess localized knowledge, experience, and familiarity, all of which define their identities. It would take a foreigner, no matter how well equipped, years to attain and master such knowledge.

The interaction between globalization and local elements may be viewed from even more diverse angles. For instance, although conflict on the international level is more visible (than interdependence), global activities may indicate a dimension of interdependence (Pevehouse, 2004) between the local and the global, similar to the interdependence among states in the US or the interdependence among EU countries. In Wittgenstein’s words, interdependence is very much a part of the natural context:

“Just as we cannot think of spatial objects at all apart from space, or temporal objects apart from time, so we cannot think of any object apart from the possibility of its connection with other things.”

Various considerations of globalization and locality breed new concepts such as glocalization and grobalization. Glocalization refers to the interaction between the global and the local, with distinct outcomes in some geographic regions (Ritzer, 2003). Singapore may be one example where glocalization processes prevailed. Grobalization, on the other hand, is about growth and globalization concerns in a more corporate sense. Both glocalization and grobalization, and related concepts of hybridity and creolization, are worth further appreciation. They are hereby mentioned solely for the sake of suggestion.

Thus, in the Shal, Kasym’s story would have taken a different course if the visiting hunters had collaborated with him, the native. Shal offers a beautifully painted picture of struggles for survival on a harsh land where local knowledge, wisdom, and expertise are invaluable and global information may mostly be short of depth.

References

• Bird, A., – Stevens, M. J. (2003). Toward an emergent global culture and the effects of globalization on obsolescing national cultures. Journal of International Management, 9(4), 395-407.
• Castells, M. (2010). Globalisation and identity. Quaderns de la Mediterrania, (5), 183-189.
• Dupuis, J. P. (2014). New approaches in cross-cultural management research The importance of context and meaning in the perception of management styles. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 14(1), 67-84.
• Fanon, F. (2007). The wretched of the earth. Grove Press.
• Friedman, T. L. (2006). The world is flat [updated and expanded]: A brief history of the twenty-first century. Macmillan.
• Hall, S. (1996). Cultural identity and cinematic representation. Black British cultural studies: A reader, 210-222.
• Jungck, S., – Kajornsin, B. (2003). Thai wisdom” and glocalization: Negotiating the global and the local in Thailand’s national education reform. Local meanings, global schooling: Anthropology and world culture theory, 27-49.
• Khondker, H. H. (2004). Globalization to Glocalization: Evolution of a Sociological Concept. Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore.
• Kundera, M. (1984). The tragedy of central Europe. The New York Review of Books, 31(7), 33-38.
• Pevehouse, J. C. (2004). Interdependence theory and the measurement of international conflict. Journal of Politics, 66(1), 247-266.
• Ritzer, G. (2003). Rethinking globalization: Glocalization/grobalization and something/nothing. Sociological theory, 21(3), 193-209.
• Widdis, R. W. (2006). Globalization, Glocalization and the Canadian West as Region: A Geographer’s View. Acadiensis, 129-137.
• http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2182115/

The availability of CNN worldwide (media), the growth in international organizations (political), and McDonald’s (economic and cultural) illustrate the diverse factors driving globalization. In addition, it is important to recognize that globalization, as an issue, is linked to capitalism’s triumph in the Cold War. The United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, pointed out that its opponents see globalization as “an ideology of predatory capitalism.”²

Hardt and Negri: Empire

Michael Hardt is a professor of literature at Duke University, and Antonio Negri is currently an inmate at Rebibbia Prison, Rome.³ Their book Empire, a post-Marxist attempt to analyze capitalism/globalism proposes the following simple thesis: “Globalization is a symptom of the new Empire. The new Empire is a result of the demise of the sovereignty of the nation state. However, ‘throughout the contemporary transformations, political controls, state functions, and regulatory mechanisms have continued to rule the realm of economic and social production and exchange. Our basic hypothesis is that sovereignty has taken a new form, composed of a series of national and supranational organisms united under a single logic of rule. This new global form of sovereignty is what we call Empire’…⁴ As national sovereignty declines, however, ‘Empire’ emerges. Empire, or globalization, is the latest strategy of the wealthy and powerful to control the weak and powerless. It has a number of advantages over the traditional nation state that it has displaced. First, it has no boundaries. Second, it is attempting to create this myth that it is simply the logical expression of certain economic laws. Third, it wants to shape every aspect of human life. And finally, it shelters behind the rhetoric of peace.”⁵

The study makes much of the decline of state sovereignty. It documents, with some care, the distinctive set of historical and social conditions that gave birth to the idea that a particular people within a particular boundary are sovereign over their actions. It notes that this was often a device that protected tyranny, and that the European Enlightenment had strong tendencies toward racism and colonialism.

Where traditional national sovereignty was grounded in a “transcendent” ruler (e.g., the king over his people), the Empire uses capital to operate on the plane of immanence “through relays and networks of relationships of domination, without reliance on a transcendent center of power…. In the passage of sovereignty toward the plane of immanence, the collapse of boundaries has taken place within each national context and on a global scale.”⁶ Capitalism is not simply about power over resources; it is also about the relationship of religion and ethics to economic life.

The danger in this debate about globalization is that we confine our reflections to the political left (i.e., those with socialist sympathies) and the political right (i.e., those with capitalist sympathies). To prevent this, we turn to Said Nursi. If I am right in stressing the religious factors at the heart of capitalism and globalization, we should expect to learn something from Nursi.

Four Themes in Said Nursi

It is dangerous to apply the ideas of great thinkers to problems that they did not experience. Said Nursi (1877-1960) experienced the concluding years of the Ottoman Caliphate, the First World War, and the establishment of the aggressively secular Republic of Turkey (1923). He responded to modernity’s challenge to belief with the Risale-i Nur (the Treatise of Light).

Although he does not mention globalization, his work contains four relevant themes. The first of these is that it is appropriate to build bridges between Western scientific culture and the Islamic world. Nursi believed that the best of modernity is compatible with and anticipated in Islamic thought. For example, he writes: “Things like the airplane, electricity, railways, and the telegraph have come into existence as wonders of science and technology as the result of humanity’s progress in science and industry. Surely the All-Wise Qur’an, which addresses all of humanity, does not neglect these. Indeed, it has not neglected them.”⁷

He argues that the Qur’an anticipates such technological advances. This enthusiasm for scientific achievement underpins his “natural theology” (i.e., the world itself provides good and decisive arguments for God’s Existence). After discussing various scientific disciplines, he concludes: “Through the certain testimony of hundreds of sciences like these, the universe has been adorned with innumerable instances of wisdom, purposes, and beneficial things within a faultless, perfect order. And the order and wisdom given through that wondrous, all-encompassing wisdom to the totality of the universe have been included in small measure in seeds and in the tiniest living creatures. It is clear and self-evident that aims, purposes, in-stances of wisdom, and benefits can only be followed through choice, will, intention, and volition, not through any other way. Just as they could not be the work of unconscious causes and Nature, which lack will, choice, and purpose, so too they could not interfere in them.”⁸

Nursi saw science as part of God’s intended purpose for humanity: “The miracles of the other prophets all indicate a wonder of human art or craft, and Adam’s miracle indicates in concise form, besides the fundamentals of those crafts, the index of the sciences and branches of knowl-edge, and of the wonders and perfections, and urges humanity toward them.”⁹

His confidence that Islam endorses modern-ity’s technological dynamic, a major feature of globalization, is reflected in this vision of the future. Writing about Nursi, one author states: “Indeed, as we shall see when examining the [Damascus] Sermon, Bediuzzaman [Nursi] predicted that, according to all the signs, Islam and Islamic–or, true–civilization would prevail in the future, and that the majority of mankind would accept and join the religion of Islam. He said: ‘In the future when reason, science and technology hold sway, that will surely be the time the Qur’an will gain ascendancy, which relies on rational proofs and makes the reason confirm its pronouncements.’”¹⁰ In other words, the truth of the Qur’an will be recognized when reason, science, and technology hold sway in the world.

Many who are sympathetic to religion tend to see modernity, as well as the growth of technology and globalization, as evils to be opposed. However, Nursi argues that the achievements of science, modernity, communication, and globalization need to be recognized as representing the best of the human spirit and humanity’s creativity. In addition, they are made possible by the God-designed order of the universe.

Themes two to four are far more critical. The second theme is that society must accommodate in a just way the inequalities of wealth. While Nursi assumes that some inequality is inevitable, he maintains the need for balance:

“. . . just as the source of mankind’s revolutions is one phrase, so another phrase is the origin of all immorality. First Phrase: ‘So long as I’m full, what is it to me if others die of hunger.’ Second Phrase: ‘You work so that I can eat.’ Yes, the upper and lower classes in human society, that is, the rich and the poor, live at peace when in equilibrium. The basis of that equilibrium is compassion and kindness in the upper classes, and respect and obedience in the lower classes. Now, the first phrase has incited the upper classes to practice oppression, immorality, and mercilessness. And just as the second has driven the lower classes to hatred, envy, and to contend the upper classes, and has negated human tranquility for several centuries, so too this century, as the result of the struggle between capital and labor, it has been the cause of the momentous events of Europe well-known by all. Thus, together with all its societies for good works, all its establishments for the teaching of ethics, all its severe discipline and regulations, it could not reconcile these two classes of humanity, nor could it heal the two fearsome wounds in human life. The Qur’an, how-ever, eradicates the first phrase with its injunction to pay zakat, and heals it. While it uproots the second phrase with its prohibition on usury and interest, and cures that. Indeed, the Qur’anic verse stands at the door of the world and declares usury and interest to be forbidden. It reads out its decree to mankind, saying: ‘In order to close the door of strife, close the door of usury and interest!’ It forbids its students to enter it.”¹¹

There are two strategies for balancing inequal-ity: obligatory charity, which falls heavier on the rich, and forbidding usury. Implied in this is the fact that economic globalization becomes problematic when inequality is not managed. Some nations are fortunate and benefit from globalization, while others struggle with it. Nursi’s proposal has much to commend it: fortunate nations are obliged to help unfortunate ones, and IMF loans should not require a prohibitive repayment schedule. Also, debt cancellation is appropriate, given the detrimental contracts negotiated in the mid-1970s by Western financial institutions. The overall point is that inequality needs to be managed with considerable care.

The third theme is that all wealth and property ultimately should be entrusted to God. Nursi speaks of a king with two subjects. One allows the king to hold the property in trust; the other insists on sole ownership. The first subject experiences positive results; the second one eventually becomes an object of pity. According to Nursi: “Transient property becomes everlasting. For this waning life, when given to the Eternal and Self-Subsistent Lord of Glory and spent for His sake, it will be transmuted into eternity. It will yield eternal fruits. The moments of one’s life will apparently vanish and rot like kernels and seeds. But then the flowers of blessedness and auspiciousness will open and bloom in the realm of eternity, and each will also present a luminous and reassuring aspect in the Intermediate Realm.”¹²

This fundamental religious insight should shape our view of globalization. As life is transitory, we can see possessions as ends in themselves or as a means to serve God’s purposes. In the latter case, we seek to make globalization feed the hungry, educate the ignorant, bring hope to the hopeless, and so on by entrusting what we have to God.

The fourth theme is that not all of the West’s achievements should be seen as part of the march of progress. He has harsh words for uncritical supporters of European progress, especially when it is at the cost of religion: “O miserable pseudo-patriot who fervently encourages Muslims to embrace this world and forcibly drives them to European industry and progress! Beware, do not let the bonds with which certain members of this nation are tied to religion be broken! If thus, foolishly, blindly imitating and crushed under foot, their bonds with religion are broken those irreligious people will become as harmful for the life of society as fatal poison.”¹³ The meaning is clear: Together with the third theme, globalization should not become the goal in itself, but rather should serve a vision of social organization that allows humanity’s spiritual dimension to grow and develop.

Concluding Reflections

Unlike the entrenched positions of Hardt and Negri, Nursi offers a far more nuanced approach. To interpret capitalism simply as the tool of the powerful to retain control of as much wealth as possible distorts reality. Capitalism has its roots in certain religious dispositions and has generated vast wealth. It offers many dangers as well as many possibilities.

This is also true of globalization. Nursi certainly would recognize globalization’s technological and scientific underpinning as good. However, he also would want to make sure that globalization works for the good by creating strong safeguards against the vast inequality engendered by so much wealth. I believe that he would have strongly supported the debt-cancellation campaign and agreed that the world’s economic life is intended to serve humanity’s spiritual vision. Generating wealth for itself is madness; generating wealth so that all people can live full God-directed lives is a vision. Globalization might make the latter possible, and all of us should work toward that end.

* Ian Markham is Dean of Hartford Seminary, Hartford, Connecticut.

Footnotes

1. Robertson, R., “Globalization and the Future of ‘Traditional Religion,” in God and Globalization, eds. Max L. Stackhouse with Peter J. Paris, Harrisburg, PA, Trinity Press International: 2000, Vol. I, pp. 53-54.
2. As quoted in ibid., Vol. I, p. 5.
3. A writer, professor at the University of Padua and Marxist political activist, Negri was arrested on 7 April 1979 on the charge of “armed insurrection against the powers of the State.” Acquitted and released after 4 years in jail, he fled to France to avoid re-imprisonment. He returned to Italy in 1997, turned himself in, and received a 13-year sentence. (http://www.notbored.org/negri.html.)
4. Hardt, M., Negri, A., Empire, Harvard University Press: 2000, p. xii.
5. Ibid., pp. xiv-xv.
6. Ibid., pp. 326-32.
7. Nursi, S., The Second Station of the Twentieth Word, The Words, Sozler Publications, Istanbul: 2002
8. Ibid., 3:408.
9. Ibid., 1:272.
10. Sukran Vahide, Bediuzzaman Said Nursi, Sozler Publications, Istanbul: 1992, p. 90.
11. Nursi, S., The Words, Sozler Publications, Istanbul: 2002, p.421.
12. Ibid., 1:38.
13. Ibid., 3:168.

Globalization or Westernization?

As the mere terminology surrounding the debate has led to a considerable amount of confusion and misunderstanding, we need to define our terms. Globalization is the spread and exchange of people, goods, and ideas across the globe. Characteristically, it is directly associated with change, or transformation, modernity, and an increasingly interdependent relationship between different regions of the world. “Globalization is an aspect of human life that has always been there since the beginning of humanity. It corresponds with the natural human instinct and man’s tendency towards being a ‘social animal.’ It is the tendency with which God has created man to live on exchanging his sources and experiences with others around him, in order to achieve and realize the best chances of life.” (1)

However, globalization is frequently associated with the liberal classical economic theory, and since the mid-1970s with neo-liberalism, which has its roots in the classical economic theory. More specifically, globalization is considered a reflection of the classical economic theory’s principle of comparative advantage, which promotes an open economic system and free trade in order to achieve and realize the best chances of life.

Although the process of globalization has been linked with concepts of comparative advantage, free trade, and open economy, its origins can be traced to a time long before such ideas appeared. In order to develop a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of the so called “Islam-globalization” debate, it is critical to distinguish between the process of globalization in its original sense and such relatively more contemporary processes, like Westernization, that are masked as globalization and yet are fundamentally different.

“Globalization targets the narrowing of the gaps separating different communities. This is done by exchanging benefits in all aspects of life — economic, social, scientific, and political governance. That is, they exchange information, understand each other’s values and codes of ethics and build a common ground.” (2) In contrast, Westernization does not consider such an understanding or building of such common ground to be worthwhile enterprises. Globalization is a process in which “the whole world becomes like a small village, where the less advanced communities can develop their capacities” and that “tends to be a two-way street process, which makes it possible for each community to take as well as to give.” (3) Westernization, on the other hand, tends to be a one-way street, meaning that one region attempts to dominate and control other regions in the name of globalization. Moreover, while globalization occurs through the free will of different communities, Westernization is characteristically imposed upon other regions.

Islam’s role

Having clarified the difference between globalization and Westernization, the Islam-globalization debate can be assessed more accurately. Islam is not anti-globalization (or modernity, which is considered to be a by-product of globalization) in its original sense, but Muslims do have a problem with Westernization. “Although Westernization of society is condemned, modernization as such is not. Science and technology are accepted, but they are to be subordinated to Islamic belief and values in order to guard against the Westernization and secularization of Muslim society.” (4) Based upon historical precedence and contemporary evidence, Islam clearly embraces globalization in its original form, which is based upon free-will and not upon the aggressive imposition of the West upon the East.

First of all, it is important to note that Islam orders people to cooperate, to be helpful to one another according to goodness and piety, and not to be helpful in evil and malice (Qur’an 5:2). This principle is fully endorsed by Prophet Muhammad on the local level, regardless if your neighbor is a Muslim or not. Surely this principle can be extended into the international level, where a neighboring country can be defined as any country that has normal economic and political relations with the Islamic world.(5)

Other factors illustrate Islam’s acceptance and predominant role in the process of globalization. “For several centuries, Arabic was the world’s leading language in sciences. Muslims made important advances in mathematics, astronomy and medicine — a legacy from which European scholars derived great benefit,” and which led to the Renaissance. (6) Globalization is not only a Western phenomenon, for “the agents of globalization are neither European nor exclusively Western, nor are they necessarily linked to Western dominance. Indeed, Europe would have been a lot poorer — economically, culturally, and scientifically — had it resisted the globalization of mathematics, science, and technology [from the East]…”(7)

We have to differentiate between the gifts of globalization and the products of Westernization. More specifically, the Islam-globalization debate in itself is built upon a number of mistaken diagnoses that misconstrue Islam’s place in the globalized world — one that has been quite productive in the past and has the potential to be productive in the future. The misguided assumption that Islam opposes globalization and modernization is dangerous, because it could potentially result in the loss of Islam’s significant contributions to the rest of the world.

Muslim attitudes toward Westernization

The Muslim world’s reaction to Westernization, and the West’s emergence as the dominant force transforming the world, must be assessed. “It is similar to the emergence of the Arab Muslims as a major world power in the seventh and eighth centuries…”(8) It is important to note that “the Muslim weakness at the end of the eighteenth century coincided with the rise of an entirely different type of civilization in the West, and this time the Muslim world would find it far more difficult to meet the challenge.”(9) In the past, Muslim communities were able to revitalize Islam’s role and power in the world. However, the impact of Westernization was an unprecedented experience that significantly challenged Islam and created a bi-polar dichotomy that separated the West from the rest — and specifically from Islam.

From a historical perspective, Westernization minimized Islam’s role and made it dependent upon the Western way of doing things. “The Islamic world has been convulsed by the modernization process. Instead of being one of the leaders of world civilization, Islamdom was quickly and permanently reduced to a dependent bloc by European powers.”(10) As a result, resentment toward the West emerged. Muslims questioned whether they would have to accept Western-style modernization or be deemed as being anti-globalization. “From this point, a growing number of Muslims would wrestle with these questions, and their attempts to put Muslim history back on the straight path would sometimes appear desperate and even despairing. The suicide bomber — an almost unparalleled phenomenon in Islamic history — shows that some Muslims are convinced that they are pitted against hopeless odds.”(11)

The emergence and rise of extremism can be directly attributed to the resulting resentment toward the Western style of globalization — a one-way process that does not strive to create a common ground between the West and other regions, and hence the desire and perceived need to pursue religious revivalism. However, we should realize that violence and extremism are not exclusively Islamic phenomena. “The Western media often gives the impression that the embattled and occasionally violent form of religiosity known as fundamentalism is a purely Islamic phenomenon. This is not the case. Fundamentalism is a global fact and has surfaced in every major faith in response to the problems of our modernity.”(12)

“For Islamic society, the underlying concerns regarding globalization are: how to protect a unique heritage in the face of global pressure; to uphold religious traditions; to preserve linguistic purity; to defend social institutions; and ultimately, to maintain a viable identity in the midst of a rapidly changing global environment.”(13) According to Islam, complete submission to God is the first and foremost priority for all Muslims. Anything that undermines Islamic principles is considered a threat to Islam’s longevity and power in the world. More importantly, we should be aware of the fact that despite the Islam-West bi-polarization, Islam is rapidly becoming a global phenomenon that transcends the boundaries that once separated the West from the rest.

Global Islam: The growing phenomenon and implications for the future

Islam is the second largest religion and the fastest growing religion in the world. Islam began to spread in Arabia around the year 610 A.D. when Prophet Muhammad began receiving revelations from God through Archangel Gabriel, sharing with others what he had been told. Today, Islam is a global phenomenon represented by Muslims across the world. “Fifteen million Muslims reside in Europe, and seven to eight million in the United States. There are now about a thousand mosques each in Germany and France, and five hundred in the United Kingdom.”(14) One factor that may explain the rapid spread of Islam is the process of globalization itself.

Islam’s future depends upon its ability to wed Western-style modernism with Islamic principles, or, in other words, whether it can develop an Islamic-style modernism. The challenge is to engage in modernity without sacrificing Muslim values or undermining Islamic principles. “As we are only slowly realizing, Islam is truly a world religion, increasingly visible in Europe and the United States as well as Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.”(15) It is significant for the future of Islam that “the capitals and major cities of Islam are not only Cairo, Istanbul, Mecca, but equally Paris, London, New York.”(16)

Given that Islam has become a global phenomenon, it is increasingly important that its principles are respected and not made irrelevant in the modern world. “All religious people in any age have to make their traditions address the challenge of their particular modernity…”(17) Rather than provoking the bi-polarization of the world, separating Islamic values from Western values, the goal of globalization is to develop an understanding of each other’s values and codes of ethics and to establish a common ground. Establishing a common ground is vital for ensuring the progress of globalization and allowing the world to reach its full potential. Modernization and globalization need to respect the identities of all regions and respect religion as a natural necessity for humanity.

Conclusion

The struggle for religion to remain relevant in the world is common to all religions at some point in history. Much of the literature surrounding the current Islam-globalization debate provides an inadequate and fragmented view of religion’s role in the process of globalization. Secularization, which is promoted in the current forms of globalization, is a new concept. In fact, based upon historical precedence, religion has played a key role in contributing to globalization and, more specifically, Islam has had a predominant role. The challenge for the future of a globalized world, and not just for Islam, is to be helpful to one another according to goodness and piety, and not to be helpful in evil and malice (Qur’an 5:2).

This article is available in Romanian in the following link: http://webhostinggeeks.com/science/article-fountainmagazine-rm

Footnotes

1. www.IslamOnline.com.
2. www.IslamOnline.com.
3. www.IslamOnline.com.
4. John Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, 3d ed. (Oxford University Press, 1998), 165.
5. Choudhury, www.Islamic-finance.net.
6. Hardy, http://news.bbc.co.uk.
7. Sen, www.prospect.org.
8. Karen Armstrong, Islam: A Short History, (Modern Library: 2002), 141.
9. Ibid., 138.
10. Ibid.,
11. 146.
12. Ibid., 153.
13. Ibid., 164.
14. Dr. Ahmed Kamal Aboulmagd, The Middle East Times,
15. Armstrong, Islam, 176.
16. Esposito, Islam, xvi.
17. Ibid, 203.
18. Armstrong, Islam, 164.

Enron in only the poster boy for the type of greed running rampant in today’s multinational corporate world. Despite the rhetoric spilling over the airwaves of the world media, the truth cannot stay hidden for very long in this age of information. The world’s current level of violence is tied directly to the greed of such corporations and so-called leaders who care nothing for the people’s general welfare. They have sold their souls, as the cliché goes, joined hands with Satan, and are ready to ride off into the sunset.

I am not referring to any particular country, people or hemisphere. The greed that we see today exists among all races, religions, and nations. Granted, some may be guiltier than others, especially in light of current world events, but the evil force of greed does not discriminate. Satan has used greed to dupe many people, even Muslims. As Abdullah Yusuf Ali comments in his Qur’anic translation: What an evil choice he makes in committing treason against his own Benefactor (Allah) by going after the petty baubles of this world’s wealth of fleeting gains. How eloquent and true. Greed is nothing but selling our fate in the akhirah (the Hereafter) for this world’s temporary cheap thrills “ often at a tremendous expense to others.

Some facts you should know

So just how bad has it gotten? To what degree has greed enveloped the entire world? The following provides a shocking glimpse:

– In a statement by the Institute for Policy Studies, the group said that 497 billionaires registered a whopping collective wealth of 1.54 trillion dollars. This is way above the combined gross national products of all the nations of sub-Saharan Africa, which stands at only 929.3 billion dollars, or those of the oil-rich regions of the Middle East and North Africa 1.34 trillion dollars.1

– This collective wealth of the 497 is also greater than the combined incomes of the poorest half of humanity, says IPS.2

– Last week, the U.S. government announced that it was building the biggest-ever war machine. Military spending will rise to $379 billion, of which $50 billion will pay for its ˜war on terrorism.’3

– The wealth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans grew an average $1.44 billion each from 1997-2000, for an average daily increase in wealth of $1,920,000 per person ($240,000 per hour, or 46,602 times the U.S. minimum wage).4

– Funds in the hands of U.S. money managers grew from $1.9 trillion in 1980 to $17 trillion in 2000. While those funds were under the control of fiduciaries (half the funds are due to tax incentives), the pay gap between top executives and production workers in the 362 largest U.S. companies soared from 42:1 in 1980 to 475:1 in 1999.5

– The financial wealth of the top one percent of U.S. households now exceeds the combined household financial wealth of the bottom 95 percent.6

– The top fifth of U.S. households claims 49.2 percent of national income while the bottom fifth gets by on 3.6 percent.7

Of course, these all refer to the U.S. However, the U.S. and the western world are not alone in being the culprits of such distorted wealth distribution and inequality. For example,

– In Indonesia, 61.7 percent of the stock market’s value is held by that nation’s fifteen richest families. The comparable figure for the Philippines is 55.1 percent and 55.3 percent for Thailand.8

The impact of such greed is devastating for the rest of the world. Consider these facts:9

– Eighty countries have per capita incomes lower than a decade ago. Sixty countries have grown steadily poorer since 1980.

– In 1960, the income gap between the fifth of the world’s people living in the richest countries and the fifth in the poorest countries was 30:1. By 1990, the gap had widened to 60:1. By 1998, it had surged to 74:1.

– From 1995 to 1999, the world’s 200 wealthiest people doubled their net worth to $1,000 billion.

– Three billion people presently live on $2 or less per day, while 1.3 billion of those get by on $1 or less per day. With the global population expanding by 80 million each year, World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn cautions that unless we address the challenge of inclusion, 30 years hence we may have 5 billion people living on $2 or less per day.

– Two billion people suffer from malnutrition, including 55 million in industrial countries. Thus, in 3 decades, neoliberal-style globalization could create a world where 3.7 billion people suffer from malnutrition.

– The UNDP’s assessment: Development that perpetuates today’s inequalities is neither sustainable nor worth sustaining.

Although the above facts offer just a glimpse of the big picture, it is quite clear that the current policies of nations and their corporate entities are destructive, oppressive, and barriers to peace and justice. Such policies are making a select few rich beyond comprehension while the vast majority either barely survives or literally starves. This is our world’s hard and cold reality “ a reality that goes largely unchecked even among the educated masses of the developed world. Unfortunately, those same educated masses seem content to be brainwashed by a corporate-controlled media that tells them next to nothing about the world’s true condition. According to those who control information, people are on a need-to-know basis, and most of what is truly important the people simply do not need to know!

A worldwide epidemic

This is truly a worldwide epidemic, for it can be found in the third world as much as (if not more than) the developed world. It is a problem, however, that can be addressed only at its roots. While living in both the U.S. and Southeast Asia, I have learned that these problems all stem from the same place. The appearances (e.g., people, cultures, and religions) may be different, but ultimately everything that ails us has the same root causes, as mentioned in the Qur’an. Greed is greed, whether it is that of Enron or some other corrupt entity somewhere else. It may look different and the people may speak a different language, but the ailment is the same, because underlying it all are the same diseases of the heart. This is precisely why the Qur’an is for humanity “ because we have so many fundamentals in common with our fellow human beings.

All of us are capable of harboring some of these booby traps of the soul (e.g., greed, injustice, envy, and hatred). This is why we cannot point fingers at one nation, person, or corporation. The diseases of the heart are killers, and they are killing, starving, and oppressing millions of innocent people. Thus we have to deal with the sickness’ cause, not just its symptoms. More war and destruction may eliminate some of the culprits, but it certainly will not rid the world of the problem, which is, ultimately, sickened human hearts feeding on ignorance.

Globalization

We must be wise at such times and seek out wisdom, not just information as to how the world works. Globalization, which is actually just a fancy innocuous-sounding term for the westernization and materialization of the entire planet, is not in most people’s best interests. In fact, some less well-known world leaders have been brave enough to acknowledge this. Malaysian prime minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamed has consistently spoken out against the dangers of globalization in its current guise. He considers it to be nothing more than the developed nations leveraging its huge capital advantages in order to exploit developing and underdeveloped nations.

By lining the pockets of weak, corrupt government leaders, multinational corporations are free to wreak havoc on the people, economies, and lands of weaker nations. Dr. Mahathir has said that capital must be equalized first if the current form of globalization is to have a truly equalizing effect on all nations’ economies. Developing countries must be protected and their own economies nurtured until they can compete on an even playing field. However, this is far from the case today. Thus, globalization in its current form allows developed nations to strip developing nations of their resources while spreading a culture of consumerism and materialism through their huge multinational corporate media and advertising machines.

A Qur’anic perspective

To further understand greed from a Qur’anic perspective, we should understand why God banned usury: Those who devour usury will not stand, except as stands one whom the Evil One has driven to madness by his touch (2:275). When referring to this verse in his Tafsir al-Qur’an, Daryabi says: According to the socialist writers of today, money is lent by them who have abundance and returns to them to increase that abundance, the increase being the unpaid dues of labor, which is the only source of wealth “ the rich are thus made richer and the poor poorer, by every fresh act of taking interest, and the stability of social organism is disturbed. This analysis is perfectly consistent with the world economy today. Look around “ interest is everywhere, wealth is in the hands of a few, and the gap between rich and poor is growing ever wider. The result? The social organism is grossly disturbed.

This is why the Book is called Al-Qur’an al-Hakim (the wise Qur’an). It is a book full of wisdom. The evils of usury, greed, and their ugly companions are forces that have destroyed entire peoples throughout history. They are problems that humanity cannot shake, especially when we turn away from the Creator’s wisdom and guidance.

Our world’s current course, with the haves and the have nots growing apart at an exponential rate, cannot be sustained. Somewhere, somehow, and at some point there will be a monumental adjustment. A world economic system that is so unequal, so unjust, and so divisive cannot last for long. The powers-that-be currently controlling the world economy are deluded if they think that they can continue their corrupt policies while 95 percent of the world sits back and does nothing. Sooner or later, it will come to a crashing halt.

Islam provides a straightforward solution to this problem. Yet history has proven that until humanity can tackle the evil that lies within each person, we will never address the evils around us effectively. The solution is called fairness (justice) and cooperation. In our present capitalist-dominated world, such terms seem utopian. Unbridled competition is the name of the game and, moreover, there is no indication that this will change any time soon. Such over-competitiveness seeps into every aspect of life until entire societies distrust one another, become antisocial, and are completely dysfunctional from a social perspective. This is already the case in much of the western world.

Conclusion

Islam encourages people to come together, rely on one another, and commune. It already has the built-in, well-formulated systems to do it in an inclusive way one that is neither elitist nor harsh. Islam says that when people unite to build and do good works out of a desire to achieve goodness for all and His approval, they will earn His pleasure. When humanity is granted God’s succor, the sky is the limit in terms of what can be accomplished. The glorious history of Islamic civilization proves this.

This is how the Prophet erected the perfect society in seventh-century Madinah. In that society, people worked, lived, and worshipped together. Muslims, non-Muslims, and different peoples and tribes co-existed peacefully, all agreeing to live under one leader in a perfectly just system. That leader was a man who desired nothing for himself and only the best for his fellow believers and neighbors. Until those with envy and hatred in their hearts spoiled the peace, Madinah showed the world how belief in God, cooperation, and living for the common good are the keys to peaceful coexistence. This can never happen again until humanity is willing and able to fight the sicknesses lying deep within each person’s heart.

Footnotes

1. Steve Smith, World Billionaires Still Richer than Half of Humanity. Online at Islamonline.net, 2002.
2. Ibid., 2002
3. John Pilger, The Colder War, The Mirror 20 (30 January 2002).
4. Online at www.forbes.com.
5. Business Week (7 April 2000), 100.
6. Edward N. Wolff, Recent Trends in Wealth Ownership (paper for the Benefits and Mechanisms for Spreading Asset Ownership in the United States conference, New York University, December 10-12, 1998.)
7. Online at www.census.gov [Table H-2].
8. Stijn Claessens, Simeon Djankov, and Larry H. P. Lang, Who Controls East Asian Corporations? (Washington, DC: The World Bank, 1999).
9. Jeff Gates, Modern Fashion or Global Fascism, Tikkun: A Bi-Monthly Jewish Critique of Politics, Culture, and Society (Jan.-Feb. 2002).

Other developments supported this trend, the most important being:

The invention of the silicon chip (1958-59). Subsequent improvements have so miniaturized computer components and compressed data that data transmission is now practically instantaneous. When combined with Web browsers, search engines, and the Internet, access to financial and other data can be exploited to its full potential. The U.S. Congress’ approval of Internet commerce and the falling prices of home computers and phone calls was a boon for transnational corporations (TNCs). Now they can micromanage their far-flung operations, direct money to the best economic opportunity, avoid taxes and financial losses, cripple unions and labor gains, skirt environmental legislation, and find other “creative” ways to increase profits.

The deregulation of financial capital (1973). This was signaled by abandoning the Bretton Woods system of fixed currency exchange rates, which had been maintained by America since 1944 and supported by its adherence to the gold standard, in favor of letting the market determine a currency’s value. Now that governments could no longer control the outflow of national currency, TNCs were free to move it as they wished.

Breaking the large banks’ and insurance companies’ monopoly on providing financial loans. With the rise of the bond market in the late 1960s, securitization of home mortgages in the 1970s, and “junk bonds” and the securitization of the international debt market in the 1980s, the current phase of globalization quickly blossomed.

These developments opened once-closed markets to millions of individual investors and mutual fund managers whose first concern is profit. As a result: “Not only can investors now buy and sell stocks and bonds from all over the world, not only can they now do that buying and selling from their home computers, but Internet brokerage sites are now giving them-for free-the information and analytical tools to make those trades, without ever having to call a broker. The more people do that, the more they will demand more information and analyses about different economies and companies, and the more easily they will move their money around, punishing the bad performers and rewarding the good ones.”¹

The underlying philosophy of increasing profits meshed nicely with a firm belief in social Darwinism. Developing and then applying “economic” Darwinism was a logical outgrowth. Just as individuals and species survive by adapting and becoming stronger, so companies survive by means of rapid adaptation.

This can take the form of corporate mergers or understandings, paying lower wages to and providing few if any benefits for overseas workers, and justifying everything in terms of increased efficiency. A new vocabulary has emerged for such activities: downsizing, outsourcing, streamlining, business restructuring or re-engineering, cost rationalization, retrenchment, redundancy, rationalization, risk minimization, profit alignment …

Benefits and Drawbacks

Those who dream of vast legions of Chinese consumers assert that globalization will make China a more open society. First, they say, Beijing’s official monopoly on information will end because foreign and local investors must have access to the Internet. Internal dissident groups can use it to contact sympathizers and publicize their causes at home and abroad.² Second, as China is drawn further into the world community, Beijing will have to adhere to international business law and treaties on workers’ rights, working conditions, fair payment, and so on. It also will have to adjust to globalization’s driving economic philosophy of neo-liberalization, which means liberalizing the economy, privatizing state-owned businesses and utilities, opening the financial and banking sectors, establishing transparency and accountability, and providing accurate financial data. Supposedly, such reforms will counteract China’s tendency to put politics and ideology above all other concerns. Third, those Chinese who work with foreign investors will learn about democracy, individuality, personal responsibility, human rights, governmental accountability, and how people in other countries actually live. In addition, foreign investment will open up new opportunities for Chinese entrepreneurs and those who want to improve their lives. They might even be paid above the normal hourly or daily wage, and thus can send money home to help their families.

Such arguments can be applied to many developing countries with only slight variations. These arguments sound great and really do have some merit, but reality sometimes does not conform to theoretical expectations. The following examples are by no means confined to the countries mentioned.

In Mexico, economic development is concentrated in Mexico City and along the northern border with America. The agricultural sector is largely ignored, despite the large numbers of people involved in it. Looking for debt relief, foreign investment, and entrance into the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA), the government gutted Article 27 of its constitution, which made all communal land belonging to indigenous communities off-limits to foreigners and TNCs. It had to do this because America and Canada want access to Mexico’s untapped wealth, most of which is under indigenous-held land. The result was the Zapatista uprising on January 1, 1994, which continues to enjoy wide support, and a host of problems that drove the 71-year old ruling party from power in 2000.

In northern Thailand, villagers untouched by Bangkok’s modernization and development can see how their urban counterparts live thanks to television. Hoping to reap some of the benefits, some families sell their daughters to Bangkok’s brothels. Large sectors of Thai society and the government silently support this, finding an easy way out of this moral dilemma by saying that it is the girls’ karma. The result is an out-of-control AIDS epidemic and a booming sex-tourism business based upon the unbelievable exploitation of young women. Neighboring Cambodia has the same problem, while many Russian women see prostitution as the key to the good life.

In Ecuador, Amazonian Indian tribes and other affected peoples sued Texaco in an American court (1993) to force it to clean up the contamination it left behind. Texaco, which no longer operates in Ecuador, dumped “4.3 million gallons per day of toxic oil waste water over a period of 20 years … [but] claims the dumping caused no appreciable damage.” It also left behind more than 300 open waste pits contaminated with heavy metals and other carcinogenic compounds. “In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs cite a wave of deadly cancers, skin lesions, birth defects and other abnormalities among the areas indigenous peoples, and massive die-offs of plants, crops, and animals from air and groundwater pollution as well as poisonous “black rain.” In some villages near polluted water sources, the rate of cancer is 100 times higher than the historical norm.” The case has yet to be resolved.³ There are similar problems with Shell in Nigeria, Nike in Indonesia, Union Carbide in India, and Rio Tinto in Papua New Guinea.

Areas of Concern

Agriculture. The Green Revolution of the 1960s globalized agriculture and introduced the concept of “cash crops.” It also brought the promise of higher crop yields, reduced malnutrition, and rural development. However, along with it came traditional crop varieties and farmers displaced by agribusiness and hard-currency-earning cash cops, expensive imported fertilizers and pesticides, increased land distribution inequity, foreign corporate patenting of seeds and crop strains developed by local farmers over the centuries, and the diversion of financial and natural resources to agribusiness.

All of this undermined local agriculture, a devastating blow to indigenous farmers. Even worse, the Food and Agriculture Organization says that about 75 percent of all plant species have become extinct. In more than 80 of the 154 countries surveyed in 1995, this loss was attributed to “the spread of modern, commercial agriculture and the introduction of new varieties of crops.”⁴

Medicine. On February 1, 2001, America threatened to complain to the World Trade Organization about Brazil’s national and highly successful AIDS treatment program. By producing local and cheap generic drugs and delivering them for free, Brazil has halved its AIDS victims’ death rates and substantially reduced treatment costs. On April 19, 2001, after a protracted battle in South African courts, several pharmaceutical TNCs dropped their quest to block the South African government’s plan to import cheap generic drugs to treat its AIDS victims. Cilpa, an Indian company that produces cheap generic drugs for AIDS victims, routinely faces pressure from pharmaceutical companies and their governments to cease and desist.

In each case, the charge is the same: violation of the intellectual property and patent rights held by Western pharmaceutical companies. That these same companies are among the richest in the world, and that their clients are among the poorest countries in the world, is rarely mentioned. Prices have been reduced as a result of such negative publicity, but many victims in Asia and Africa still cannot afford the medicine they need to survive.

In the Amazon, researchers have discovered many plants and herbs with medicinal value from the indigenous peoples. However, most of them sell the data to the large pharmaceutical companies and both become rich. The Amazon’s people do not benefit; in fact, their situation deteriorates as even more TNCs descend upon them.

National Sovereignty. The rise of 24-hour computerized and almost instantaneous financial transactions and currency speculation makes it hard to know who is in control. Governments face an impossible situation: “Central banks and elected governments [are] regularly compelled to choose between [their obligations to domestic economies and the new force of the global market] … This was often a ‘no win’ choice for political leaders since yielding to the market’s idea of ‘sound economic policy’ frequently required them to depress their own economies, increasing unemployment or cutting social spending.”⁵

George Soros, perhaps the best known of all individual and institutional currency speculators, has humbled governments with this strategy. Working together, they humiliated the Bank of England in 1992 and destroyed Europe’s Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1993. Malaysian Prime Minister Mohamad blames Soros for the Asian economic crisis of 1997-98. No individual currency speculator can do much on his or her own, but when big players like Soros begin to move, others jump on the bandwagon. The results show who is really in charge of a nation’s economy and, to a certain extent, social policy.

Structural adjustment programs (SAPs) are another controversial matter. In the 1980s, America began tying its aid to World Bank and IMF economic prescriptions and reforms (reducing inflation, promoting exports, meeting debt-payment schedules, and decreasing budget deficits) and to facilitating increased American trade and investment.

However, they generally entail “severe reductions in government spending and employment, higher interest rates, currency devaluation, lower real wages, sale of government enterprises, reduced tariffs, and liberalization of foreign investment regulations…. But while government balance sheets may improve, SAPs have failed to establish a base for sustainable, balanced economic development … [and] have bankrupted local industries, increased dependency on food imports, gutted social services, and fostered a widening gap between rich and poor.”⁶

In addition, they tend to keep poor countries in debt, for new loans are needed to pay off existing debts and to qualify for future loans. Despite this, they remain the usual “cure” for countries seeking international financial aid and investment. This could change if anti-SAP protests continue, and if demands that lending institutions become more transparent and make allowances for social policies succeed.

Political Development and Human Rights. Decades of Western investment in oil-rich Middle Eastern and resource-rich African countries appears to have strengthened dictators of all persuasions. Instead of supporting human and religious rights in Chinese-occupied Tibet and Sinkiang, not to mention in China itself, American business interests persuaded Washing-ton to grant China permanent normal trade relations on September 19, 2000. Thus, China’s violations of human, labor, and religious rights no longer has to concern the American business community. Unfortunately, this seems to be the rule rather than the exception.

Conclusion

Global capitalism, based upon unfettered consumerism and the idea that continued profits through continued growth leads to ultimate happiness, now runs the world’s economy: “The culture-ideology of consumerism is the set of beliefs and practices that persuades people that consumption far beyond the satisfaction of physical needs is, literally, at the center of meaningful existence and that the best organized societies are those that place consumer satisfaction at the center of all their major institutions.”⁷

If this is true, human unhappiness is sure to increase. Poor people viewing the “real” lives of the rich through foreign television programs or movies see a lifestyle and possessions forever beyond their rich. Workers face constant job insecurity. Rural migrants in cities have their hopes dashed when they cannot find jobs. The media report the rise of sweat-shop and child labor, environmental devastation, a loss of corporate accountability and responsibility to their home bases, a hollowing of hard-won labor gains by threats of relocating overseas, and declining taxes as TNCs juggle their books.

Even those who benefit cannot feel secure. Their job might be outsourced in the interest of higher profits, abolished by corporate streamlining, or lost because they cannot acquire new skills fast enough. Shareholder dissatisfaction can destroy their companies, and job-related demands upon their time can make a normal family life and friendships impossible.

In sum: “Given their narrow premise, market economists never attempted to calculate all of the collateral damage that could also be attributed to the liberalization of finance-the capital investments destroyed when viable factories were abruptly abandoned, the economic output lost when economies grew more slowly, the public welfare costs from rising unemployment or declining wages, the instability for companies and nations caused by the sifting money values.”⁸

Economic globalization does have its good and bad points. But its emphasis on always-increasing profits as the way to ultimate happiness and meaning in our lives is misguided, for how can what is transient give lasting satisfaction? It has nothing to offer those who fall behind but dreams that will be fulfilled “sometime in the future.” And one day they will demand the fulfillment of those dreams…

Footnotes

1. Thomas L Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization (New York: Anchor, 2000), 71.
2. China’s first “cyber-dissident” was tried in Shanghai on December 4, 1998, “on charges of subversion for having given the addresses of 30,000 Chinese computer users to VIP Reference, a journal that Chinese dissidents publish in the United States.”
3. Ibid., 68.
4. Cristobal Bonifaz and Joseph C. Kohn, “Amazon Tribal Leaders Blast U.S. Judge For Blocking Texaco Pollution Case,” 31 May 2001. Online at: www.amazonwatch.org.
5. The State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Chapter 1: “The State of Diversity,” (Leipzig: 1996). Online at: http://web.icppgr.fao.org/ wrlmap_e.htm.
6. William Greider. One World, Ready or Not (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997), 242.
7. Carol Welch and Jason Oringer, “Structural Adjust-ment Programs,” Foreign Policy In Focus, vol. 3, 3 (Apr. 1998). Online at: www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/briefs/ vol3/v3n3sap.html.
8. Leslie Sklair, The Transnational Capital Class (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2001), 4-5. 8 Greider, One World, 250.

Other References

• Bales, Kevin. Disposable People: New Slavery in the Global Economy. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California, 2000.
• Barnet, Richard J. and John Cavanagh, Global Dreams: Imperial Corporations and the New World Order. New York: Touchstone, 1995.
• Korten, David C. When Corporations Rule the World. 2d ed.
• Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press, 2001. Madeley, John.
• Big Business, Poor People: The Impact of Transnational Corporations on the World’s Poor. New York: Zed Books, 2000.

Abstract: Appadurai’s work offers a very critical and deep analysis of modernity and globalization. He believes that no single theory can describe modernity’s complexity, for he believes that a theory cannot be universalistic, and because societies are much messier than our theories about them. His focus is more on globalization’s cultural dimensions, as opposed to its economic ones. In addition, he looks at globalization in terms of homogenization and heterogenization, for migration and media create both sameness and difference in today’s globalized world. Migrating people and media, particularly television, produce different cultural spheres in different countries. As a result, he looks for irregularities as much as he looks for regularities in the modern or postmodern social world.

Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization

In Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization, Appadurai examines new dimensions of globalization, particularly cultural ones. He argues that few theories describe modernity, and that all of them either declare or desire universal applicability. Looking at modernity and globalization from a historical context, he argues that modernity was very much a product of the Enlightenment. However, he is not convinced that the Enlightenment created modernity and made people wish to become modern (p. 1).

Modernism originated in the late-sixteenth century after the rise of capitalism. However, it is not limited to economic dimensions, for it also contains cultural and political ones. Becoming more visible after the Industrial Revolution, modernism eventually became the dominant culture of the West and then of the world.

The understanding and theorizing associated with modernity is very much a part of Western social science, for it was shaped by such leading Western social scientists as Karl Marx (d. 1883), Auguste Comte (d. 1857), Max Weber (d. 1961), and Emile Durkeim (d. 1917). Appadurai sees Western social science as problematic, for it reinforces the sense of a single moment (which he calls the modern moment) serving as a dramatic and unparalleled break between past and present. Western social science has focused on categorizing and typologizing traditional and modern societies, practices that Appadurai argues distort the meanings of change and the past, and assumes that the Western experience of modernity is universal.

Modernity, however, is irregularly self-conscious and unevenly experienced in different parts of the world. This causes Appadurai to disagree with modernization theory’s identification of societies as modern vs. traditional, urban vs. rural, small family vs. large family, and so on, for he sees irregularities within so-called modern and traditional societies. He claims that modernity is experienced differently over space and throughout time. For instance, such modern metropolitan cities as Mexico City, Sao Paulo, and Cairo experience modernity and tradition simultaneously. The same is true of Germany, the United States, or any other modern state in which both traditional and modern ways of life are practiced at the same time in different parts these countries.

Appadurai thinks that the media and population migration are the most important factors defining today’s global world. He explores their joint effect on the work of the imagination, as a constitutive feature of modern subjectivity. Both media and migration create specific irregularities. For example, he analyzes both print and electronic media, while claiming that electronic media, especially television, has been much more influential in terms of modifying cultural spaces and cultural worlds: Electronic media give a new twist to the environment within which the modern and the global often appear as flip sides of the same coin (p. 44). He believes that the electronic media’s ability to transform the sense of distance between viewer and event transforms everyday discourse. It also shapes and reshapes society and the self in all different types of societies and people.

Migration is the second constitutive force. This is not limited to moving or migrating people; rather, he includes within this concept a process of transporting ideas, values, life styles, and everyday lives from the home of origin. As he puts it: When the story of mass-migration is juxtaposed with the rapid flow of mass-mediated images, scripts, and sensations, we have a new order of instability in the production of modern subjectivities (p. 44).

Migrants create diasporic public spheres that confound theories that depend on the continued salience of the nation“state as key arbiter of important social changes (p. 4). For instance, Turkish guest workers in Germany watch Turkish movies and gather together to celebrate religious and traditional festivals. This is an irregularity in modern German society, as different cultural groups lead everyday lives that have nothing to do the dominant culture of the country in which they live.

When discussing migration, one must realize that the young or new generation are the agents of social challenge and change, not the elderly. The new generation experiences and pushes new ways of life, and is people’s minds migrate along with their bodies and produce change.

Appadurai considers globalization as both cultural homogenization and, at the same time, cultural heterogenization (p. 32). He urges us to think of the new global cultural economy in terms of complexity, overlap, and disorder. Moreover, he is unsure if existing center-periphery models can address such complexity and irregularity. Nor is he convinced that traditional models, such as the pull“push migration model or surpluses and deficits, can explain the global cultural economy.

Therefore, he proposes a new framework for understanding the new global cultural economy’s complexity and messiness. This consists of five dimensions of global cultural flows: ethnoscapes, mediascapes, techno-scapes, financescapes, and ideocapes (p. 33). He uses the suffix -scape to point out the fluid and irregular shapes of landscapes. These deeply perspectival constructs are inflected by nation-states, multinationals, diasporic communities, as well as religious, political, and economic groupings and movements confronting such groups as neighborhoods and families.

I am not going to discuss each cultural landscape. Suffice it to say, as Appadurai asserts, that these cultural landscapes are the building blocks for imagined worlds. He quotes this from Anderson’s discussion of imagined communities. These worlds are socially and historically constructed by historically situated people and social groups all over the globe.

Appadurai disagrees with the idea that goods and services end in consumption. Calling it an illusion, he urges us to re-situate consumption in time and place. He especially focuses on history, periodicity, process, and how demand is produced and consumption is achieved. How do people make their preferences? How is demand produced?

Although people seemingly make free choices in their everyday lives, their choices are structured through the market. Everything is commodified, from food and medical care to transportation and housing, from education and leisure to body and knowledge. Everything is bought and sold in the capitalist market. Thus, it is important to know that commodities are socially constructed and humanly produced.

Expanding capitalism allowed scholars and philosophers to rework time and space. New philosophies showed social constructions of time and space. We know that they are not natural; rather, they are human constructions.

I conclude with a few words about knowledge“ relations. Appadurai proves that different cultural landscapes exist. It also is important to realize that all cultural landscapes are socially made, and that we produce those landscapes with our everyday practices, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Landscapes, maps, and cultural spheres are social products, and their construction reflects ongoing power relations. Appadurai deals with this when discussing how Britain measured its Indian colony (e.g., census and maps) to control it. The resulting knowledge served British imperial interests, not those of India. Maps as social texts were not used for social betterment, but as tools of social control.

As a result, Appadurai urges, if we are to understand today’s cultural, economic, and political globalized world, we need to understand it in those time“ space contexts and knowledge“power relations that have shaped both its homogeneous and heterogeneous cultural, economic, and political realities

• References:
• Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso, 1983.
• Appadurai, Arjun. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998.