Saturday, August 25, 2007


We've all read 'The World Is Flat'. Good book. Organized, descriptive, interesting anecdotes, almost inspiring. Do I hear biased?

'Globalization' as a subject for bestsellers is great. And, so is, selective reporting of facts and a positive bias, after all, even writers have mortgages to pay. So all that synergy and equal opportunity, faster internet, outsource, outshore, insource, in-form is fine but on what costs? Is that all that there is to having the small grow smaller?

Extremism/Radicalism/Fanaticism however you call it breeds out of intolerance. Modernization buys for each of us 'noninterference'. Then how come when on a personal level we seek independence and noninterference, on a broader spectrum we're forced to bind together and agree all?

What gives the more scientifically advanced nations the right to dictate and impose their so-assumed higher moral structures on others?

What I'm trying to say is, from my small cluttered window, as I view the world, 'Terrorism' is an outcome of forced socializing in the big global family. An aftermath of Globalization.

Even when we build houses we know that we shouldn't peep in others' houses. That we respect the fences and each others' privacy. How well we define 'their business' and 'my business'. Well, yeah.

Isn't indifferent a much preferred state to be in than living the terrible consequences of intolerance?

I personally think none of this (read Extremism) would've existed if we all just stuck to our business? No social structure gives any of us the right to make others live to our terms and repair something which isn't broken yet. Advise which is not asked is also not appreciated, not personally, not nationally.

The Eskimos would've rejoiced in their Sushi and Igloos. The Sub-Saharan people riding the camels, coming home to their belly dancing wives. See, such authentic culture would've been retained too.

I'm sick of Terrorism, the world my friends, needs more genuine problems.

P.S. Anyone having access to Television, do watch 'The Business Quiz', its on CNBC TV-18.

I realized while writing this that Comma is my absolute favourite punctuation mark. Its... hopeful.


Vipashyin said...

"how come when on a personal level we seek independence and noninterference, on a broader spectrum we're forced to bind together and agree all" - Pretty interesting insight. Answers to this range from rational economic ones to the crazy (God's Debris). Seek yours.

However, I'm not so sure terrorism results from Globalization. On the contrary, I think Globalization and real integration of peoples is the most potent antidote to intolerance. Closed doors and ghettoisation result in doubt and suspicion. That's a reason Al Qaeda and Taliban are able to indoctrinate people motivating them against a fictional threat using a misinterpreted religion.

As for scientifically advanced i.e industrialised world imposing their higher moral structures on others, I do not believe they have any moral/social structures to impose at all. Why do you think so? Is this argument anyway stemming from westernisation of culture in any way?

Nainy, terrorism is not an outcome of socializing or globalization. It couldn't be.

And yes, I'm only glad we're not living in indifference - it leaves me with a chance of seeing the belly dancing women of arabia first hand :)

Nainy Sahani said...

@ Vipashyin

I'm not saying it stems from it completely, I'm just saying that Globalization in some way acts as a catalyst.

How? Well earlier the misinterpreted religion was atleast respected equally and remained aloof. Now its spread everywhere, is feared and draws completely irrational suspicion by the others. To back it up with facts, let me also add that most of Dad's generation thinks all Muslims are terrorists. It is very very sad, but it is also true.

It ofcourse doesnt mean that we need to stop hounding the Globalization flag, and I take that it is all haphazard. I'm merely saying that it's a view that could've been accounted for.

Just as it helps all the other causes, it also helps Terrorism.

And oh yeah, good luck with the belly dancers man, all yours ;)

saurav arya said...

Globalisation is not just acting as a catalyst for terrorism but also has been a failed concept for the poor.
unrestricted free trade is mostly beneficial to the wealthy who have the resources to simply take the desired favorable positions at the expense of the poor, thus globalization is inherently imperialistic.
btw a well structured post..i went through it twice n loved it!

Vipashyin said...

You do have a valid point, certain terrorism world's seen recently was probably helped along by what comes with globalization. But little more.

Also, you have too much faith in the infallibility of men, whereas I don't. Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge, Saddam's Iraq and Milosevic's Yugoslavia are recent (post world wars) examples of what can happen in closed, insulated worlds. A great tragedy occurred in (do read this) Darfur recently and the world stood ashamed afterwards for not having stepped in. That's what I think would always eventually happen in societies not given to (or forced not to) integrating with the world at large. Not quite like how you believe - that distinct circles of happiness would exist if there was no globalization (eskimos relishing their sushi and sahara men returning to their belly dancing wives).

Men are inherently wired towards killing for power and control. The only hope I see, is in them realising the greater advantage of living in peace and so keeping themselves busy with that.

But anyway, I like the fact that nainy thinks like a poet :)

P.S:I normally do not pick issues with fellow headbangers who listen to metallica :) (nainy, saurav). But I had to complete what I had to say.

Nainy Sahani said...

Nainy and Saurav definitely would'nt shy away from a good debate.

I appreciate your thoughts :)

Aneesh said...

Interesting view.
But i'd side with the comments that say that globalisation did not cause terrorism.
Globalisation has given terrorism a wider prespective. The Al Quaeda can now see more 'khafirs' to kill, it can at the same time address a larger group of fanatics, but terrorism has inherently been there since man has been around. We see it in a different form today, another effect of globalisation, but it's been here all along.

As far as the book is concerned, i did'nt like it much, it's too much of a formula book, you know the usual biases etc.

Nainy Sahani said...

@ Aneesh

Well, well.. so where do we arrive? Just like everything else, its all very subjective ;)

divi_dave said...

Read "ALL" your musings...Brilliant!!
One of a kind you are..
Dream On!!(I kno u don like hard rock.)

Nainy Sahani said...

Thanks Divi! :)

Amit said...

dont really agree with your thought process. Terrorism was always there. It was there during the time of Alexander, Napolean, Hitler, Lenin. Globalization has just helped you notice it now.

Shashank said...

hmm....Globalisation is a broad term Nainy, and so is terrorism. And both these terms are bound to be interrelated due to their inevitable nature. But then if globalisation in some way helps terrorism grow, it also in some other ways, helps curbing it. If terrorism has gone global, so has the fight against it.
Moreover, globalisation too has two aspects : social and economic. The social globalisation has been a long process which kind of started during renaissance period itself. Its basically the economic globalisation about which the world (including friedman) are so excited.
And so, I don't see much correlation between globalisation and the burgeoning terrorism.

Mayank said...

What you are questioning here is human nature ..or instinct ! human survives to prove himself better than others .. hence imposing oneself .. socializing .. is direct effect.

Its wishful thinking .. world is not perfect .. it will never be .. and i guess the architect never aimed for perfection anyways .. fun is in seeing how things evolve when left to operate on their own with the limited capabilities that they have. :)

Nia said...

the media industry has benefited most from globalization. almost every hindi music video would have an African rapper and Russian pole dancing babes getting in and out of the video illogically!

in terms of acquiring technological developments, and getting global subjects for art and design, globalization is a good concept...but i agree with nainy that there are many undesired issues that were set on fire by the same idea of building a global village