 | In Part Three, Barber outlines his case for why "neither Jihad nor McWold promises a remotely democratic future" (p. 220). It is interesting that, early in Chapter 15, Barber seems to be making something of the same argument we entertained when reading The Lost City: a plethora of choices may actually restrict our freedom. Of course, he's arguing not about moral choices, but about self- (or "soul"-) actualization: we have more consumer choices, but we are so socialized that we don't recognize that what we're choosing about (i.e., "stuff), is not very freeing. Erich Fromm (see Shared References) once made the case that society teaches us "to want to act as we have to act." What do you think of this idea?
Barber interweaves economic and political with more socio-cultural arguments in the case he makes for democracy, against both Jihad and McWorld. The former are not our principal focus here--although it is difficult to understand Barber's argument without at least a broad sense of what he is driving at, if not understanding all the particulars, such as the political situations in various countries and regions (some of which have changed since he wrote). What is important to get is his argument that "Until McWorld finds a way to nurture citizens as successfully as it nurtures buyers and sellers, such aims (releasing people from the constraints of Jihad) will be systematically neglected..." (p. 223). This is what he terms "savage capitalism." |
