Response to Tyler's Week 8 Post

I like the questions you are raising with the Global Transformations book. I agree in wondering how the quote in page 266 works in conjunction with the reality that many people suffering from AIDS aren't receiving the treatment they so desperately need. May I hypothesize that both statements are true. Held seems to overstate the progress of globalization today but his assertion is most probably true in saying that pharmaceutical MNCs are expanding beyond the borders of the developed world. At the same time, many countries in AIDS stricken Africa do not house MNC branches. Perhaps what Held is stating is an optimistic look into the very near future but not a comment on current state of affais.

As for your comments on the Pieterse book, could it be possible that a large majority of our indifference to the global AIDS crisis is that it doesn't seem to affect us daily? That is, could the epidemic be so far removed from our "reality" that we don't care to respond? "Out of sight, out of mind," seems to be an appropriate addage here.

In light of this, what does Pieterse add to the conversation? Could a world without borders breakdown move us beyond our borders of "reality"? Could we eventually see our brothers and sisters in Uganda truly as brothers and sisters? That is, are our conceptions of nation/state/people hindering us from reaching out with compassion? I realize that I'm leaning toward the possibility of an unrealistic utopian society, but I think they are questions worth asking.

Response to Hideyo's Week 8 Analysis

Again, I like the questions you are raising. While Held et al are not hyperglobalists, they do still seem to see globalization as a positive thing. Sometimes I wish they would incorporate the concerns of the skeptics more into their arguments, or at least give those concerns more discussion. As the son of small business owners, I have benefited from and am wary of MNCs (particularly Wal-Mart), so I would like to see more information about how MNCs have affected the developing nations they enter. Some I am sure are very beneficial and have helped create stability and infrastructure for healthcare and education. Others, I believe have probably strip-mined the nation of its resources.

I like the questions you raise of education. That seems to be very important. How do we encourage and increase the efficacy of education, without moving towards hegemony? As I said in my post, the breakdown of societies into social networks seems to be creating a significant shift in how we develop education. Groups are becoming more localized as it becomes more difficult to discuss socieities on national scales, but economies between those groups are highly interdependent. How do we ensure that different groups with their different values are able to compete (horrible term, I know) in the same market?

Short-term missions seems like an interesting idea, but one wrench I want to throw into our whole project is that I want to make sure we're not becoming paternalistic, which is the danger of many short-term missions, in my opinion. (I don't want to do away with short-term missions, however.) Many times short-term missions are more about us than they are about participating in the kingdom of God through serving others. Someone in class suggested we check out Touch Africa: a group seeking to help Africa and it seems very thoughtful (perhaps we can use this as an example of churches doing something). But notice that on the front page nearly every picture is of an Asian-American student. What does that communicate? What do these pictures have to do with Africa? Where is the focus of the group?