Globalization and religious fundamentalism

Globalization and Religious Fundamentalism

Name

Course

Tutor

Date

Cultural Context

a. America use of globalization and religious fundamentalism versus other nations

American use of globalization has been motivated by the changing comparative advantage patterns and the increasing trade competitor’s vulnerability (Salzman, 2008). This has made globalization in America self-interested. America is less attentive to global system structure matters and they pursue their goals through aggressive regionalism and unilateralism. When America is actively engaged, the multilateral agenda will not be likely to champion initiatives that the global welfare considerations justify especially when they need and immediate national ideological purity. Unlike other nations such as nations of Europe that do not neglect global systematic concerns, America has accelerated the neglect due to its global leadership that has been associated with the image of cold war.

Like the European nations, America also expresses fear over Islamic fundamentalism and Muslim integration. However, the beliefs among the Muslims residing in America are unknown. Christians in America are considerably socially conservative and more religious that Christian in Western Europe. This leads to a less gap in the fundamentalism levels between American Christians and American Muslims. The different religious fundamentalism between American Muslims and European Muslims is the major socioeconomic differences (Salzman, 2008). In America, Christian fundamentalism is a major political concern more than anywhere else in the world. This can be associated with northern Irelands’ protestant loyalsm. The impulse of fundamentalism reflects both nationalist and ethnic dimensions. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism serve as the primary group identity badges.

b. American Innovation

America defines itself as being an innovative nation since its inception. This has been documented in the National Museum of American History (Crow, 2013). The national innovation has been influenced by the dynamic interaction of traditions, talents and ideas in science, arts and technology to fuel new achievements. America has benefited from the brainpower influx all over the world and they are able to claim the ownership of imported knowledge. The innovation is a global affair due to partnerships of America and other multinational institutions and the relaxed national borders

c. Negative View of America by other Nations

Most of other nations have a negative view of America due to many reasons. Some of the reasons include the spying on foreign nationals and foreign leaders. Other nations do not like this and they are angry with America. The United States drone strikes have also lead to a widespread opposition and negative view by other nations in the world. The negative American view by other nations can also be explained by the disagreements on what should be done in Middle East and also the other recurring tensions. However, some nations still have a positive view of America.

Implications for the Environment

a. Renewable/ Non-renewable Resources used to help further globalization and religious fundamentalism          

There are many renewable and non-renewable resources that have helped further globalization and religious fundamentalism. Oil is major non-renewable resource that has led to Muslim fundamentalism since most of it come from an area dominated by the religion (Eriksen, 2014). The non-renewable resources such as minerals, coal and oil has led to further globalization due to the need of trade global dependence. However, using locally available renewable resources like wind, solar and water has limited the trade global dependence and a decrease in religious fundamentalism.

b.      Pollution in the world increased due to globalization & religious fundamentalism

                            i.      Effects it has on the Earth (oceans, atmosphere, plants, animals)

Globalization and religious fundamentalism has led to increased pollution in the world. This has led to environment degradation on the earth. Pollution has increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the air leading to smog that restricts the sunlight from reaching on the earth. This prevents photosynthesis by plants. Nitrogen oxide and Sulphur dioxide also causes acid rain.

                             ii.      Effects on humans (economically, spiritually and physically)

Pollution affects the health of humans that then has an impact on their spirituality, economic and physical effects. Health depends on the capability of successfully managing physical, economic, social and spiritual environment (Eriksen, 2014). Pollution affects the human health condition adversely due to unsafe water supply and poisonous gases released in the air.

Moral and Ethical Implications

a. Code of ethics

A code of ethics has moral and ethical implications. It is addressed to different people and it regulates the relationship between individuals. The code of ethics can have different aspects such as trade relations, environment protection and other major aspects regulating globalization and religious fundamentalism. In the global context, code of ethics will help in the completion of the regulations imperfect framework (MacKinnon, 2014). This enables nations to legitimate their activities and to strengthen their capabilities. This creates a positive and favorable image to other nations. In economic globalization, obligatory rules do not exist. Different multinationals will determine the values or norms to follow, either of the host country or the origin country.

b.      Individual privacy and moral concerns

References

Crow, M., & Bozeman, B. (2013). Limited by Design: R & D Laboratories in the US National Innovation System. Columbia University Press.

Eriksen, T. H. (2014). Globalization: the key concepts. A&C Black.

MacKinnon, B., & Fiala, A. (2014). Ethics: Theory and contemporary issues. Cengage Learning.

Salzman, M. B. (2008). Globalization, religious fundamentalism and the need for meaning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32(4), 318-327.