The article Jihad vs. McWorld, written by Benjamin R. Barber, explores the two possible political models that may emerge in the future. Both of them are non-democratic but promote slightly different values and approaches towards the distribution of power among the countries. They are called the McWorld model and the Jihad model. They may exist separately in different societies and, at the same time, coexist in one country.
McWorld is empowered by the four imperatives: a market imperative, a resource imperative, an information-technology imperative, and an ecological imperative. These four constituents of the system will enable the countries to create a universal rational society but in a homogenized, depoliticized, commercialized, and bureaucratized manner. The Jihad model regards war not as a political instrument but as an emblem of identity and a way to express the community’s will. Though both systems have natural politics, each of them appears to have traits that are typical of antipolitics. McWorld prioritizes laissez-faire market principles as a guiding force for society. The Jihad model, however, appears to vote for the dictatorship, military government, or theocratic fundamentalism. Both models deny democracy and do not consider its guiding principles and forces appealing or beneficial for society.
That is why neither of these two systems is beneficial for the democratic world of today, but there are slightly noticeable tendencies towards the transition to these models in some countries. However, if the democratic powers still have the opportunities to prevent such a dark future for the whole system and the world in general. It is possible because the desire for self-government, expression of participation, and representation exists even in the most traditionalized and hierarchical countries and societies.
The article The Clash of Civilizations by Samuel P. Huntington deals with the phenomenon of possible global conflicts that may inflame in the future, not between the countries but between the whole civilizations. The author stresses that the conflict of civilization will be the latest phase of the evolution of conflicts that exist or existed in the world throughout the course of history. However, despite the fact that the majority of the conflicts in the modern world are characterized by ideological or economic reasons, the future conflict of civilizations will inflame due to culture-related ones.
There exist several reasons for this supposition. They concern the religious, cultural, historical, language, and traditional differences that are typical of various civilizations. At the same time, the overpopulation of the Earth, the processes of social changes, and economic modernization contribute to people’s losing their local identities. The final reason is the increasing influence of the West and its opposition to other civilizations that exist. In other cultures, the West is regarded as the most influential, powerful, and invincible force. Its role and influence on the international community may be regarded as dual because it is the most powerful ally in peace and the most dangerous opponent at war. The phrase the world community has already been perceived by many people as only the Western European countries and the United States. Hence the world may soon face more apparent opposition between Western and non-Western countries that will finally lead to a high-scale conflict of interests. However, instead of the struggle against each other, the civilizations may move towards mutually beneficial cooperation that is better for all of them and for the world in general.