Saturday, September 15, 2007

Ramadan Kareem Ads

Just to give you an idea of the Ramadan ads here in Dubai (and probably in the rest of the Arab world). Krispy Kreme has a cool one too with date filled doughnuts and all (sorry, couldn't find it online).

On one level, it's kinda cool how Ramadan is everywhere. On the other hand, all the "commercialization" takes away from the spirituality sometimes. Kinda like what happened to Christmas.


Yesi King said...

yeah i know isn't it interesting? globalization at its finest!

Affad Shaikh said...

I dont want to damper your parade, but I am a globalist, i even think Islam is best fit for a globlized society! I mean Muslims came up with a systematic way to deposit money in one place and get it another place- the check. Then there is the mail service set up to keep people connected...aint it interesting?

Yesi King said...

Congratulations Affad, but you didn’t damper my parade. There is no question that globalization has changed due to technology. The example you gave about the check and mail system is something that is not new. It is an old process that has been changed through technological means. There is an ongoing debate in academia on whether Islam is anti-globalization. I argue no, because as you stated I also think Islam is best fitted for a globalized society. But what concerns me is the Westernization and Americanization that I see being employed instead because globalization has a cultural aspect as well. In which, what is being consumed and produced will be westernized products while local products will go out of business. There are numerous examples of this happening all around the world. Globalization is not a thing, it is a process. One that is not new but has in fact been around for thousands of years. It is the interconnecting process based on objective and subjective changes that psychologically and physically connect the world’s people through an increased movement of food, ideals, culture, politics, etc.
The questions regarding the origin and definition of globalization have not been accepted equally amongst scholars and analyzers because there are strong disagreements about the way in which globalization has evolved, the economic, political, and inequality outcomes that we see today even though they agree that world has changed fast since the start of the century. However to simplify it there are two main groups that have been identified which are the globalists (you) and the skeptics (me). Globalists (you) are those who believe the existing globalization to be the inevitable outcome of a real historical change, in other words, man has no say in its changes. Opposite of this view, skeptics (me) believe it to be a myth, something that has always been around and is not new but has in fact been around for thousands of years, and just another term for imperialism. These groups break down into further categories: Globalists into neo-liberals and social democrats, and skeptics into Marxists and realists.
The key question within these groups is ‘is globalization inevitable and what represents it?’ Both neo-liberals and social democrats view globalization as an inevitable process. They differ for the reason that neo-liberals view it as a positive trend in which TNCs (transnational corporations) will bring a global economy in which the homogenization of people and culture will evolve and will eventually solve inequality. Then social democrats believe that classes are the main actors in a negative globalization that values economic interests and is uneven but can be reformed.
Skeptics on the other hand do not believe that globalization is an inevitable thing because they believe it to be a myth and is manipulated by the main actors. Skeptics many of which are Marxists view globalization as not something new and just another name for imperialism, that is being used to justify the unequal system intended to exploit the lower classes and peripheral countries on the global level in which there is no new division of labor, and which is driven by the economically and politically more authoritative. We argue and criticize that globalization is a tool for further imperialism by Western countries i.e. loan sharks such as the IMF and WTO that’ll lend developing countries money but do it under conditionality where they must cut down government programs, deregulation, privatization, and follow sound economic guidelines that have political elements including lowering taxes for the wealthy, raising taxes for the poor.
Now as we both differ, I think we both agree Islam is not anti-globalization which is a good thing. However, the means in which it is employed is quite another. This is what muslamics represents isn’t it? Muslims living in America, attempting to define themselves, their beliefs, and their identities in a manner best suited for them to be able to show what they stand for. This is just an example of how diverse our community is Alhamdulillah.