Eric Schlosser, "Global Realization" and:

• Malcolm Gladwell, "The Power of Context"
• Beth Loffreda, Selections from Losing Matt Shepherd: Life and Politics in the Aftermath of Anti-Gay Murder
• Martha Nussbaum, "Women and Cultural Universals"
• Mary Kaldor, "Beyond Militarism, Arms Races, and Arms Control"
• Mary Kaldor, "Beyond Militarism, Arms Races, and Arms Control" and Amy Chua, "A World on the Edge"
• Amy Chua, "A World on the Edge"
• Amy Chua, "A World on the Edge" and Alexander Stille, "The Ganges' Next Life"
• Michael Pollan, "Playing God in the Garden"
• Michael Pollan, "Playing God in the Garden" and William Greider, "Work Rules"

For more assignment ideas involving this essay, please visit the Schlosser link-o-mat.

Eric Schlosser: Globalization and Imperialism

A generation ago American embassies and oil companies were the most likely targets of overseas demonstrations against "US imperialism." Today, fast food restaurants have assumed that symbolic role, with McDonald's a particular favorite (Schlosser 540). In your first paper, explain why you think fast food companies are viewed as a threat to foreign nations. Is there a difference between imperialism and globalization? In what ways are these two concepts dissimilar? In what ways are they alike?

Jack Jarmon, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

Back to top

Schlosser and Gladwell: The Context of Globalization

In his essay about crime in New York, Malcolm Gladwell provides a conceptual framework for the study of cultural change, the “power of context.” In your essay, I would like you to consider how Gladwell might use his theory to explain the “global realization” discussed by Schlosser. Use the “power of context” to develop an argument about the cultural changes that have accompanied globalization.

As you construct your argument, consider the following questions:

How do the central issues in Gladwell’s essay – behavioral change and environmental context – contribute to our discussion of globalization? Gladwell writes about local contexts, but how can we imagine thinking about context in connection to Schlosser’s global culture?

It is probably relatively easy to imagine the sudden and ubiquitous nature of McDonald’s being the consequence of a “tipping point,” but think also about Gladwell’s argument that small changes in context can alter human character. What does this suggest to you about how we should understand Schlosser’s argument about the cultural effects of globalization?

Piper Kendrix Williams, Rutgers University, Spring 2002

From Tradition, Modernity, and Change: Assessing the Value of Re-thinking in an Evolving World.

Both Schlosser and Gladwell present examples which illustrate the notion of a tipping point. Consider their articles and describe how each author applies the concept to his particular views and themes. Support your argument with passages from the texts. Offer the reader your own interpretation of a "tipping point." Begin your essay with a thesis statement and base your discussion on the logic of your premise.

Jack Jarmon, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

Malcolm Gladwell demonstrates, in "The Power of Context," how powerful institutions, such as the government, can exert social control over people by making small but significant changes in their environment. In Eric Schlosser's analysis of global capitalism in "Global Realization," he likewise examines the ways that multinational corporations gain popularity across the globe. Is this the same kind of social control that Gladwell describes? What happens when people are influenced not for the benefit of society but for the benefit of a private corporation? How much agency do people have in the context of the global market? Develop a project that states your opinion on the role of the consumer in global capitalism.

Molly Burke, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Identity and Agency.

Back to top

Schlosser, Loffreda, Nussbaum: Moving from Individual Cases to a Theory about Globalization

From one perspective, globalization seems benign, even positive. After all, no one forces people to eat at McDonalds, or to watch American movies, or to wear American running shoes. We might argue that when it exports hamburgers and Coke to other countries, the U.S. also exports democracy, the rule of law, free markets, technological progress and so on. From another perspective, however, globalization might be viewed as a form of cultural imperialism, and possibly also a precursor to economic and political imperialism. It is quite likely right now that 17-year-olds in Tokyo know more about the U.S. than they do about their own culture and history. By contrast, while many people in the U.S. know all about the latest "reality" shows, the majority are probably incapable of finding Japan on an unlabeled map.

Of course, these are not the only ways to view globalization. Some observers might argue that globalization will produce a richly diverse world society. These people might point out that just as American culture flows into places like India and China, so the values and outlooks of other societies flow into the U.S. as well. One good example of this cultural reciprocity is the "world music" scene.

For your final paper, I would like you to make an argument about globalization, using as your primary evidence the texts by Loffreda, Nussbaum, and Schlosser. You may also draw on other information at your disposal, including personal experience, but you should make detailed use of all three texts. You do not have to argue "for" or "against" globalization: you may also choose, instead, to explore the complexities.

Back to top

Eric Schlosser and Mary Kaldor

Consider some of the similarities and differences between the phenomena that each author describes. Particularly notable are Kaldor’s descriptions of “Netforce:”

First, the networks cross borders. One of the typical features of the “new wars” is the key role played by Diaspora groups either far away... or in neighboring states... Secondly, the wars involve an array of global actors—foreign mercenaries and volunteers, Diaspora supporters, neighboring states... humanitarian actors such as aid agencies, NGOs, or reporters. And thirdly... the “new wars” tend to be concentrated in areas where the modern state is unraveling and where the distinctions between internal and external, public and private, no longer have the same meaning (Kaldor 385).

And Schlosser’s description of the global economy:

[Activist Dave Morris] spoke intensely about McDonald’s, but stressed that its arrogant behavior was just one manifestation of a much larger problem now confronting the world: the rise of powerful multinationals that shift capital across borders with few qualms, that feel no allegiance to any nation, no loyalty to any group of farmers, workers, or consumers (Schlosser 544-5).

In what ways are multinational corporations like Kaldor’s Netforces? In what ways are they different? Does the existence of one have anything to do with the existence of the other? 

What is the relationship between the “global realization” achieved by McDonald’s and other companies and “New War” as described by Kaldor? Is the violence of “New War” part of the shadow cast by global franchises? Or does it merely operate on similar principles to the global economy? What are some of the causes and consequences behind both, and what are some of the potential solutions? Should businesses like McDonald’s be regulated in the interests of stabilizing local economies? Or is McDonald’s a potential instrument of peace, as New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has claimed? Or both, or neither?

Jason Grote, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

Writing assignment:

What are, in your opinion, the consequences of the prominent economical, cultural, and military spreading of the USA on the world scene?  

Food for thought:

Eric Schlosser takes up the complex question of the success of the fast-food industry as representative of the process of the spreading of American values, tastes and interests worldwide. Is the "cheap food" of poor quality a real paradigm of the American way of life? What other paradigms can you think of (country music, Hollywood movies, etc.)? What do they have in common? It is not incidental that McDonald's executives describe the company's ever-spreading presence in the world as "global realization:" "Americanization" of eating habits around the globe connects and equalizes people of different races, religions, and societal status, thereby emerging as a new and powerful lever of globalization. Schlosser seems to imply that the globalization thus achieved is mainly conducted by the USA. How does this phenomenon relate to Kaldor's idea of globalization and peacekeeping forces as its military articulation? Both Kaldor and Schlosser seem to suggest that globalization is inevitable. Who, Kaldor or Schlosser, views the process of globalization in a better light? With whom do you agree and why?

Sanja Bahun, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Globalization and Global Realization.

Globalization has offered access to products, information and communication, but not without tension. Based on Schlosser's essay and what you've read from the Kaldor piece, how do you explain the tension between globalizing forces and its backlash, or what some writers have called "localization?" How do you think the forces of globalization and localization compete. To what extent do they complement each other?"

Jack Jarmon, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

Back to top

Eric Schlosser, Mary Kaldor, and Amy Chua

Writing assignment:

What are the ways in which the US can recuperate its image and reestablish itself as a positive role-model in the apparently inevitable process of globalization? Should the US try to do that at all? Combining all three readings, position yourself towards these issues and present your own argument in a persuasive manner.

Food for thought:

Kaldor, Schlosser, and Chua explore the role of America in present-day global military, economic and cultural changes. The authors delineate both positive and negative impacts of US dominance on the world scene and the consequences it has on the image of the USA in the eyes of other nations. Amy Chua, in particular, engages in the discussion of anti-American sentiment on the most immediate basis. She perceives in this recent phenomenon not only valid nation-based attempts to resist "Americanization" and humiliation in the face of a culturally and economically dominant state, but also a more complicated process of "demagogue-fueled mass resentment against a market-dominant minority" (Chua 231). The visible (and often terrifying) costs of the anti-American climate cry for a solution to this complex cultural and socio-political development.

Sanja Bahun, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Globalization and Global Realization.

Back to top

Eric Schlosser and Amy Chua

As Chua points out, a number of countries have responded occasionally to multinational foreign investment by nationalizing American owned companies.  In the 1930s, for example, the Mexican government nationalized the entire Mexican oil industry which, until then, had been controlled by American and British companies, a move that was wildly popular with Mexicans. Imagine that the Mexican government is considering a move to nationalize the growing operation of McDonald's in that country. What feelings and thoughts might encourage Mexicans to support a government confiscation of McDonald's, and what groups would be most likely to endorse such a move? What would be the arguments against nationalization, and who would make these arguments? Do not confine your paper to Chua's explicit discussion of nationalization. Both essays provide explicitly or implicitly several specific arguments for and against the spread of American multinational corporations, arguments that would be relevant to a debate on nationalization.  

Questions to get you started:

Reread Chua's discussion of various attempts by governments to nationalize foreign-owned businesses. How does her discussion of nationalization fit into her overall argument?  What causes "fear," "resentment," and "envy" toward the US and what role would these factors play in such a decision? To what degree does the economic inequality that Chua describes justify nationalization? What role might "hegemony,"  "cultural imperialism," and "market domination" by a minority play in this debate? What do the various case histories she recounts suggest about the feasibility of confiscation? Why was nationalization popular even when it was not economically successful? Find passages in Schlosser that apply to this debate. Be sure to identify the different factors that are relevant to this debate. Some are economic, some cultural, some political (i.e. questions of power). Do not be satisfied with a partial explanation. If you think that some of the factors suggested in the reading are not relevant, do not ignore them; explain why you think they are not important.

Sally Sevcik, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

The Master-Servant Divide and Forecasting Errors in Faith (Assignment 4)

In her essay “ A World on the Edge,” Amy Chua says,

The global spread of markets and democracy is a principal aggravating cause of group hatred and ethnic violence throughout the non-Western world. In the numerous societies around the world that have a market-dominant minority, markets and democracy are not mutually reinforcing. Because markets and democracy benefit different ethnic groups in such societies, the pursuit of free-market democracy produces highly unstable and combustible conditions. (108)

She is suggesting that “when free-market democracy is pursued in the presence of a market-dominant minority, the result, almost invariably, is backlash” (108). We see such violent backlash happening throughout the world, exacerbated by globalization. In Eric Schlosser’s “Global Realization,” McDonald’s’ presence has also led to instances of backlash. One is therefore led to wonder if a “market-dominant minority” might exist in the case of McDonald’s in Europe. Is its presence there as potentially catastrophic as Chua predicts such a market-dominant minority, coupled with free-market democracy, might be elsewhere? Chua argues that the pursuit of free markets and democracy “can proceed only in deep tension with each other” (113), but is she correct in that assertion? Markets and democracy are typically seen as helpful for society, and yet she shows how the opposite is often true. Using globalizing fast-food chains as an example, make an argument about the circumstances that are necessary for free-market democracy to thrive, and discuss how it sometimes fails. When are markets and democracy beneficial, and when do they lead to backlash and ethnic group hatred?

Danis Banks, Rutgers University, Fall 2005

From The Master-Servant Divide and Forecasting Errors in Faith.

Back to top

Eric Schlosser, Amy Chua, and Alexander Stille

Stille spends a good deal of "The Ganges' Next Life" considering what he calls "the complex double identity" of Mishra. Drawing on examples from all three essays and what you have learned about globalization from these essays, I want you to think about how globalization contributes to mixed and conflicting identities. How does globalization relate to "complex double identities," your own and those described in the texts? You may focus on your own identity by setting it in relation to examples in the texts or entirely on those described in the texts.  You may consider how globalization contributes to conflicting identities and also consider the problems and advantages such identities offer in a global world.  

Questions to get you started:

Exactly what is a "complex double identity"? Does everyone have one? Compare and contrast figures from the different texts to arrive at your definition. How do examples from Chua and Schlosser differ from the model offered by Mishra? What difficulties and strengths do the conflicts in Mishra's identity create? How is identity developed? What is the role of media in creating identity? What examples of double identity seem closest to your own experience? To what degree is your identity double, triple, or complex? In what ways is your identity related to globalization?

Sally Sevcik, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

Back to top

Eric Schlosser and Michael Pollan

In "Global Realization," Eric Schlosser examines the phenomenon of globalization, paying particular attention to the McDonald's corporation, while in "Playing God in the Garden," Michael Pollan contemplates the latest trend in agriculture, the development of foods genetically engineered by biotech companies. Skeptical of the growing influence of multinational corporations, both authors address the ways that these corporations influence everything from our culture to the very nature of the planet. Are these authors suggesting that this progression is inevitable? Can we criticize the effects of globalization without acknowledging its advantages? Can we celebrate the advantages of globalization without acknowledging its detrimental effects? Develop a project in which you assess proper response of the general public to this increasing influence of corporations on our world. Remember to address the complexity of the issue-we should not make simple, unrealistic suggestions. What larger conditions would have to be changed in order to implement the kind of changes you suggest?

Molly Burke, Rutgers University, Spring 2005

From Identity and Agency.

Back to top

The Master-Servant Divide and Forecasting Errors in Faith (Assignment 3)

Toward the end of Eric Schlosser’s essay “Global Realization,” he says that in the German town called Plauen, “every Wednesday night, a few hundred people gather at The Ranch for line dancing” (517). He adds, “For a few hours the spirit of the American West fills this funky bar deep in the heart of Saxony…and the old dream lives on, the dream of freedom without limits, self-reliance, and a wide-open frontier” (517). But does the McDonald’s Corporation truly encourage self-reliance in the various countries where it opens? How would William Greider view the way that McDonald’s does business? What, if anything, might McDonald’s have in common with biotech companies?

If we assume that biotech farming and fast-food franchises both function according to a certain model of work, explore whether they operate under the model of a master-servant divide, or if they encourage self-sufficiency and independence (the worker-as-owner model). Should biotech and globalization—as seen through the actions and practices of the McDonald’s Corporation—change so that people benefit more? If so, how might this change occur? Make an argument about the responsibilities that biotech companies and fast-food chains have in providing food and employment for many of the world’s people.

You must quote from all three texts—Michael Pollan, Greider, and Schlosser—in this essay; provide quotation from more than one author at a time in your body paragraphs, to make connections. You also need to have a project.

Note: To avoid repeating what was said in Paper #2, use original quotation.

Danis Banks, Rutgers University, Fall 2005

From The Master-Servant Divide and Forecasting Errors in Faith.

Back to top