Response to Iyer’s article

            In all honesty I think the article was just a bundle of confusing, repetitive nonsense. I mean, I agree with the fact that the world is becoming more and more inter-mixed. But it seemed to me that all he was doing was analyzing everything in the environment around him into different nations. Again, I still agree with what he was saying, it is how he said it that turned me off from the whole article. He could have gone a little further into statistics and predictions instead of explaining how someone can claim to be “Canadian” and live in Hong Kong.

            He then tried to explain how this mix-match of race and ethnicity can be associated to trade of goods and cultural trends. Which he ended up liking everything to America somehow, which said to me that he was anticipating the global takeover by the American culture. Granted there is a Burger King in downtown Hong Kong, but, that doesn’t necessarily mean that America is taking over the world’s culture. It’s only an expansion to gain more money if franchising. There are plenty of foreign food restaurants in America but we don’t take it into any thought that they might be taking our culture over.

            I might just be ranting off my own opinion on this article, but is that not what a response is supposed to be? Which I think it is appropriate because that is what I seen the article to be, just opinion based. This man has a very diverse background, and education from Oxford and Harvard, and has written for Time magazine. I would imagine than an article like this would not have been written had it not been for the journalist’s thoughts on the subject. I believe this article serves no purpose other than to tell people what this man thinks of globalization. Not that he is saying it is a bad thing, but there is no informational value that I can find useful to me in this article.

1 Comment(s)

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI