 |
 |
I mentioned 'global era' rather than focusing on 'globalised' and 'globalisation' in my previous message. 'Global era' means our communication on the earth is getting more intense, therefore multiple factors might be intervene more heavily and easily. The war is not only happened on the frontier, but also elsewhere even on a discussion board like this one. When I mentioned 'global', doesn't really mean to distinguish 'the west' 'the east' 'capitalisation'..etc. 'Global' can be a value-free word, I supposed, just mean a complicated world we face today. By the way, I am typing in a very calm mood. yuwei Baruch Kimmerling wrote: > On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Yuwei Lin wrote: > > > Oppose! > > Of course this will be a global war. Any war happened on the earth will > > influence one another, not only from the political perspective, but also a broad > > array of issues such as religional, cultural, ethnical, environmental, > > economical etc. Especially this is a global era, no one can really set > > themselves outside the world. To see any war as regional or local is wrong and > > narrow-minded, particularly this mistake happened on a sociologist! > > Hey, hey, hey: calm down. It is a big difference between a "global > war" (eg. the west vs. the rest) and the statement that local or > regional events and processes can have some effects and infect other parts > of the globe (back to the old functionalist homeostatic presumptions?). > A good sociologist must be able to make distinctions between different > phenomenon. Globalization is not chips with everything. > bk. -- Yuwei Lin Science and Technology Studies Unit (SATSU) Department of Sociology University of York York YO10 5DD UK Tel. +44-01904-434742 Fax. +44-01904-433043 http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~yl107/ http://www.york.ac.uk/org/satsu/