of 22
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
1/22
In this class we have observed the importance of identity to anindividual and to a population. However, this distinctive sense of selfcomes with a whole plethora of values and cultural norms that must be
adhered to. In this way a persons identity becomes so engrained thatit dictates how one communicates and interacts with others, how oneviews the world, and what one considers to be of utmost importance. Itis understandable then, how the convergence of two opposing or differ-ent ideologies has provided the spark for much of the world conflictthroughout history.
In the past, ones identity was typically determined by wherethey were born. It was difficult to travel, and therefore most did notmove far away from where they were raised. This meant that the samevalues and culture were passed on from generation to generation,
without very much change. In this way a very firm sense of us andthem arose, in which those who did not share the same values wereseen as evil and a threat; giving rise to the idea of the nation-state.Identity became firmly confined within the boundaries of the nation-state. As such, when conflict did erupt it often resulted in a war not be-tween random groups of people, but between clearly defined nation-states.
In recent years however, the world has become much more inter-connected as a result of rapidly growing technology and globalization.The barriers that once restrained efficient travel and communication
have been torn down. We live now in a world where information flowsfreely regardless of national borders. People, capital, and ideas areable to travel around the globe with a speed that would have beenunimaginable no more than 200 years ago. This has led to the emer-gence of multinational corporations, international trade unions, andworld regulatory organizations; however, far more importantly, it hascreated a world in which culture is no longer necessarily tied to geogra-phy.
This rise of global capitalism has changed the world in ways be-yond counting, but just as importantly, it has done so incredibly quick-
ly. The nation-state has attempted to respond by expanding upon, asAppadurai refers to it in Fear of Small Numbers, its vertebrate struc-ture. He suggests that this can be seen, ...by the large and growingbody of protocols, institutions, treaties, and agreements that seek toensure that all nations operate on symmetrical principles in relation totheir conduct with one another, whatever their hierarchies in power orwealth. (25) They have attempted to structure and control this new
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
2/22
world in the same way they always have, through rigid, unyielding lawsand regulations except on an international level.
The nation-states response is understandable when you considerthe fact that its right power is based upon the legislation it created. It
is only natural that it should work to maintain control over its people,because if it does not, it will fade into nothing but a distant memory.The problem with this method of strict legislative adherence is that theworld we now live in is no longer constrained by national boundaries.Capitalism, and the way of life that comes with it, has pervaded everycountry in the world. In the age of the Internet, someone in the UnitedStates can find and communicate with someone in India who has simi-lar views. Identity is no longer completely tied to the place one israised. Someone born in Croatia can be raised in America, and thismelding of cultures creates a new identity, a hybrid of both. Traditions,values, ways of living, they are all subject to rapid and drastic change
in this newly globalized world. This emergence of global connectivityand change has led to what Appadurai calls, cellular organizations,describing them as, Connected yet not vertically managed, coordinat-ed yet remarkably independent, capable of replication without centralmessaging structures, hazy in their central organizational features yetcrystal clear in their cellular strategies and effects... (28)
We can see that the evolution of modern capitalism into a globalcapitalistic system has split, to form a dichotomy of both vertebrateand cellular elements. These disjunctive components of our world to-day have been the source of much tension, and it is this tension that
has led to many modern day conflicts. As capitalism spreads aroundthe globe, it carries with it a certain way of life. It has become sostrong that to resist means isolation. There are many people who donot want to convert to the ways of capitalism, and wish to retain theirtraditional identities. So nations are forced to play a strange game inwhich they appeal to their people by emphasizing their nationalsovereignty and independence, but at the same time must enter theglobal market in order to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world.However, by doing so they create unrest and anger within their citi-zens, some of which take advantage of the autonomy provided by cel-lular organization. This in and of itself has created a new problem for
nation-states. No longer is a threat represented by another nation-state, but by an undefined group of people in all areas of the world,possibly even within the nation-state itself. So we see that even con-flicts have now evolved into a cellular process.
The process of globalization and the expansion of capitalismhave resulted in a number of unfortunate externalities. There is nodoubt that the growth and movement of industry around the world has
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
3/22
severely damaged the environment and many groups of people, aswell as physically separating members of specific cultures. Those whoresist this way of life are not without reason, despite their sometimesviolent actions. In his last chapter, Robbins makes suggestions as tohow these externalities could be reversed by rebuilding natural, politi-
cal, and social capital.
While making his recommendations, Robbins political beliefs andbiases become blatantly obvious. In my opinion he presents too hard aview of globalization and the rise of global capitalism. I do not mean tosuggest that the culture of capitalism is without any fault; simply thatit has also had a great deal of positive effects on the world as well. Be-cause of globalization my generation and those that follow have a newand completely unique view of the world. I do not see the world in rigidterms of nationality and belief. To me, the connections between peoplearound the world, the ability to rapidly share ideas and information,
and the perpetual expansion of the global economy is a good thing. Ican see among my peers a growing sense of respect, if not under-standing, of those with different beliefs. I think the evolution of cellularorganizations represent an amazing change in the way our world func-tions. These networks can be used for so many beneficial purposes, al-though as we have seen they can be used for the opposite as well.
It is for this reason that I must disagree with the suggestions putforth by Robbins. What he describes sounds to me like a movementback in time to strictly vertebrate, isolationist nations; resistant to anyform of change. I agree with him in that there are many problems fac-
ing our world and that if something is not done soon there will be dis-astrous consequences; however, one must look at the whole picture.Capitalism, despite its current faults, has the potential to create autopian world. What I believe many, including Robbins, have done isshut their eyes to this fact; they see the problems, but not the poten-tial benefits. I would propose instead that we focus on what needs tobe done to correct the mistakes of capitalism, but without removing itall together. Cellular processes I believe can greatly help in this en-deavor.
Change is a good thing; it leads to progress and innovation. Capi-
talism encourages both, and should therefore be preserved. Withoutcapitalism and the industrial revolution we would still be living in themiddle ages; without any of the goods, technology, or medicine thatdefine our age. I do not understand how It is impossible to travel backin time, and any attempt to bring back these outdated and inefficientworld orders would lead to stagnation and ultimately failure. As withnatural selection, only the fittest survive. Those that do not change are
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
4/22
at an evolutionary disadvantage, and in the end will die out. We cannotmove backward, only move forward.
In this class we have observed the importance of identity to anindividual and to a population. However, this distinctive sense of self
comes with a whole plethora of values and cultural norms that must beadhered to. In this way a persons identity becomes so engrained thatit dictates how one communicates and interacts with others, how oneviews the world, and what one considers to be of utmost importance. Itis understandable then, how the convergence of two opposing or differ-ent ideologies has provided the spark for much of the world conflictthroughout history.
In the past, ones identity was typically determined by wherethey were born. It was difficult to travel, and therefore most did notmove far away from where they were raised. This meant that the same
values and culture were passed on from generation to generation,without very much change. In this way a very firm sense of us andthem arose, in which those who did not share the same values wereseen as evil and a threat; giving rise to the idea of the nation-state.Identity became firmly confined within the boundaries of the nation-state. As such, when conflict did erupt it often resulted in a war not be-tween random groups of people, but between clearly defined nation-states.
In recent years however, the world has become much more inter-connected as a result of rapidly growing technology and globalization.
The barriers that once restrained efficient travel and communicationhave been torn down. We live now in a world where information flowsfreely regardless of national borders. People, capital, and ideas areable to travel around the globe with a speed that would have beenunimaginable no more than 200 years ago. This has led to the emer-gence of multinational corporations, international trade unions, andworld regulatory organizations; however, far more importantly, it hascreated a world in which culture is no longer necessarily tied to geogra-phy.
This rise of global capitalism has changed the world in ways be-
yond counting, but just as importantly, it has done so incredibly quick-ly. The nation-state has attempted to respond by expanding upon, asAppadurai refers to it in Fear of Small Numbers, its vertebrate struc-ture. He suggests that this can be seen, ...by the large and growingbody of protocols, institutions, treaties, and agreements that seek toensure that all nations operate on symmetrical principles in relation totheir conduct with one another, whatever their hierarchies in power orwealth. (25) They have attempted to structure and control this new
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
5/22
world in the same way they always have, through rigid, unyielding lawsand regulations except on an international level.
The nation-states response is understandable when you considerthe fact that its right power is based upon the legislation it created. It
is only natural that it should work to maintain control over its people,because if it does not, it will fade into nothing but a distant memory.The problem with this method of strict legislative adherence is that theworld we now live in is no longer constrained by national boundaries.Capitalism, and the way of life that comes with it, has pervaded everycountry in the world. In the age of the Internet, someone in the UnitedStates can find and communicate with someone in India who has simi-lar views. Identity is no longer completely tied to the place one israised. Someone born in Croatia can be raised in America, and thismelding of cultures creates a new identity, a hybrid of both. Traditions,values, ways of living, they are all subject to rapid and drastic change
in this newly globalized world. This emergence of global connectivityand change has led to what Appadurai calls, cellular organizations,describing them as, Connected yet not vertically managed, coordinat-ed yet remarkably independent, capable of replication without centralmessaging structures, hazy in their central organizational features yetcrystal clear in their cellular strategies and effects... (28)
We can see that the evolution of modern capitalism into a globalcapitalistic system has split, to form a dichotomy of both vertebrateand cellular elements. These disjunctive components of our world to-day have been the source of much tension, and it is this tension that
has led to many modern day conflicts. As capitalism spreads aroundthe globe, it carries with it a certain way of life. It has become sostrong that to resist means isolation. There are many people who donot want to convert to the ways of capitalism, and wish to retain theirtraditional identities. So nations are forced to play a strange game inwhich they appeal to their people by emphasizing their nationalsovereignty and independence, but at the same time must enter theglobal market in order to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world.However, by doing so they create unrest and anger within their citi-zens, some of which take advantage of the autonomy provided by cel-lular organization. This in and of itself has created a new problem for
nation-states. No longer is a threat represented by another nation-state, but by an undefined group of people in all areas of the world,possibly even within the nation-state itself. So we see that even con-flicts have now evolved into a cellular process.
The process of globalization and the expansion of capitalismhave resulted in a number of unfortunate externalities. There is nodoubt that the growth and movement of industry around the world has
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
6/22
severely damaged the environment and many groups of people, aswell as physically separating members of specific cultures. Those whoresist this way of life are not without reason, despite their sometimesviolent actions. In his last chapter, Robbins makes suggestions as tohow these externalities could be reversed by rebuilding natural, politi-
cal, and social capital.
While making his recommendations, Robbins political beliefs andbiases become blatantly obvious. In my opinion he presents too hard aview of globalization and the rise of global capitalism. I do not mean tosuggest that the culture of capitalism is without any fault; simply thatit has also had a great deal of positive effects on the world as well. Be-cause of globalization my generation and those that follow have a newand completely unique view of the world. I do not see the world in rigidterms of nationality and belief. To me, the connections between peoplearound the world, the ability to rapidly share ideas and information,
and the perpetual expansion of the global economy is a good thing. Ican see among my peers a growing sense of respect, if not under-standing, of those with different beliefs. I think the evolution of cellularorganizations represent an amazing change in the way our world func-tions. These networks can be used for so many beneficial purposes, al-though as we have seen they can be used for the opposite as well.
It is for this reason that I must disagree with the suggestions putforth by Robbins. What he describes sounds to me like a movementback in time to strictly vertebrate, isolationist nations; resistant to anyform of change. I agree with him in that there are many problems fac-
ing our world and that if something is not done soon there will be dis-astrous consequences; however, one must look at the whole picture.Capitalism, despite its current faults, has the potential to create autopian world. What I believe many, including Robbins, have done isshut their eyes to this fact; they see the problems, but not the poten-tial benefits. I would propose instead that we focus on what needs tobe done to correct the mistakes of capitalism, but without removing itall together. Cellular processes I believe can greatly help in this en-deavor.
Change is a good thing; it leads to progress and innovation. Capi-
talism encourages both, and should therefore be preserved. Withoutcapitalism and the industrial revolution we would still be living in themiddle ages; without any of the goods, technology, or medicine thatdefine our age. I do not understand how It is impossible to travel backin time, and any attempt to bring back these outdated and inefficientworld orders would lead to stagnation and ultimately failure. As withnatural selection, only the fittest survive. Those that do not change are
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
7/22
at an evolutionary disadvantage, and in the end will die out. We cannotmove backward, only move forward.
In this class we have observed the importance of identity to anindividual and to a population. However, this distinctive sense of self
comes with a whole plethora of values and cultural norms that must beadhered to. In this way a persons identity becomes so engrained thatit dictates how one communicates and interacts with others, how oneviews the world, and what one considers to be of utmost importance. Itis understandable then, how the convergence of two opposing or differ-ent ideologies has provided the spark for much of the world conflictthroughout history.
In the past, ones identity was typically determined by wherethey were born. It was difficult to travel, and therefore most did notmove far away from where they were raised. This meant that the same
values and culture were passed on from generation to generation,without very much change. In this way a very firm sense of us andthem arose, in which those who did not share the same values wereseen as evil and a threat; giving rise to the idea of the nation-state.Identity became firmly confined within the boundaries of the nation-state. As such, when conflict did erupt it often resulted in a war not be-tween random groups of people, but between clearly defined nation-states.
In recent years however, the world has become much more inter-connected as a result of rapidly growing technology and globalization.
The barriers that once restrained efficient travel and communicationhave been torn down. We live now in a world where information flowsfreely regardless of national borders. People, capital, and ideas areable to travel around the globe with a speed that would have beenunimaginable no more than 200 years ago. This has led to the emer-gence of multinational corporations, international trade unions, andworld regulatory organizations; however, far more importantly, it hascreated a world in which culture is no longer necessarily tied to geogra-phy.
This rise of global capitalism has changed the world in ways be-
yond counting, but just as importantly, it has done so incredibly quick-ly. The nation-state has attempted to respond by expanding upon, asAppadurai refers to it in Fear of Small Numbers, its vertebrate struc-ture. He suggests that this can be seen, ...by the large and growingbody of protocols, institutions, treaties, and agreements that seek toensure that all nations operate on symmetrical principles in relation totheir conduct with one another, whatever their hierarchies in power orwealth. (25) They have attempted to structure and control this new
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
8/22
world in the same way they always have, through rigid, unyielding lawsand regulations except on an international level.
The nation-states response is understandable when you considerthe fact that its right power is based upon the legislation it created. It
is only natural that it should work to maintain control over its people,because if it does not, it will fade into nothing but a distant memory.The problem with this method of strict legislative adherence is that theworld we now live in is no longer constrained by national boundaries.Capitalism, and the way of life that comes with it, has pervaded everycountry in the world. In the age of the Internet, someone in the UnitedStates can find and communicate with someone in India who has simi-lar views. Identity is no longer completely tied to the place one israised. Someone born in Croatia can be raised in America, and thismelding of cultures creates a new identity, a hybrid of both. Traditions,values, ways of living, they are all subject to rapid and drastic change
in this newly globalized world. This emergence of global connectivityand change has led to what Appadurai calls, cellular organizations,describing them as, Connected yet not vertically managed, coordinat-ed yet remarkably independent, capable of replication without centralmessaging structures, hazy in their central organizational features yetcrystal clear in their cellular strategies and effects... (28)
We can see that the evolution of modern capitalism into a globalcapitalistic system has split, to form a dichotomy of both vertebrateand cellular elements. These disjunctive components of our world to-day have been the source of much tension, and it is this tension that
has led to many modern day conflicts. As capitalism spreads aroundthe globe, it carries with it a certain way of life. It has become sostrong that to resist means isolation. There are many people who donot want to convert to the ways of capitalism, and wish to retain theirtraditional identities. So nations are forced to play a strange game inwhich they appeal to their people by emphasizing their nationalsovereignty and independence, but at the same time must enter theglobal market in order to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world.However, by doing so they create unrest and anger within their citi-zens, some of which take advantage of the autonomy provided by cel-lular organization. This in and of itself has created a new problem for
nation-states. No longer is a threat represented by another nation-state, but by an undefined group of people in all areas of the world,possibly even within the nation-state itself. So we see that even con-flicts have now evolved into a cellular process.
The process of globalization and the expansion of capitalismhave resulted in a number of unfortunate externalities. There is nodoubt that the growth and movement of industry around the world has
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
9/22
severely damaged the environment and many groups of people, aswell as physically separating members of specific cultures. Those whoresist this way of life are not without reason, despite their sometimesviolent actions. In his last chapter, Robbins makes suggestions as tohow these externalities could be reversed by rebuilding natural, politi-
cal, and social capital.
While making his recommendations, Robbins political beliefs andbiases become blatantly obvious. In my opinion he presents too hard aview of globalization and the rise of global capitalism. I do not mean tosuggest that the culture of capitalism is without any fault; simply thatit has also had a great deal of positive effects on the world as well. Be-cause of globalization my generation and those that follow have a newand completely unique view of the world. I do not see the world in rigidterms of nationality and belief. To me, the connections between peoplearound the world, the ability to rapidly share ideas and information,
and the perpetual expansion of the global economy is a good thing. Ican see among my peers a growing sense of respect, if not under-standing, of those with different beliefs. I think the evolution of cellularorganizations represent an amazing change in the way our world func-tions. These networks can be used for so many beneficial purposes, al-though as we have seen they can be used for the opposite as well.
It is for this reason that I must disagree with the suggestions putforth by Robbins. What he describes sounds to me like a movementback in time to strictly vertebrate, isolationist nations; resistant to anyform of change. I agree with him in that there are many problems fac-
ing our world and that if something is not done soon there will be dis-astrous consequences; however, one must look at the whole picture.Capitalism, despite its current faults, has the potential to create autopian world. What I believe many, including Robbins, have done isshut their eyes to this fact; they see the problems, but not the poten-tial benefits. I would propose instead that we focus on what needs tobe done to correct the mistakes of capitalism, but without removing itall together. Cellular processes I believe can greatly help in this en-deavor.
Change is a good thing; it leads to progress and innovation. Capi-
talism encourages both, and should therefore be preserved. Withoutcapitalism and the industrial revolution we would still be living in themiddle ages; without any of the goods, technology, or medicine thatdefine our age. I do not understand how It is impossible to travel backin time, and any attempt to bring back these outdated and inefficientworld orders would lead to stagnation and ultimately failure. As withnatural selection, only the fittest survive. Those that do not change are
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
10/22
at an evolutionary disadvantage, and in the end will die out. We cannotmove backward, only move forward.
In this class we have observed the importance of identity to anindividual and to a population. However, this distinctive sense of self
comes with a whole plethora of values and cultural norms that must beadhered to. In this way a persons identity becomes so engrained thatit dictates how one communicates and interacts with others, how oneviews the world, and what one considers to be of utmost importance. Itis understandable then, how the convergence of two opposing or differ-ent ideologies has provided the spark for much of the world conflictthroughout history.
In the past, ones identity was typically determined by wherethey were born. It was difficult to travel, and therefore most did notmove far away from where they were raised. This meant that the same
values and culture were passed on from generation to generation,without very much change. In this way a very firm sense of us andthem arose, in which those who did not share the same values wereseen as evil and a threat; giving rise to the idea of the nation-state.Identity became firmly confined within the boundaries of the nation-state. As such, when conflict did erupt it often resulted in a war not be-tween random groups of people, but between clearly defined nation-states.
In recent years however, the world has become much more inter-connected as a result of rapidly growing technology and globalization.
The barriers that once restrained efficient travel and communicationhave been torn down. We live now in a world where information flowsfreely regardless of national borders. People, capital, and ideas areable to travel around the globe with a speed that would have beenunimaginable no more than 200 years ago. This has led to the emer-gence of multinational corporations, international trade unions, andworld regulatory organizations; however, far more importantly, it hascreated a world in which culture is no longer necessarily tied to geogra-phy.
This rise of global capitalism has changed the world in ways be-
yond counting, but just as importantly, it has done so incredibly quick-ly. The nation-state has attempted to respond by expanding upon, asAppadurai refers to it in Fear of Small Numbers, its vertebrate struc-ture. He suggests that this can be seen, ...by the large and growingbody of protocols, institutions, treaties, and agreements that seek toensure that all nations operate on symmetrical principles in relation totheir conduct with one another, whatever their hierarchies in power orwealth. (25) They have attempted to structure and control this new
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
11/22
world in the same way they always have, through rigid, unyielding lawsand regulations except on an international level.
The nation-states response is understandable when you considerthe fact that its right power is based upon the legislation it created. It
is only natural that it should work to maintain control over its people,because if it does not, it will fade into nothing but a distant memory.The problem with this method of strict legislative adherence is that theworld we now live in is no longer constrained by national boundaries.Capitalism, and the way of life that comes with it, has pervaded everycountry in the world. In the age of the Internet, someone in the UnitedStates can find and communicate with someone in India who has simi-lar views. Identity is no longer completely tied to the place one israised. Someone born in Croatia can be raised in America, and thismelding of cultures creates a new identity, a hybrid of both. Traditions,values, ways of living, they are all subject to rapid and drastic change
in this newly globalized world. This emergence of global connectivityand change has led to what Appadurai calls, cellular organizations,describing them as, Connected yet not vertically managed, coordinat-ed yet remarkably independent, capable of replication without centralmessaging structures, hazy in their central organizational features yetcrystal clear in their cellular strategies and effects... (28)
We can see that the evolution of modern capitalism into a globalcapitalistic system has split, to form a dichotomy of both vertebrateand cellular elements. These disjunctive components of our world to-day have been the source of much tension, and it is this tension that
has led to many modern day conflicts. As capitalism spreads aroundthe globe, it carries with it a certain way of life. It has become sostrong that to resist means isolation. There are many people who donot want to convert to the ways of capitalism, and wish to retain theirtraditional identities. So nations are forced to play a strange game inwhich they appeal to their people by emphasizing their nationalsovereignty and independence, but at the same time must enter theglobal market in order to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world.However, by doing so they create unrest and anger within their citi-zens, some of which take advantage of the autonomy provided by cel-lular organization. This in and of itself has created a new problem for
nation-states. No longer is a threat represented by another nation-state, but by an undefined group of people in all areas of the world,possibly even within the nation-state itself. So we see that even con-flicts have now evolved into a cellular process.
The process of globalization and the expansion of capitalismhave resulted in a number of unfortunate externalities. There is nodoubt that the growth and movement of industry around the world has
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
12/22
severely damaged the environment and many groups of people, aswell as physically separating members of specific cultures. Those whoresist this way of life are not without reason, despite their sometimesviolent actions. In his last chapter, Robbins makes suggestions as tohow these externalities could be reversed by rebuilding natural, politi-
cal, and social capital.
While making his recommendations, Robbins political beliefs andbiases become blatantly obvious. In my opinion he presents too hard aview of globalization and the rise of global capitalism. I do not mean tosuggest that the culture of capitalism is without any fault; simply thatit has also had a great deal of positive effects on the world as well. Be-cause of globalization my generation and those that follow have a newand completely unique view of the world. I do not see the world in rigidterms of nationality and belief. To me, the connections between peoplearound the world, the ability to rapidly share ideas and information,
and the perpetual expansion of the global economy is a good thing. Ican see among my peers a growing sense of respect, if not under-standing, of those with different beliefs. I think the evolution of cellularorganizations represent an amazing change in the way our world func-tions. These networks can be used for so many beneficial purposes, al-though as we have seen they can be used for the opposite as well.
It is for this reason that I must disagree with the suggestions putforth by Robbins. What he describes sounds to me like a movementback in time to strictly vertebrate, isolationist nations; resistant to anyform of change. I agree with him in that there are many problems fac-
ing our world and that if something is not done soon there will be dis-astrous consequences; however, one must look at the whole picture.Capitalism, despite its current faults, has the potential to create autopian world. What I believe many, including Robbins, have done isshut their eyes to this fact; they see the problems, but not the poten-tial benefits. I would propose instead that we focus on what needs tobe done to correct the mistakes of capitalism, but without removing itall together. Cellular processes I believe can greatly help in this en-deavor.
Change is a good thing; it leads to progress and innovation. Capi-
talism encourages both, and should therefore be preserved. Withoutcapitalism and the industrial revolution we would still be living in themiddle ages; without any of the goods, technology, or medicine thatdefine our age. I do not understand how It is impossible to travel backin time, and any attempt to bring back these outdated and inefficientworld orders would lead to stagnation and ultimately failure. As withnatural selection, only the fittest survive. Those that do not change are
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
13/22
at an evolutionary disadvantage, and in the end will die out. We cannotmove backward, only move forward.
In this class we have observed the importance of identity to anindividual and to a population. However, this distinctive sense of self
comes with a whole plethora of values and cultural norms that must beadhered to. In this way a persons identity becomes so engrained thatit dictates how one communicates and interacts with others, how oneviews the world, and what one considers to be of utmost importance. Itis understandable then, how the convergence of two opposing or differ-ent ideologies has provided the spark for much of the world conflictthroughout history.
In the past, ones identity was typically determined by wherethey were born. It was difficult to travel, and therefore most did notmove far away from where they were raised. This meant that the same
values and culture were passed on from generation to generation,without very much change. In this way a very firm sense of us andthem arose, in which those who did not share the same values wereseen as evil and a threat; giving rise to the idea of the nation-state.Identity became firmly confined within the boundaries of the nation-state. As such, when conflict did erupt it often resulted in a war not be-tween random groups of people, but between clearly defined nation-states.
In recent years however, the world has become much more inter-connected as a result of rapidly growing technology and globalization.
The barriers that once restrained efficient travel and communicationhave been torn down. We live now in a world where information flowsfreely regardless of national borders. People, capital, and ideas areable to travel around the globe with a speed that would have beenunimaginable no more than 200 years ago. This has led to the emer-gence of multinational corporations, international trade unions, andworld regulatory organizations; however, far more importantly, it hascreated a world in which culture is no longer necessarily tied to geogra-phy.
This rise of global capitalism has changed the world in ways be-
yond counting, but just as importantly, it has done so incredibly quick-ly. The nation-state has attempted to respond by expanding upon, asAppadurai refers to it in Fear of Small Numbers, its vertebrate struc-ture. He suggests that this can be seen, ...by the large and growingbody of protocols, institutions, treaties, and agreements that seek toensure that all nations operate on symmetrical principles in relation totheir conduct with one another, whatever their hierarchies in power orwealth. (25) They have attempted to structure and control this new
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
14/22
world in the same way they always have, through rigid, unyielding lawsand regulations except on an international level.
The nation-states response is understandable when you considerthe fact that its right power is based upon the legislation it created. It
is only natural that it should work to maintain control over its people,because if it does not, it will fade into nothing but a distant memory.The problem with this method of strict legislative adherence is that theworld we now live in is no longer constrained by national boundaries.Capitalism, and the way of life that comes with it, has pervaded everycountry in the world. In the age of the Internet, someone in the UnitedStates can find and communicate with someone in India who has simi-lar views. Identity is no longer completely tied to the place one israised. Someone born in Croatia can be raised in America, and thismelding of cultures creates a new identity, a hybrid of both. Traditions,values, ways of living, they are all subject to rapid and drastic change
in this newly globalized world. This emergence of global connectivityand change has led to what Appadurai calls, cellular organizations,describing them as, Connected yet not vertically managed, coordinat-ed yet remarkably independent, capable of replication without centralmessaging structures, hazy in their central organizational features yetcrystal clear in their cellular strategies and effects... (28)
We can see that the evolution of modern capitalism into a globalcapitalistic system has split, to form a dichotomy of both vertebrateand cellular elements. These disjunctive components of our world to-day have been the source of much tension, and it is this tension that
has led to many modern day conflicts. As capitalism spreads aroundthe globe, it carries with it a certain way of life. It has become sostrong that to resist means isolation. There are many people who donot want to convert to the ways of capitalism, and wish to retain theirtraditional identities. So nations are forced to play a strange game inwhich they appeal to their people by emphasizing their nationalsovereignty and independence, but at the same time must enter theglobal market in order to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world.However, by doing so they create unrest and anger within their citi-zens, some of which take advantage of the autonomy provided by cel-lular organization. This in and of itself has created a new problem for
nation-states. No longer is a threat represented by another nation-state, but by an undefined group of people in all areas of the world,possibly even within the nation-state itself. So we see that even con-flicts have now evolved into a cellular process.
The process of globalization and the expansion of capitalismhave resulted in a number of unfortunate externalities. There is nodoubt that the growth and movement of industry around the world has
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
15/22
severely damaged the environment and many groups of people, aswell as physically separating members of specific cultures. Those whoresist this way of life are not without reason, despite their sometimesviolent actions. In his last chapter, Robbins makes suggestions as tohow these externalities could be reversed by rebuilding natural, politi-
cal, and social capital.
While making his recommendations, Robbins political beliefs andbiases become blatantly obvious. In my opinion he presents too hard aview of globalization and the rise of global capitalism. I do not mean tosuggest that the culture of capitalism is without any fault; simply thatit has also had a great deal of positive effects on the world as well. Be-cause of globalization my generation and those that follow have a newand completely unique view of the world. I do not see the world in rigidterms of nationality and belief. To me, the connections between peoplearound the world, the ability to rapidly share ideas and information,
and the perpetual expansion of the global economy is a good thing. Ican see among my peers a growing sense of respect, if not under-standing, of those with different beliefs. I think the evolution of cellularorganizations represent an amazing change in the way our world func-tions. These networks can be used for so many beneficial purposes, al-though as we have seen they can be used for the opposite as well.
It is for this reason that I must disagree with the suggestions putforth by Robbins. What he describes sounds to me like a movementback in time to strictly vertebrate, isolationist nations; resistant to anyform of change. I agree with him in that there are many problems fac-
ing our world and that if something is not done soon there will be dis-astrous consequences; however, one must look at the whole picture.Capitalism, despite its current faults, has the potential to create autopian world. What I believe many, including Robbins, have done isshut their eyes to this fact; they see the problems, but not the poten-tial benefits. I would propose instead that we focus on what needs tobe done to correct the mistakes of capitalism, but without removing itall together. Cellular processes I believe can greatly help in this en-deavor.
Change is a good thing; it leads to progress and innovation. Capi-
talism encourages both, and should therefore be preserved. Withoutcapitalism and the industrial revolution we would still be living in themiddle ages; without any of the goods, technology, or medicine thatdefine our age. I do not understand how It is impossible to travel backin time, and any attempt to bring back these outdated and inefficientworld orders would lead to stagnation and ultimately failure. As withnatural selection, only the fittest survive. Those that do not change are
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
16/22
at an evolutionary disadvantage, and in the end will die out. We cannotmove backward, only move forward.
In this class we have observed the importance of identity to anindividual and to a population. However, this distinctive sense of self
comes with a whole plethora of values and cultural norms that must beadhered to. In this way a persons identity becomes so engrained thatit dictates how one communicates and interacts with others, how oneviews the world, and what one considers to be of utmost importance. Itis understandable then, how the convergence of two opposing or differ-ent ideologies has provided the spark for much of the world conflictthroughout history.
In the past, ones identity was typically determined by wherethey were born. It was difficult to travel, and therefore most did notmove far away from where they were raised. This meant that the same
values and culture were passed on from generation to generation,without very much change. In this way a very firm sense of us andthem arose, in which those who did not share the same values wereseen as evil and a threat; giving rise to the idea of the nation-state.Identity became firmly confined within the boundaries of the nation-state. As such, when conflict did erupt it often resulted in a war not be-tween random groups of people, but between clearly defined nation-states.
In recent years however, the world has become much more inter-connected as a result of rapidly growing technology and globalization.
The barriers that once restrained efficient travel and communicationhave been torn down. We live now in a world where information flowsfreely regardless of national borders. People, capital, and ideas areable to travel around the globe with a speed that would have beenunimaginable no more than 200 years ago. This has led to the emer-gence of multinational corporations, international trade unions, andworld regulatory organizations; however, far more importantly, it hascreated a world in which culture is no longer necessarily tied to geogra-phy.
This rise of global capitalism has changed the world in ways be-
yond counting, but just as importantly, it has done so incredibly quick-ly. The nation-state has attempted to respond by expanding upon, asAppadurai refers to it in Fear of Small Numbers, its vertebrate struc-ture. He suggests that this can be seen, ...by the large and growingbody of protocols, institutions, treaties, and agreements that seek toensure that all nations operate on symmetrical principles in relation totheir conduct with one another, whatever their hierarchies in power orwealth. (25) They have attempted to structure and control this new
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
17/22
world in the same way they always have, through rigid, unyielding lawsand regulations except on an international level.
The nation-states response is understandable when you considerthe fact that its right power is based upon the legislation it created. It
is only natural that it should work to maintain control over its people,because if it does not, it will fade into nothing but a distant memory.The problem with this method of strict legislative adherence is that theworld we now live in is no longer constrained by national boundaries.Capitalism, and the way of life that comes with it, has pervaded everycountry in the world. In the age of the Internet, someone in the UnitedStates can find and communicate with someone in India who has simi-lar views. Identity is no longer completely tied to the place one israised. Someone born in Croatia can be raised in America, and thismelding of cultures creates a new identity, a hybrid of both. Traditions,values, ways of living, they are all subject to rapid and drastic change
in this newly globalized world. This emergence of global connectivityand change has led to what Appadurai calls, cellular organizations,describing them as, Connected yet not vertically managed, coordinat-ed yet remarkably independent, capable of replication without centralmessaging structures, hazy in their central organizational features yetcrystal clear in their cellular strategies and effects... (28)
We can see that the evolution of modern capitalism into a globalcapitalistic system has split, to form a dichotomy of both vertebrateand cellular elements. These disjunctive components of our world to-day have been the source of much tension, and it is this tension that
has led to many modern day conflicts. As capitalism spreads aroundthe globe, it carries with it a certain way of life. It has become sostrong that to resist means isolation. There are many people who donot want to convert to the ways of capitalism, and wish to retain theirtraditional identities. So nations are forced to play a strange game inwhich they appeal to their people by emphasizing their nationalsovereignty and independence, but at the same time must enter theglobal market in order to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world.However, by doing so they create unrest and anger within their citi-zens, some of which take advantage of the autonomy provided by cel-lular organization. This in and of itself has created a new problem for
nation-states. No longer is a threat represented by another nation-state, but by an undefined group of people in all areas of the world,possibly even within the nation-state itself. So we see that even con-flicts have now evolved into a cellular process.
The process of globalization and the expansion of capitalismhave resulted in a number of unfortunate externalities. There is nodoubt that the growth and movement of industry around the world has
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
18/22
severely damaged the environment and many groups of people, aswell as physically separating members of specific cultures. Those whoresist this way of life are not without reason, despite their sometimesviolent actions. In his last chapter, Robbins makes suggestions as tohow these externalities could be reversed by rebuilding natural, politi-
cal, and social capital.
While making his recommendations, Robbins political beliefs andbiases become blatantly obvious. In my opinion he presents too hard aview of globalization and the rise of global capitalism. I do not mean tosuggest that the culture of capitalism is without any fault; simply thatit has also had a great deal of positive effects on the world as well. Be-cause of globalization my generation and those that follow have a newand completely unique view of the world. I do not see the world in rigidterms of nationality and belief. To me, the connections between peoplearound the world, the ability to rapidly share ideas and information,
and the perpetual expansion of the global economy is a good thing. Ican see among my peers a growing sense of respect, if not under-standing, of those with different beliefs. I think the evolution of cellularorganizations represent an amazing change in the way our world func-tions. These networks can be used for so many beneficial purposes, al-though as we have seen they can be used for the opposite as well.
It is for this reason that I must disagree with the suggestions putforth by Robbins. What he describes sounds to me like a movementback in time to strictly vertebrate, isolationist nations; resistant to anyform of change. I agree with him in that there are many problems fac-
ing our world and that if something is not done soon there will be dis-astrous consequences; however, one must look at the whole picture.Capitalism, despite its current faults, has the potential to create autopian world. What I believe many, including Robbins, have done isshut their eyes to this fact; they see the problems, but not the poten-tial benefits. I would propose instead that we focus on what needs tobe done to correct the mistakes of capitalism, but without removing itall together. Cellular processes I believe can greatly help in this en-deavor.
Change is a good thing; it leads to progress and innovation. Capi-
talism encourages both, and should therefore be preserved. Withoutcapitalism and the industrial revolution we would still be living in themiddle ages; without any of the goods, technology, or medicine thatdefine our age. I do not understand how It is impossible to travel backin time, and any attempt to bring back these outdated and inefficientworld orders would lead to stagnation and ultimately failure. As withnatural selection, only the fittest survive. Those that do not change are
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
19/22
at an evolutionary disadvantage, and in the end will die out. We cannotmove backward, only move forward.
In this class we have observed the importance of identity to anindividual and to a population. However, this distinctive sense of self
comes with a whole plethora of values and cultural norms that must beadhered to. In this way a persons identity becomes so engrained thatit dictates how one communicates and interacts with others, how oneviews the world, and what one considers to be of utmost importance. Itis understandable then, how the convergence of two opposing or differ-ent ideologies has provided the spark for much of the world conflictthroughout history.
In the past, ones identity was typically determined by wherethey were born. It was difficult to travel, and therefore most did notmove far away from where they were raised. This meant that the same
values and culture were passed on from generation to generation,without very much change. In this way a very firm sense of us andthem arose, in which those who did not share the same values wereseen as evil and a threat; giving rise to the idea of the nation-state.Identity became firmly confined within the boundaries of the nation-state. As such, when conflict did erupt it often resulted in a war not be-tween random groups of people, but between clearly defined nation-states.
In recent years however, the world has become much more inter-connected as a result of rapidly growing technology and globalization.
The barriers that once restrained efficient travel and communicationhave been torn down. We live now in a world where information flowsfreely regardless of national borders. People, capital, and ideas areable to travel around the globe with a speed that would have beenunimaginable no more than 200 years ago. This has led to the emer-gence of multinational corporations, international trade unions, andworld regulatory organizations; however, far more importantly, it hascreated a world in which culture is no longer necessarily tied to geogra-phy.
This rise of global capitalism has changed the world in ways be-
yond counting, but just as importantly, it has done so incredibly quick-ly. The nation-state has attempted to respond by expanding upon, asAppadurai refers to it in Fear of Small Numbers, its vertebrate struc-ture. He suggests that this can be seen, ...by the large and growingbody of protocols, institutions, treaties, and agreements that seek toensure that all nations operate on symmetrical principles in relation totheir conduct with one another, whatever their hierarchies in power orwealth. (25) They have attempted to structure and control this new
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
20/22
world in the same way they always have, through rigid, unyielding lawsand regulations except on an international level.
The nation-states response is understandable when you considerthe fact that its right power is based upon the legislation it created. It
is only natural that it should work to maintain control over its people,because if it does not, it will fade into nothing but a distant memory.The problem with this method of strict legislative adherence is that theworld we now live in is no longer constrained by national boundaries.Capitalism, and the way of life that comes with it, has pervaded everycountry in the world. In the age of the Internet, someone in the UnitedStates can find and communicate with someone in India who has simi-lar views. Identity is no longer completely tied to the place one israised. Someone born in Croatia can be raised in America, and thismelding of cultures creates a new identity, a hybrid of both. Traditions,values, ways of living, they are all subject to rapid and drastic change
in this newly globalized world. This emergence of global connectivityand change has led to what Appadurai calls, cellular organizations,describing them as, Connected yet not vertically managed, coordinat-ed yet remarkably independent, capable of replication without centralmessaging structures, hazy in their central organizational features yetcrystal clear in their cellular strategies and effects... (28)
We can see that the evolution of modern capitalism into a globalcapitalistic system has split, to form a dichotomy of both vertebrateand cellular elements. These disjunctive components of our world to-day have been the source of much tension, and it is this tension that
has led to many modern day conflicts. As capitalism spreads aroundthe globe, it carries with it a certain way of life. It has become sostrong that to resist means isolation. There are many people who donot want to convert to the ways of capitalism, and wish to retain theirtraditional identities. So nations are forced to play a strange game inwhich they appeal to their people by emphasizing their nationalsovereignty and independence, but at the same time must enter theglobal market in order to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world.However, by doing so they create unrest and anger within their citi-zens, some of which take advantage of the autonomy provided by cel-lular organization. This in and of itself has created a new problem for
nation-states. No longer is a threat represented by another nation-state, but by an undefined group of people in all areas of the world,possibly even within the nation-state itself. So we see that even con-flicts have now evolved into a cellular process.
The process of globalization and the expansion of capitalismhave resulted in a number of unfortunate externalities. There is nodoubt that the growth and movement of industry around the world has
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
21/22
severely damaged the environment and many groups of people, aswell as physically separating members of specific cultures. Those whoresist this way of life are not without reason, despite their sometimesviolent actions. In his last chapter, Robbins makes suggestions as tohow these externalities could be reversed by rebuilding natural, politi-
cal, and social capital.
While making his recommendations, Robbins political beliefs andbiases become blatantly obvious. In my opinion he presents too hard aview of globalization and the rise of global capitalism. I do not mean tosuggest that the culture of capitalism is without any fault; simply thatit has also had a great deal of positive effects on the world as well. Be-cause of globalization my generation and those that follow have a newand completely unique view of the world. I do not see the world in rigidterms of nationality and belief. To me, the connections between peoplearound the world, the ability to rapidly share ideas and information,
and the perpetual expansion of the global economy is a good thing. Ican see among my peers a growing sense of respect, if not under-standing, of those with different beliefs. I think the evolution of cellularorganizations represent an amazing change in the way our world func-tions. These networks can be used for so many beneficial purposes, al-though as we have seen they can be used for the opposite as well.
It is for this reason that I must disagree with the suggestions putforth by Robbins. What he describes sounds to me like a movementback in time to strictly vertebrate, isolationist nations; resistant to anyform of change. I agree with him in that there are many problems fac-
ing our world and that if something is not done soon there will be dis-astrous consequences; however, one must look at the whole picture.Capitalism, despite its current faults, has the potential to create autopian world. What I believe many, including Robbins, have done isshut their eyes to this fact; they see the problems, but not the poten-tial benefits. I would propose instead that we focus on what needs tobe done to correct the mistakes of capitalism, but without removing itall together. Cellular processes I believe can greatly help in this en-deavor.
Change is a good thing; it leads to progress and innovation. Capi-
talism encourages both, and should therefore be preserved. Withoutcapitalism and the industrial revolution we would still be living in themiddle ages; without any of the goods, technology, or medicine thatdefine our age. I do not understand how It is impossible to travel backin time, and any attempt to bring back these outdated and inefficientworld orders would lead to stagnation and ultimately failure. As withnatural selection, only the fittest survive. Those that do not change are
7/29/2019 Final Anthro Paper 2.0
22/22
at an evolutionary disadvantage, and in the end will die out. We cannotmove backward, only move forward.
