In your opinion, is there one fundamental difference that separates people of the world?
What is the primary division of the world?
As global citizens vs citizens of somewhere?
As the winners and losers from globalization?
As a clash of civilizations?
There is no necessarily correct answer for this assignment – points will be given for clear expression of thought. An equally valid response is to explain why you think there isn’t one fundamental way in which the world separates.
Read the three articles:
1 – Friedman – It’s a flat world, after all
2 – Forsyth – Theresa May’s new 3rd way
3 – Gelfand – Here’s the science…
Summarize and explain the key global division identified in each article. This should be at least a paragraph per article.
Which of the three approaches do you find most convincing for explaining the world? Give justification for your answer. If you prefer a different framework for identifying the world (e.g. Huntingdon’s Clash of Civilization thesis), this is the point to introduce it. To have a chance of maximum points, you should try and explore how the three readings connect with each other, even though they use different frameworks. For example, are the winners and losers for Friedman the same groups as Gelfand identifies?
Depending on your answer to Part 3 – which single policy would you advocate for to improve the quality of life of those identified as losing out from globalization.