Blog 10

Blog 10: Globalization and the Church

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is worldwide church that continues to grow more and more each year. Being that it is a global church, what affects does globalization have on the church and what affect does the church have on globalization? The church is spreading into new countries and cultures every year. The spreading of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its teachings has a positive effect of globalization upon the church and world.

Globalization is “the spread of political, economic, and cultural dynamics among governments, groups, and individuals beyond the borders of any one particular country” (Samuels pg. 346). Samuels categorizes globalization into three categories: political, economic and cultural. As the church spreads throughout the world, people of different cultures become members of the church. The church takes into account the cultural history of these individuals and the celebrations in which they have and encourages them to share their cultures with those around them. The spreading of religion among groups, individuals and beyond state borders can also be considered part of cultural globalization.

Missionary efforts have been a part of the church since its beginnings in the 1800’s. In its beginning stages, most members of the church lived within the United States where it began. However, “beginning in 1997, half of Latter-day Saints lived outside of the United States and Canada” (Global Mormonism). This shows how the church is spreading throughout the world. “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the fourth largest Christian church in the world and of its 14 million members, over half of them live outside of the United States” (Mormonism 101). This shows how globalization has positively affected the church. It also shows how the church itself is becoming more accepted across the world; this is another sign of positive globalization. The fact that the church is able to send missionaries into countries throughout the world is also a positive sign of globalization. Countries are becoming more open to the thought of having the church in their countries. This is significant because that means they are open to allowing the “culture” of the church within their own country. Also, in Minnesota, the church has sacrament meetings in English, Spanish, Hmong and Korean. This shows how globalization has affected the church within the United States.

Another way that they church is affectively using globalization to spread the gospel is through the media, specifically, the Internet. Recently, the church has launched a large add campaign on the Mormon.org website that features different individuals from around the world. Often times these individuals talk about their specific culture or where they are from and how gospel has greatly blessed their life despite the different circumstances.

Globalization can occur in many different ways. Globalization affects the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in many ways. Globalization has had a positive affect on the church and the church has had a positive affect on globalization. Globalization has played a key role in the spreading of the church and its teachings and will continue to have a positive affect on the world.

Sources

Global Mormonism. Global Mormonism RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. <http://globalmormonism.byu.edu/?page_id=899>.

Mormonism 101. The Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, n.d. Web. 4 Dec. 2012. <http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/mormonism-101>.

Samuels, David. Comparative Politics. New York: Pearson Education, 2013. Print.

         

Blog 10

Blog 10: Globalization and the Church

            Globalization is increasingly prevalent in today’s world culture. Globalization is essentially the interchange of political, economic, and cultural dynamics between different nations all over the world. There are both risks and benefits that accompany increasing globalization as countries become more involved with and dependent on one another. I believe globalization has both positive and negative impacts on our country. However, when it comes to the LDS Church I think globalization has a very positive impact and very minimal, if any, negative impact.

            As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints we are familiar with our own worldwide missionary efforts, especially with the announcement made this past October lowering the age requirements for those young men and women wishing to serve. As a Church we emphasize missionary work and particularly encourage young men to serve. However, as was stated in a Church Newsroom article covering the change in age requirement, “missionaries receive their assignment from Church headquarters and are sent only to countries where governments allow the Church to operate” (“Church Lowers Missionary Service Age”). With increased globalization comes increased foreign relations and foreign cooperation in our own country. These new relationships often times open the door for the Church to create its own relationships with these same countries. This in turn helps the Church to be able to send missionaries to more places around the world to preach the Gospel safely.

            In addition to better foreign relations, globalization also enables more cultural diffusion between countries across the globe. In places like China they are extremely proud and protective of their culture and are thus slow to be open to new ideas and religions. “The Chinese government recognizes only five religious groups: Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, Muslim and Taoists” (Fletcher). This is part of the reason the Church has not been able to send proselyting missionaries into China. However, with the increased diffusion of cultures and with the continual global encouragement to accept other cultures China is growing less and less prejudice to different ideas and religions. As they become softened in this way due to globalization, the Church has more of an opportunity to persuade China to allow missionaries into the country to preach the Gospel.

            Through globalization resources and technology are also shared worldwide. With increased access to and use of the internet the Church has a unique opportunity to share the Gospel through its websites. Virtually anyone curious about the LDS Church with internet access can find the Church’s websites and learn the truth for themselves. There they can find testimonies of other members, videos, scriptural resources, and so much more. As the internet becomes more and more popular across the globe more people have access to the Church’s information and are more likely to want to know more. That is where more missionaries come into the picture.

            Globalization does some great things for the Church, especially in regards to the great emphasis placed on spreading the Gospel to the entire world. Globalization allows us as separate nations to connect and share ideas, technologies, information, etc. This makes the mission to spread the Gospel more feasible as other nations and cultures become more accepting of one another and as information becomes more accessible. The more people we are able to share the truth with the better the world will be. Globalization has helped and will continue to benefit the Church immensely.

Sources

"Church Lowers Missionary Service Age." Newsroom. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6 Oct. 2012. Web. 04 Dec. 2012. <http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-lowers-age-requirement-for-missionary-service>.

Fletcher, Peggy. "China a Prize in LDS's Eyes." The Salt Lake Tribune. N.p., 9 Sept. 2010. Web. 04 Dec. 2012. <http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50189317-76/church-china-chinese-lds.html.csp>.

            

Brittney Griffith

      Globalization and the LDS Church

At this point and time in our world globalization is in an integral part of survival for organizations such as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or Mormons. The boundaries that separate the people of the world have started to fade due to factors like interdependence of states through the economy and politics, as well as the advancement of technology. The affects felt from the globalization of the LDS church have been, as I see it, a very positive one, however there are some negative effects of globalization in general that cannot be ignored. But I do believe globalization has ample more positive affects than negative ones. Because of this I believe the efforts of the church to increase globalization is a good thing and will aid in its continued success.
In David J. Samue'ls book Comparative Politics he defined globalization as, "The spread of political, economic, and cultural dynamics among governments, groups, and individuals beyond the borders of any one particular country" (Samuels). Starting in 1830 at the founding of the LDS church there were six members in one country. Today there are members in over 162 countries and had over 11 million members in the year 2000 (Goodman). The church globalizes through a common topic, the gospel in which it teaches. Because of this many other products from the spread of the church have become clear but not all of them necessarily positive.
Although it was very hard to viable negative points against globalization of the church I did find one major problem that should be noted. The biggest issue I saw with globalization of the lds church which was founded in one county, the United States, is that it may have the tendency to blend cultures. Although the work the church does for other countries as well as missionary work is very beneficial to the country itself and its people, it also meshes cultures and takes away the uniqueness that cultures are valued for (Stief). This is a very troubling issue because with a world progressing so fast to becoming unified as a human race and world through our social, economic, political, and technological advancements, we run the threat of losing everything has makes us different, so that we don't all become the same. Even though this causes concerns however, I happen to be a member of the LDS church and know they are intent on keeping cultures alive and stable. They don't want to tear things down they want to enrich lives and build things up.
On the other hand, I found multiple positive effects of LDS globalization. The most prominent effect was one, the ability to give almost all people the ability to hear and learn of this gospel and its Savior Jesus Christ. This gospel gives hope and faith to not those who just need it but to everyone no matter race, ethnicity, gender, political affiliation, past transgressions,  or future ones, it is a church for everyone. The second thing that came to mind was the church's humanitarian services system  The system set up by the church has done extraordinary things for the world and not just for its members. The church has set programs up all over the world to teach the people self-reliance so they can have a better quality of life, they're giving people meaning. They're also setting up insensitive to bring areas that are lacking things lack drinkable water, infant care, and food production, as well as immunization (Wrigley). Along  Another benefit is where the church goes technology goes. The church is bringing new ways to survive and learn through its technological fields and it is benefiting many countries and peoples who have not had the benefits of what technology can do, especially through medical and science advancements. We are able to save many lives as well as increase quality of life for people all over the world (Wrigley).
In my opinion, the positives out way the effects that are negative. So much benefit has come from the globalization of the church, not just for those who believe and become or already are members of the church. The LDS church helps everyone and that is amazing. Putting the temporal needs aside, I feel the spiritual benefit that people have profited from the globalization of the church is astounding, it is changing the world in so much of a good way.


Works Cited
Goodman, Kristen L., and Douglas A. Hooper. "Global Mormonism." Global Mormonism RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Dec. 2012.
Samuels, David J. Comparative Politics. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 1967. 343-73. Print.
Stief, Collin. "Globalization." About.com Geography. N.p., 7 July 2008. Web. 05 Dec. 2012.
Wrigley, Heather W. "Church Makes Immunizations an Official Initiative, Provides Social Mobilization." - Church News and Events. N.p., 13 June 2012. Web. 05 Dec. 2012.

Globalization and the Church

The world is more connected today than ever before, globalization is bringing the world together in several ways. Globalization is the spread of political, economic, and cultural dynamics among governments, groups, and individuals beyond the borders of any one particular country (Samuels.) One cultural effect of globalization is the spread and transfer of religion. The LDS church positively benefits from globalization by more effectively being able to expand their church through missionary work.

Missionary work has been an essential piece of the LDS church since it was first established. “In 1950 nine out of ten members lived in the United States; 40% lived in Utah. Since then, conversion outside the United States has changed the distribution dramatically. Beginning in 1997, half of all Latter- day Saints lived outside the United States and Canada.” (Global Mormonism) In 1950 there were 1,111,314 members of the LDS church, and by 1997 that number grew to 10,071,783 (Almanac.) Globalization and the spread of this religion across the world have helped increase membership in the LDS church. Spreading the gospel to the world is an important part of the LDS religion and globalization has helped make that goal easier.

Globalization has allowed the LDS church to get missionaries into various countries around the world. Governments have become more closely linked and international relations are increasing. The LDS church has been able to take advantage of transnational government participation and send missionaries to spread the gospel in over 150 countries (Facts and Statistics.)

Cultural Globalization is a very important aspect of the globalizing church. With advancing technology people are able to know what is going on in the world around them. The internet is a major cause of “global homogenizing” and people are being exposed to different cultures, seeing what other places are like. The LDS church has taken advantage of technology; they have several websites like Mormon.org and lds.org to inform people around the world about the church and its beliefs. They have used technology to broadcast general conference and other church news to members and non-members around the world. The church sends missionaries from different cultures to new countries. These missionaries are trained to learn the language of the country they are serving in. Often these missionaries come back with a piece of the culture of the country they served in, perhaps an accent, way of dress, or recipes. These missionaries also bring part of their culture to the country they are serving in. People in Brazil may be drawn to an American looking missionary because they know and most likely participate in different aspects of American culture.

The LDS church greatly benefits from globalization. Through globalization they are able to spread the gospel through missionary work, as well as run a worldwide church. We can learn from the example of the LDS church to use globalization for good. The LDS church provides welfare and aide to various countries around the world. They use the world’s connectedness to know what is going on, and are aware of how they can help out. Globalization has allowed the LDS church to spread the gospel and serve around the world.

Bibliography

Deseret News 2012 Church Almanac.

"Facts and Statistics." Www.mormonnewsroom.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Dec. 2012. <http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/facts-and-stats>.

"Global Mormonism." Global Mormonism RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. <http://globalmormonism.byu.edu/?page_id=899>.

Samuels, David. Comparative Politics. New York: Pearson Education, 2013. Print.

Blog 9

Blog 9

                For this analysis, I used the measure of per capita PPP GDP from the World Development Indicators database as the measurement for economic performance, as well as the World Bank’s “Governance Matters” data on Corruption (specifically, the Control of Corruption data). The PPP (purchasing power parity) of the GDP per capita is a good measurement of economic power. It balances out wealth disparities that are present between very rich and very poor people in the same country, and measures how much money a specific product would cost in different countries, correcting for foreign exchange rates (World Development Indicators). The Control of Corruption statistics is defined by the World Bank as “perceptions of the extent to which public power is exercised for private gain.” The score is given on a scale from -2.5 (weak governance) to 2.5 (strong), and is an estimated score. I chose this over other data points because I believe that it better shows the rate of corruption inside the country itself, instead of comparative measurements between countries (Governance Matters). The data for both was taken from 2010, so that the data would be recent but complete. I also removed countries from the sample for which data was not available in both categories (e.g. Greenland, North Korea, etc.).

                As you can see in the graph below, there is a loose correlation between economic development and corruption, and as economic development increases, there is a slight increase in good governance. The graph does not have very tight fit, and several outliers (such as those countries with good governance but weak economic performance) might need explanation.

                My explanation is that there is a causal relationship between the two variables. This is because people who have little chance for honest economic progress  because of a poor national economy will turn to more shady avenues of profit-making, while those in more developed, richer countries have viable opportunities to enrich themselves without harming others. Also, in richer countries, the police force is stronger, which could lead to fewer opportunities for corrupt actions.

REFERENCES

World Bank. Governance Matters website. http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.asp           (accessed November 19, 2012).

World Bank. World Development Indicators. http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-     development-indicators/ (accessed November 19, 2012). 

Roy Copans

                The country that I chose to study the causes and effects of political violence in is South Africa. The specific events of political violence that I will explore are the conflicts between the African National Congress (ANC) and the apartheid government in the final years of apartheid, the 1980s and early 1990s. The violent events that took place are an example of a revolution, and in my paper I will attempt to correctly categorize this instance of political violence and see how well the textbook’s definitions actually work.

                Ever since 1948 when the National Party came into power, the country of South Africa was ruled by a racially segregated “apartheid” government. Under apartheid, white and black people were separated, legally bound to be segregated in areas such as education, medical care, public services, the neighborhoods they lived in, recreational activities, etc.[i] Under apartheid, blacks were heavily repressed, deprived of their citizenship and not allowed to vote. This led to a black revolution, as they rebelled, protested, and sought to come into power to overcome the apartheid government that held them down. According to the UCDP/PRIO Armed Conflict Dataset, the major conflicts between ANC (black political party) and the country of South Africa began in 1981 and carried on throughout the eighties into the early nineties until apartheid was finally abolished[ii].

                The textbook’s definition of a revolution is that it is an “armed conflict within a sovereign state between insurgents and the state, in which (1) both the insurgents and the state claim the allegiance of a significant proportion of the population; (2) authority over the state is forcibly transferred from the state to the insurgents, and (3) the insurgents subsequently bring about wholesale political change.”[iii] I feel that this definition almost perfectly describes the type of revolution that took place in South Africa. The only part of the definition that wavers from the conflict between the insurgents (ANC) and state (National Party apartheid government) is when it is defined as an “armed” conflict. Much of what the ANC and black insurgents in townships did was not armed, but was in small-scale forms of riots, boycotts, bombings, and beatings, but not necessarily armed militant-style attacks[iv]. Occasionally armed attacks would occur, but as a whole the revolution would not be thought of as an armed conflict. However, the rest of the definition of a revolution is spot on, as the ANC did claim the allegiance of a huge proportion of the country’s population (nearly all black South Africans), and authority over the state was transferred, bringing about wholesale political change, as the ANC eventually won the right to vote for blacks and Nelson Mandela (ANC) won the 1994 presidential elections, bringing civil rights to black South Africans and abolishing the apartheid government and its racist policies. Because of the revolution, the foundations for a new democratic government in South Africa were laid.

In attempting to categorize the causes behind the revolution that took place in South Africa, I’ve felt that the main causes and dimensions of the revolution are motivation, the identity of the actors, and the goal. The motivation and goals go hand in hand, as the blacks were motivated by the repression that bound them to rise up and bring about change in the country. The ultimate goal was obviously to gain rights for their people, and the identity of the actors was an important cause because it was their identity as repressed black South Africans that united them.

Later on in the chapter, the book states that “revolutions are a subtype of civil war in which the winning side not only takes control of the state but implements radical change, such as bringing previously excluded groups of people into power.”[v]  To me, this solidifies the categorization of the political violence of the ANC in South Africa as a successful revolution.

---

[i] Wikipedia: Apartheid in South Africa (2012). Apartheid.

< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid_in_South_Africa#Final_years_of_apartheid>

[ii] Department of Peace and Conflict Research (2012). UCDP/PRIO Armed Conflict Dataset.

<http://www.pcr.uu.se/research/ucdp/datasets/ucdp_prio_armed_conflict_dataset/>

[iii] Samuels, David J. Comparative Politics. (pg. 268-269). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Pearson Education. 2013.

[iv] Wikipedia: Apartheid in South Africa (2012). Final Years of Apartheid.

 < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid_in_South_Africa#Final_years_of_apartheid>

[v] Samuels, David J. Comparative Politics. (pg. 273). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Pearson Education. 2013.

The Glorious Revolution by Spencer Marks

The Glorious Revolution of 1688, in Britain, is often called “The Bloodless Revolution.” While this is not technically true, as Royalist forces clashed with Dutch and parliamentary forces at the Battle of Broad Street¹, it is one of the least violent revolutions in history. However, it is unclear if this was purely a revolution, or even a revolution at all.

The conflict leading to this was between King James II of England and Parliament. He leaned catholic, with a tendency to ally with France, while Parliament was strongly protestant and preferred Holland. The king also had little concern for constitutional restraints placed on him, though he was often forced to defer to Parliament, particularly in fiscal matters. Eventually, he began packing Parliament with his supporters and appointing Catholics to army leadership positions. When that happened, Parliament united and asked William of Orange, military leader in Holland and wife of Mary, a legitimate British heir, to come depose their king.

William did this, landing in England with Dutch troops. He was there joined by Protestant English who opposed the king. After one small clash at Reading, the Battle of Broad Street, James abdicated the throne and fled from England. The Glorious Revolution was complete.

The reason this is hard to classify as a revolution is that usually, revolutions are primarily internal affairs. In this case, there were few English troops that actually fought, and when it was all over, the foreigner became the new king. If one looks at it from the perspective of James, the so-called “Glorious Revolution” was just a foreign invasion by an unfriendly power, aided by treasonous insurrectionists within his own country. By this, it certainly seems that the events of 1688 were actually an inter-state conflict.

I would argue otherwise, however, because of the events which occurred afterward. When William took the throne, he had to give considerable considerations to Parliament. This was the true birth of the Constitutional Monarchy. There were considerable restraints on royal power, and the groundwork was laid for Britain to become the powerful democracy that it is today. Since the definition of revolution is that it’s a popular movement that brings lasting and meaningful change to the system of government, I think that this is a great example. I also think that it proves that political violence can achieve its goals with only the threat of violence, that mass amounts of blood don’t need to be shed, which is an encouraging thought.

1.      "Berkshire History: The Battle of Broad Street." Berkshire History: The Battle of Broad Street. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2012. <http://www.berkshirehistory.com/articles/reading_broadst.html>.