Jihad vs. Mcworld

The « Jihad vs. Mcworld » paper describes two tendencies occurring currently and going against each other. On one hand, we have the Jihad which is defined as the whole of conflicts of ethnicities, religion or the problem of nationalism that divide the world. On the other hand, we have the Mcworld which is the flow of information, people and capitals in another word, the system of connection existing between countries and reducing boundaries. Then, it is said in the paper that neither Jihad nor Mcworld is promoting democracy and that democracy wouldn’t survive with them.
After reading the paper, I found it very sensible when it comes to define the two tendencies. As a matter of facts, with new technologies that allow us to communicate all over the world to trade online, food travelling everywhere and computers, the Mcworld is very visible. Also when the paper talks about Jihad, I agree with it because by following world’s event you hear a lot about civil wars, religious conflicts and also conflicts of ethnicities. And it is obvious that the two of them are contradictory when one is trying to unify the world and the second one to divide it.
However, when it comes to say that both tendencies Jihad and Mcworld do not need democracy and do not promote it I remain a little bit skeptical. I might not have got it but I think that democracy can survive with the Mcworld. Let us first define democracy. Wikipedia defines it as a form of government in which the supreme power is held completely by the people under a free electoral system. I think that although people with the Mcworld will care a lot about their business and the markets, they will still need to live in a society where their rights are respected and where they have a freedom of decision. However with the Jihad I do believe in democracy no longer because I think that there is no democracy in a place where there is war. To me war imposes its own system of regulation and therefore, we cannot speak of democracy anymore.