I refer to Dr M Bakri Musa's article entitled 'Globalisation - bogeyman of neocolonialism' (July 5). Although I have great respect for the good doctor's age and experience, I respectfully disagree with his analysis.

In the article, M Bakri mentions that "Globalisation is the increasing integration of markets, economies and other institutions into one world standard". But I would argue that globalisation is another neo-colonialist method to re-colonise, this time, through economy.

Furthermore it is a world standard dictated by Western ideas and precepts, with no consideration of local culture and needs. It is to do with making money, big money. It is to do with big multi-national corporations quashing any sort of competition with their unfair advantage.

What is their unfair advantage, you may ask? It is their so-called global markets, and money politics, which enable them to sell things cheaply until they kill off all the small guys, your local and friendly businesses. It is their ability to pack their bags and leave at any sign of trouble. It is the eradication of entrepreneurship and making everyone part of the work force, as employees. And they (the big corporations, backed by western nations) package this as globalisation.

Islam has never been a globalising religion as how globalisation is seen today. It has always found ways of internalising various national cultures into its 'national' construct. It is based on dialogue, not monologue.

Globalisation is a monologue, the rich countries, or the 'haves' dictate what is good to the 'have nots'.

I agree that globalisation has a levelling effect. It destroys all forms of union or workers' rights. If the workers in South America protest due to poor working conditions, then the company just moves to Indonesia. If Indonesia has economic and ethnic problems, they move again to another country. They completely disregard human integrity, dignity or social responsibility. All these in the name of profit, the new global economy as they call it.

This is unlike your local businesses that have a stake in the community. They have nowhere to go and, as a result, will and have to be responsible to the community from which they operate.

In the example of McDonald's, if people are just interested in a concept of fast and clean food, then why are people killing each other, so to speak, to get to McDonald's each time the fast food outlet releases a new toy? McDonald's is not known for their good food; rather, it is a concept food, the idea of hamburger and fries, the whole idea of the American dream.

The US is not insular. The people cannot close up and live independently, and no one knows that more than the US government. Why else are they always concerned with other nation's affairs? They make up about five percent of the world's population, yet they consume more that 25 percent of the world's resources.

The US is also the largest debtor nation in the world. A nation such as this cannot afford to be insular. The US is a perfect example of unsustainable development and lifestyle. It is wholly dependent on everyone else. In fact, they live off other nations, especially on the poorest nations of the world.

For these reasons and many, many more, globalisation must not only be resisted, but it must be fought.

Some argue that globalisation leads to competition, which in turn leads to better products and services. This is true only if the big corporations do not destroy the competition and in turn create a monopoly, as we can see with Microsoft.

But in traditional society it has been the civil society that has been the major driving force for better products and services. Businesses provide better services because, their customers - civil society - demand better service.

So what do we do? Globalisation has been our own undoing. As George Monbiot puts it :"The corporations are powerful only because we have allowed them to be. In theory, it is we, not they, who mandate the state. But we have neglected our duty of citizenship, and they have taken advantage of our neglect to seize the reins of government. Their power is an artefact of our acquiescence."

It is time we take an active role in government. We have to stand up and be counted. There is no time to sit on the fence.

Taking M Bakri Musa's analogy, if the sea is infested with sharks, then the best strategy is to swim elsewhere, or not to swim at all, rather than learning to swim better, because no matter how much you train, my friend, you will never out-swim a shark.