Summary – Come September

In her argument, Arundhati Roy concentrates on the issue of ‘nationalism’ in a situation of War against Terror, to decide what happens to her world. She believes that eliminating the rising threats of globalizations is justifiable. In arguing for this position, she begins by conceding that the ‘anti-national’ is a person who had anti-perspectives about his or her nations. She uses her personal example in the month of September that this month had devastated effects to all citizens around the world. Imagine reminding us of what we cannot forget - Roy recalls – this month of dreadful anniversaries that the horror of what has come to be known as 9/11. Nearly three thousands civilians lost their lives in that lethal terrorist strike. The grief is still deep. The tears have not dried. And a strange, deadly war is raging around the world. She also quoted for those who lived in a democracy, would find it hard to imagine what living in a dictatorship and enduring the absolute loss of freedom means. She was meant a person is unwillingly keep all the glory for himself, not just thinking about others around him. The point of Roy’s example is to show that if you refuse to believe that the world will be controlled by the government’s fascism, you are not obliged to feel fear about terrorism unless you implicitly or explicitly agree about the world’s protection. In relation to improving democracy for every country, she likens this idea to being freedom through not only the concept of government’s purpose but also capability of democracy for all citizens. If some people had drawn more tragic conflicts than the others, then the government is obligated to prevent them from happening because she may believe that globalization was fought for business and domination. Even though she criticized that the US has called “the most peaceful nation on earth”