Looking for a fast growth industry? Are high profit margins just beyond your reach? Consider America's Plan for Worldwide Domination. As close as your magazine rack, as far as the Arabian deserts, the exponentially expanding market for American culture beckons you. Take your ideas, your products, theology and pop psychology and get thee to another country. Time's a-wastin and if you don't have the gumption to spread the Good News, get out of the way.

At least, that's what those of entrepreneurial aspirations would like you to believe. The only way to survive is to globalize. We are already under the yoke of global interdependency; most any nation in the world has more foreign imports than domestic exports. In the absence of nationalistic sentiments, reliance on a global exchange network is the optimal solution. Maximum efficiency equals maximum satisfaction, at least, ideally so.

Since an ideal world isn't currently an option, we must return to nationalistic concerns and the problem of protecting the interests of a country and its people. This is where the import/export ratio becomes of primary concern.

In America we import tangible products - computers, wheat, oil - which makes the rest of the world happy; we're the cash cows of many a nation. What America exports is less tangible and, to some, far more dangerous. We export television shows, movies, music, clothes - things which seem trivial by comparison with other countries. Saudi Arabia exports oil and thus helps people to drive to work each day. We export Beavis and Butthead and thus help people to...what? Laugh? Vent their angst? Torture innocent animals? Mock and rebel against parents and other sources of authority?

It's only a television show. It's only a purveyor of cultural values. It's the archetype and it's the exception. Most importantly, as Huffington notes in How the West Hasn't Won, it's the point of contention: China, France, Vietnam and a host of other countries are determined to keep their citizens utilizing all things domestic and, especially, no things American.

Although Huffington believes that foreign consumption of American goods does not make for a universalized civilization, his argument is not completely convincing. A roomful of teenagers from Germany, Japan, Israel and Argentina would all be, as Joffe says in America the Inescapable, speaking English, ''wearing Levi's and baseball caps...[discussing] Ace Ventura, Michael Jordan [and] the merits of Nike versus Converse.''

A trip to any high school, college (or for that matter, grade school) in America would doubtless show the same scene, the only variation being perhaps a Dodgers cap versus the A's. Does this mean that we live in an Americanized, universalized civilization? Of course not. It does, however, mean that we're on the way.

Doesn't sound like your idea of a good time? You're not alone: Japan, Canada and many other countries are trying to put a stop to the influx of American culture and values and the subsequent effects. Their reasons that range from the practical (supporting local vendors helps make the local economy strong) to the religious (watching Beverly Hills 90210 is encouraging improper sexual behavior in adolescents).

Despite years of research, American scientists can't (or won't) agree that watching Dirty Harry and Rambo movies directly increases the incidence of violent acts. However, there are plenty of other countries where the absence of a democratic process (and presence of a religious or political leadership) drastically eliminates the options for public, personal opportunities to affect social policy. In such a situation, these attempts to 'protect' the culture are often of dubious legitimacy. For example, consider the prospect of banning all violent American movies and shows as a preventative measure to keep violent acts at a minimum. Even though some citizens may agree with the ban, it is still a subjective and individual call as to whether the ban is truly good or bad.

The core issue then becomes, who has the right to be the gatekeeper of information? In America, that right lies with the individual (at least for now, V-chip aside). In France the right also lies with the individual and, in their case, they have voted to 'protect their culture' by eliminating certain American products from their country. In religiously mediated nations or dictatorships, the right lies within the established hierarchy. Power to control information, to control the culture, belongs to a select few. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? That depends on your point of view and the position you hold within society. As Americans we tend to believe that our way, the Western way, is the One True Way. We like to believe that our 'right' to choose for ourselves means that we have things better; we can choose our own destiny. But if you asked, I'm sure there are plenty of people in India, Thailand and Egypt who inherently believe and trust in the governmental process to best serve the needs of their country.

Just because we relish in the constitutional freedom to do as we please doesn't mean that everyone would relish such a situation. The best solution is the one that the most people agree on. If the French want to 'protect' their culture and keep out American movies, okay. That's more popcorn for me.