What do you think?
Rate this book
The Lexus and the Olive Tree (text only) Reprint edition by T. L. Friedman
The Lexus and the Olive Understanding Globalization [Paperback]Thomas L. Friedman (Author)
Paperback
First published January 1, 1997
450 people are currently reading
7474 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 495 reviews
August 5, 2007
I really do not understand the appeal of Thomas Friedman. I don’t think his writing is very good, and I think his political commentary is inane. I cannot believe smart people take this man seriously.
My synopsis of standard Friedman socio-economic analysis:
I am a genius able to see developments in the world economic order before anyone else. I went to Southeast Asia, because I am a man of adventure with large expense account from a big newspaper. A South Asian man rowed me in a boat. He had a cell phone. Globalization is curing the ills of the world!
There, now you don’t have to read this stupid book.
My synopsis of standard Friedman socio-economic analysis:
I am a genius able to see developments in the world economic order before anyone else. I went to Southeast Asia, because I am a man of adventure with large expense account from a big newspaper. A South Asian man rowed me in a boat. He had a cell phone. Globalization is curing the ills of the world!
There, now you don’t have to read this stupid book.
February 15, 2020
الدافع وراء قراءة هذا الكتاب هو مدى شهرة ونجاح صاحب العامود فى أكبر الجرائد الأمريكية توماس فريدمان وحاجتنا لفهم العولمة وما يجرى فى العالم فى ظل التحولات والتغيرات الاقتصادية التى تشهدها بلادنا.
بدايةً فريدمان مولع بالعولمة وبالنظام العالمى الجديد وكأنى أقرأ فى صفحات كتابه دعوة لكل دول العالم :
انصهرى فى النظام العالمى الجديد ولا تتمسكوا بجذوركم ولا بإثبات أنفسكم ولا بتطوركم الذاتى فهذا لن يحدث إلا من خلال نظام عالمى جديد قائم على مجتمع واحد تسيطر عليه وتحركه قوى خفية غير ملموسة
ثم يعود فريدمان إلى تأصيل العلاقة بين السيارة ليكساس وشجرة الزيتون من منطلق عام ويقول:
إن التحدى فى حقبة العولمة هذه بالنسبة للدول والأفراد يتمثل فى تحقيق توازن صحى بين الحفاظ على الإحساس بالهوية والوطن والمجتمع وبين القيام بكل ما من شأنه تحقيق البقاء داخل نظام العولمة والسعى الدائم لبناء السيارة ليكساس والدفع بها إلى العالم
بدايةً فريدمان مولع بالعولمة وبالنظام العالمى الجديد وكأنى أقرأ فى صفحات كتابه دعوة لكل دول العالم :
انصهرى فى النظام العالمى الجديد ولا تتمسكوا بجذوركم ولا بإثبات أنفسكم ولا بتطوركم الذاتى فهذا لن يحدث إلا من خلال نظام عالمى جديد قائم على مجتمع واحد تسيطر عليه وتحركه قوى خفية غير ملموسة
ثم يعود فريدمان إلى تأصيل العلاقة بين السيارة ليكساس وشجرة الزيتون من منطلق عام ويقول:
إن التحدى فى حقبة العولمة هذه بالنسبة للدول والأفراد يتمثل فى تحقيق توازن صحى بين الحفاظ على الإحساس بالهوية والوطن والمجتمع وبين القيام بكل ما من شأنه تحقيق البقاء داخل نظام العولمة والسعى الدائم لبناء السيارة ليكساس والدفع بها إلى العالم
May 16, 2008
Thomas L. Friedman is a fuck. The copy of this I have has so much highlighter ink in it that the pages look like rainbows and the only reason I took the time to do that is so that I could easily find all the backward and sometimes down right stupid things he said in it. "..the easier it is to fire workers, the more incentive companies have to hire them." What he should have said in other words: flexible labor market = lower wages (and higher profits). "Air power alone couldn't work in Vietnam because a people who are already in the stone age couldn't be bombed back into it." See that was easy. And just so we are clear he supports these ideas and I did not take them out of context. The guy is a soulless huckster one step above Ann Coulter on the evil/stupid scale.
Should have been titled The Lexus OR the Olive Branch: Pick One
Should have been titled The Lexus OR the Olive Branch: Pick One
July 21, 2020
كاتب صهيوني مهووس بالعولمة، نشر هذا الكتاب للتبشير بأمركة العالم قبل عشرين سنة، والآن يرى أن العولمة فشلت تماما مع صعود الصين وانكفاء بلاده على نفسها في عهد ترمب، ومع ذلك ظهر مؤخرا في لقاء تلفزيوني وأكد أنه ما زال متمسكا بقناعاته.
September 22, 2008
This book is so appalling in so many ways that I cannot understand why it is so popular. I had to read it for a class in school (my Costa Rica sustainable development course) and basically everyone in the class agreed that Friedman had a very disturbing view of globalization. He seems to think that globalization benefits everyone in its race to the bottom because it makes goods and services cheaper and better. Guess what buddy? If everyone is getting paid crap they have no money for those goods and services. He spends most of the book defending the practices of some of the American corporations with the worst reputations (like Enron, I'm not kidding!) and name dropping all these "important people" he's met.
Actually the very worst was in the last chapter when he said that the U.S. military exists entirely to protect U.S. economic interests abroad, and that's what it should do! Also, in a weird kind of unrelated section he talks about how the internet is godless and we have to "bring God to the internet." What the f___?
Actually the very worst was in the last chapter when he said that the U.S. military exists entirely to protect U.S. economic interests abroad, and that's what it should do! Also, in a weird kind of unrelated section he talks about how the internet is godless and we have to "bring God to the internet." What the f___?
May 30, 2008
For reasons I cannot understand, this book is treated as canonical in high school economics classrooms across the country. Friedman presents an argument that is not only exceedingly hypocritical but asserted almost entirely through a jungle of personal anecdotes. The Lexus and the Olive Tree is not so much an explanation of globalization as it is a laundry list of interesting people that Friedman knows and you do not. Methodology aside, the arguments Friedman makes are more often than not deeply flawed. Many of the ideas Friedman babbles about are considered debatable (the "Electronic Herd") at best, or flat-out absurd (the "Golden Straitjacket") at worst. This "straitjacket" is the focal point of his argument, and it takes him a few hundred pages to get around to the crux of it. To summarize: Having spoken to 50 or 60 of his friends, Friedman declares that economic growth, specifically in emerging markets, demands a paring down of any form of social safety net, open arms to foreign investment, and a deregulatory fiscal policy on the part of the government in question. Friedman disregards the fact that heavily subsidized agricultural exports from the United States, for example, undercut domestic prices in many of these emerging markets and bankrupt local agricultural industries. The United States' own tariffs and quotas were what allowed U.S. industry and agriculture to flourish in the first place, but present-day emerging markets are somehow expected to open their borders and allow their markets to be flooded with development-stifling imports from first world economies and subsidy driven low prices. All of this aside, perhaps the most grating element of The Lexus and the Olive Tree is Friedman's penchant for creating ridiculous names for existing and well-defined economic and political phenomena. The Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention stands in as the fat sister of Democratic Peace Theory (Heard of Israel and Lebanon, Thomas? Give Russia and Georgia a few more months, perhaps.). DOScapital (a witticism perhaps overheard in a middle-school remedial English program) is a ridiculous way of describing what most have deemed the global economy; i.e. capitalism. The Electronic Herd? Capitol investors. Microchip Immune Deficiency? Insufficient decentralization and technophobia. In summation, The Lexus and the Olive Tree attempts to explain the nature and processes of globalization by combining a long list of people with whom Thomas Friedman has had lunch, kitschy jargon, five or six thousand poorly-chosen metaphors, a smattering of jingoism, a dedication to the unregulated free market that would make Lady Thatcher blush, and no formal education in economics whatsoever. It's good for a laugh, I suppose.
October 31, 2023
تبجّح مقرف بفضائل العولمة..
أنهيت الكتاب اليوم، والعولمة والحداثة قتلت في قصفٍ واحد 400 بريء لاجئ في مخيّم جباليا في قطاع غزّة..
لكي لا ننسى !!
ربيع الآخر 1445
أنهيت الكتاب اليوم، والعولمة والحداثة قتلت في قصفٍ واحد 400 بريء لاجئ في مخيّم جباليا في قطاع غزّة..
لكي لا ننسى !!
ربيع الآخر 1445
May 20, 2018
4.5/5 This was my 6th book by the 3-time Pulitzer winning author and I am wondering where are the other 3 Pulitzers ! 3 books on global politics-economics, 1 on politics and green technology and 2 on the Middle East. All 4+, all make u understand the subject perfectly, very readable, with interesting fresh anecdotes. Perhaps, the only thing that may put you off is his habit of coining and repeating phrases (remember our Indian politician Venkaiah Naidu ?) :)
As a software developer I often have to make sense of and simplify complex situations and to me Mr.Friedman is the best software developer, the Mckinsey of Mvkinseys on global politics and economics. And in doing so, he writes with empathy, optimism and honesty. An author who can praise both Reagan and Clinton in the same book.
Recommend reading all his books and especially you Mr.Donald Trump.
As a software developer I often have to make sense of and simplify complex situations and to me Mr.Friedman is the best software developer, the Mckinsey of Mvkinseys on global politics and economics. And in doing so, he writes with empathy, optimism and honesty. An author who can praise both Reagan and Clinton in the same book.
Recommend reading all his books and especially you Mr.Donald Trump.
October 23, 2016
3.5 Stars
A decent book. Gave me a good understanding of what globalization is and how it works, its pros and cons, what we have to do to make it sustainable, America's and every other country's role being played by, and the historical forces that have led to it. Very good analogies, examples, anecdotes, by which complex ideas have been explained.
Personally, I have had been an anti-globalist for a while. But this book did bring about an understanding about it's hows and whys connecting it with the 19th and 20th century histories, thus (almost) ending my qualms related to it. However, this period of globalization, to me seems to be a period of huge transitioning to a one-world order, and we as a society need to consciously progress towards a better or a progressive alternative to where we are now.
What I did not like about the author saying was, that he thinks Globalization is the only way ahead. Which was a bit of a bummer, wherein he seems to have been limited by his thoughts that have come from resources and observations during his journalistic life. The book is now however more than fifteen years old, and things certainly have changed, but not much when it comes to this particular topic. With that said, the book also comes along historically at times, and was also a good-read alongside Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind.
A decent book. Gave me a good understanding of what globalization is and how it works, its pros and cons, what we have to do to make it sustainable, America's and every other country's role being played by, and the historical forces that have led to it. Very good analogies, examples, anecdotes, by which complex ideas have been explained.
Personally, I have had been an anti-globalist for a while. But this book did bring about an understanding about it's hows and whys connecting it with the 19th and 20th century histories, thus (almost) ending my qualms related to it. However, this period of globalization, to me seems to be a period of huge transitioning to a one-world order, and we as a society need to consciously progress towards a better or a progressive alternative to where we are now.
What I did not like about the author saying was, that he thinks Globalization is the only way ahead. Which was a bit of a bummer, wherein he seems to have been limited by his thoughts that have come from resources and observations during his journalistic life. The book is now however more than fifteen years old, and things certainly have changed, but not much when it comes to this particular topic. With that said, the book also comes along historically at times, and was also a good-read alongside Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind.
September 30, 2008
friedman has a realistic point of view of the world, but comes from a purely capitalistic mind frame. he has a good perception of how the world works, but then resigns himself to dealing with it by saying 'this is how it is; things will never change.'
what sux is that he points out all the bad crap that happens from free-mkt globalization, and instead of offering good social net solutions, says 'it is what it is, so either play the game this way, or you lose.' nothing about how the rules of the game are ridiculous because they're based on comsumption and greed. nothing about how the rules should be changed or the game should be played.
realistic, but fatalistic, though, potentially i'm the one who's being a hopeless idealist.
what sux is that he points out all the bad crap that happens from free-mkt globalization, and instead of offering good social net solutions, says 'it is what it is, so either play the game this way, or you lose.' nothing about how the rules of the game are ridiculous because they're based on comsumption and greed. nothing about how the rules should be changed or the game should be played.
realistic, but fatalistic, though, potentially i'm the one who's being a hopeless idealist.
September 7, 2009
Thomas Friedman is hands down the resonant expert on globalization. He is also the most entertaining in describing it. I read his book The World is Flat first (almost out of order from his writings), this is my second book of his I have read. I will be re-reading The World is Flat again but after I read his next book Longitudes and Attitudes. Next on my list is latest Hot, Flat and Crowded.
The reason I like him so much is his colorful ways to describe what is going on and the references he uses to paint analogies and pictures. Being that he is Foreign Affairs columnist for the New York Times for 20 years now certainly gives him credence. Anybody interested in understanding the global economy must read Friedman. So far the World is Flat is his best book.
The reason I like him so much is his colorful ways to describe what is going on and the references he uses to paint analogies and pictures. Being that he is Foreign Affairs columnist for the New York Times for 20 years now certainly gives him credence. Anybody interested in understanding the global economy must read Friedman. So far the World is Flat is his best book.
June 6, 2012
I had read this book before--or at least had read parts of it, but I came across it the other day and thought I would give it another look. It was published in 2000 and I was shocked as I read to realize how much things have changed in just 12 years. The basic premise still holds--globalization is happening and it changes a lot about our lives, and gives some people (the Olive trees) a lot of angst--but the examples--how things have changed! Of course the big change was when the Olive Trees really burst forth and destroyed the World Trade Center in 2001--so there have been 2 wars since then and lots of economic woes that are made worse by globalization--or maybe they are made better--at least we are all in it together all over the world.
He talked about an economic downturn that had affected Asia in the 1990s--now it has spread to most of the world--he talked about the internet and its possible effect--but there was no Facebook then, no iphones. Apple hardly gets a mention but he talks a lot about Compaq computers--(what ever happened to them?) E-bay was just getting started and he thought everything would have an "e" preface--little did he know about the mighty "i". People also seemed to think that Microsoft would take over the world--but it didn't. He suspected that the internet might have an effect in revolutions and that as we all became more connected people from other countries would want more democracy, but there weren't the tools in place in 2000 for an "Arab Spring" to occur. This was where he first suggested the idea that two countries with McDonalds hadn't gone to war with each other yet--then a few did, but they were relatively short and very localized wars.
He's a good writer with lots and lots of interesting stories from all his travels and interviews with people, but the most amazing thing to me was to realize how much has changed in just 12 years!
He talked about an economic downturn that had affected Asia in the 1990s--now it has spread to most of the world--he talked about the internet and its possible effect--but there was no Facebook then, no iphones. Apple hardly gets a mention but he talks a lot about Compaq computers--(what ever happened to them?) E-bay was just getting started and he thought everything would have an "e" preface--little did he know about the mighty "i". People also seemed to think that Microsoft would take over the world--but it didn't. He suspected that the internet might have an effect in revolutions and that as we all became more connected people from other countries would want more democracy, but there weren't the tools in place in 2000 for an "Arab Spring" to occur. This was where he first suggested the idea that two countries with McDonalds hadn't gone to war with each other yet--then a few did, but they were relatively short and very localized wars.
He's a good writer with lots and lots of interesting stories from all his travels and interviews with people, but the most amazing thing to me was to realize how much has changed in just 12 years!
February 2, 2009
Drawing on his experience as a foreign correspondent, Tomas Friedman gives a comprehensive view of the modern worlds state of globalization covering every conceivable angle from multi-national corporate strategy, effects on smaller states as they battle between keeping up with the world and not sacrificing their culture, to how modern capitalism is effected by the integration of state intertwining technology. What I love about Friedman is how unbiased his assessment is. Friedman isn't trying to say whether globalization is "bad" or "good", he's much more interested with journalistically presenting every side of the argument to why and who it works for and to who and why it doesn't.
The book can get a little dense in sections, but Friedman does sprinkle in a lot of life antic-dotes that ground the often dense material and reminds you that the systems of development he's talking about are effecting real human beings.
I found this book to be approachable and intriguing. I would recommend it to anyone, with the small warning that they do need to know what they're getting into, and they are getting into a book with dense political and economic subject matter.
The book can get a little dense in sections, but Friedman does sprinkle in a lot of life antic-dotes that ground the often dense material and reminds you that the systems of development he's talking about are effecting real human beings.
I found this book to be approachable and intriguing. I would recommend it to anyone, with the small warning that they do need to know what they're getting into, and they are getting into a book with dense political and economic subject matter.
November 5, 2018
Ok, here goes my first "one-star" book review on GoodReads.
The only thing I got from this book was the mental strength to suffer through something so incredibly short-sighted and consequential about the world we live in. Not only was his analysis full of logical gaps about the relationship between market behavior and GDP growth, his writing is cheeky and cringe-worthy. It's really not worth the read, so just imagine Matthew McConaughey's character on Wolf of Wall Street writing a book on globalization. Here's an example:
"Listening to Mahithir's rant, I tried to imagine what then-US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin would have said to the Malaysian leader had he been able to speak his mind. I think it would have been something like this: 'Ah, excuse me, Mahathir, but what planet are you living on? You talk about participating in globalization as if it were a choice you had. Globalization isn't a choice. It's a reality...You keep looking for someone to complain to, someone to take the heat off your markets, someone to blame. Well, guess what, Mahathir, there's no one on the other end of the Phone!'"
Skip this one and go straight to Shock Doctrine if you're looking for the lowdown on Globalization, unless you want to read a petty summary of a sub-par journalist talk about how many important people and places he has seen in his capitalist adventures, while getting way too excited about the advent of e-mail. Despite his forward to the book, Friedman is just as oversimplified and outdated as Fukuyama.
The only thing I got from this book was the mental strength to suffer through something so incredibly short-sighted and consequential about the world we live in. Not only was his analysis full of logical gaps about the relationship between market behavior and GDP growth, his writing is cheeky and cringe-worthy. It's really not worth the read, so just imagine Matthew McConaughey's character on Wolf of Wall Street writing a book on globalization. Here's an example:
"Listening to Mahithir's rant, I tried to imagine what then-US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin would have said to the Malaysian leader had he been able to speak his mind. I think it would have been something like this: 'Ah, excuse me, Mahathir, but what planet are you living on? You talk about participating in globalization as if it were a choice you had. Globalization isn't a choice. It's a reality...You keep looking for someone to complain to, someone to take the heat off your markets, someone to blame. Well, guess what, Mahathir, there's no one on the other end of the Phone!'"
Skip this one and go straight to Shock Doctrine if you're looking for the lowdown on Globalization, unless you want to read a petty summary of a sub-par journalist talk about how many important people and places he has seen in his capitalist adventures, while getting way too excited about the advent of e-mail. Despite his forward to the book, Friedman is just as oversimplified and outdated as Fukuyama.
October 5, 2008
Thomas Friedman is a very smart, well-experienced, well-traveled columnist for the NYT. I really respect his insight and his opinions, and this is why I was very disappointed with this book.
Part of this may be because it was written in 1999 (it was only 9 years ago, but this country has really taken a nosedive since then). In The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Friedman is constantly giddy about the new globalization system that has come to replace the Cold War system. The "globalization" that he describes is synonymous with capitalism. In my opinion, he avoids using the term capitalist because of the connotations of greed. He extols the virtue of this universal global market system and how it eliminates inefficiencies and raises living standards worldwide.
But, Friedman describes (in my opinion, cherrypicks) those nations that have done well under the globalization system: USA, Western Europe, Japan, Korea, China, Russia, Singapore, etc. He even proudly proclaims that all nations can "choose" to go this route and become prosperous as if it were that easy. This proclamation really irked me. He never mentions the myriad of other nations just trying to escape poverty. What does this new system of globalization do for them? When you don't have food or a healthcare system, I am sure you cannot "choose" to join the capitalistic world. I am really uncomfortable with Friedman and capitalists repeating the idea that any nation can become rich, that if they embrace free-market policies, they too can have a level of consumption like developed countries. That's a cruel paradox in itself. How can the globe sustain life if everyone has American levels of consumption?
Friedman also has a very arrogant view of the world in this book. His remarks describing "angry men" sometime sound eerily similar to Bush's claims that Arabs hate us because they hate freedom and democracy.
This book sort of helps one to understand why Friedman was an early supporter of the Iraq war.
I thought Friedman provided a lot of good examples of how the world has come to be globalized. I thought that part of the book (the beginning) was solid.
The book is very readable and it feels like you're listening to an audiotape of Tom Friedman at 2X, but the man is also annoying as heck with all his made-up words and terms, such as globulation to glocalism to the electronic herd. He is also all over the place and the book has weak organization.
Part of this may be because it was written in 1999 (it was only 9 years ago, but this country has really taken a nosedive since then). In The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Friedman is constantly giddy about the new globalization system that has come to replace the Cold War system. The "globalization" that he describes is synonymous with capitalism. In my opinion, he avoids using the term capitalist because of the connotations of greed. He extols the virtue of this universal global market system and how it eliminates inefficiencies and raises living standards worldwide.
But, Friedman describes (in my opinion, cherrypicks) those nations that have done well under the globalization system: USA, Western Europe, Japan, Korea, China, Russia, Singapore, etc. He even proudly proclaims that all nations can "choose" to go this route and become prosperous as if it were that easy. This proclamation really irked me. He never mentions the myriad of other nations just trying to escape poverty. What does this new system of globalization do for them? When you don't have food or a healthcare system, I am sure you cannot "choose" to join the capitalistic world. I am really uncomfortable with Friedman and capitalists repeating the idea that any nation can become rich, that if they embrace free-market policies, they too can have a level of consumption like developed countries. That's a cruel paradox in itself. How can the globe sustain life if everyone has American levels of consumption?
Friedman also has a very arrogant view of the world in this book. His remarks describing "angry men" sometime sound eerily similar to Bush's claims that Arabs hate us because they hate freedom and democracy.
This book sort of helps one to understand why Friedman was an early supporter of the Iraq war.
I thought Friedman provided a lot of good examples of how the world has come to be globalized. I thought that part of the book (the beginning) was solid.
The book is very readable and it feels like you're listening to an audiotape of Tom Friedman at 2X, but the man is also annoying as heck with all his made-up words and terms, such as globulation to glocalism to the electronic herd. He is also all over the place and the book has weak organization.
January 8, 2012
I didn't like this book at all...infact one of those rare books that I decided to leave without finishing.
The biggest problem with the book is the condescending tone of the author; rather than treating his readers as mature well informed adults, he writes as if his reader base is made up of school going kids. The analogies that he uses insults the intelligence of his readers.
There is too much name dropping, like Manmohan Singh said this to me, or the Shah of Iran told me that; Friedman seems to like thinking that all the world leaders are cozy with him and confiding their innermost thoughts to him, rather than them granting him interviews, one of the many reporters that they would be granting interviews to.
The other thing that put me off is Friedman's rabid free market support; I had expected this book to a balanced and objective analysis of globalization and its impact, but it reads like propaganda for open market capitalization. All closed market economies and their administrators are projected as idiots and no honest intent has been shown to understand how globalization is impacting the less developed economies and why they are hesitant to open up.
This looked like a one sided point of view and I did not enjoy it at all.
The biggest problem with the book is the condescending tone of the author; rather than treating his readers as mature well informed adults, he writes as if his reader base is made up of school going kids. The analogies that he uses insults the intelligence of his readers.
There is too much name dropping, like Manmohan Singh said this to me, or the Shah of Iran told me that; Friedman seems to like thinking that all the world leaders are cozy with him and confiding their innermost thoughts to him, rather than them granting him interviews, one of the many reporters that they would be granting interviews to.
The other thing that put me off is Friedman's rabid free market support; I had expected this book to a balanced and objective analysis of globalization and its impact, but it reads like propaganda for open market capitalization. All closed market economies and their administrators are projected as idiots and no honest intent has been shown to understand how globalization is impacting the less developed economies and why they are hesitant to open up.
This looked like a one sided point of view and I did not enjoy it at all.
July 17, 2014
Imagine you open up a book. Inside that book is a bevy of anecdotes in which a random dude floating atop a charmed existence speaks to you in the second person. In that book he claims that the end of trade barriers and the rise of globalization will solve the problems. Sure, you and me might do them slightly differently, depending on the clothes we wear (and here the bad analogies really begin to pile up-you wonder if that drunken three way with other clueless tourists has gotten to your head)we have our own approaches. But then we realize we are all really the same, because the world is like an icecream sundae being carried along by a postman. Eventually the ice cream will melt and form a pool. The pool is flat,even if still cool- so is the world. And thats why we need to invade Iraq. Wait, what?
August 30, 2008
The Lexus and the Olive Tree is an overview of economic globalization in the post-Cold War era. The author is Thomas L.Friedman, who more recently wrote the bestseller The World Is Flat. I haven't read that one yet, but I hope to get to it if my to-read stack ever starts going down.
My copy of Lexus is the 2000 edition. I'm still in the habit of thinking anything from 1999 or later is quite recent-- it's a little jarring to realize that the first edition of this book came out ten years ago. It's very interesting to read a book on global economics and politics that was written before 9/11 (and before the disappearance, in the U.S., of "a substantial budget surplus projected into the new millenium" (450).) Even though it's a bit out of date, however, it's still quite relevant and a very important read.
Friedman pulls in examples from all over the world to illustrate the impacts of "The Electronic Herd," his name for global investors operating primarily through the Internet. In the last section of four, he focuses more exclusively on the United States. The "Lexus," of course, is used throughout the book as a symbol of new technology. The "olive tree" stands for traditional values and cultures, things that are being eroded by globalization.
Friedman believes-- and I agree with him-- that there is no real way to stop globalization short of completely destroying the Internet. The advent of the Internet is constantly lowering intercultural "walls," and the resulting free flow of information is causing deep and far-reaching changes in every culture affected. These changes cannot be reversed; they can only, to some extent, be directed. (As Octavia Butler said (more or less) in Parable of the Talents, "God is change. Shape change. Shape God.")
Part One, "Seeing the System," is an introduction to the idea of globalization. It describes how the Internet and other new technologies have changed the way the global economy works. Part Two, "Plugging into the System," uses a fairly laborious "hardware/OS/software" metaphor to discuss why some countries are adapting better than others to globalization. Friedman believes, and repeats often, that countries no longer have a choice of two (or many) ideologies or political systems, as they did in the Cold War:
"Suddenly, we found ourselves at a remarkable moment in history: For the first time, virtually every country in the world had the same basic hardware-- free-market capitalism. Once that happened, the whole game changed. Countries no longer had to decide which hardware to choose, just how to make the best of the only hardware that seemed to work-- free-market capitalism" (152).
The third and shortest section, "The Backlash Against the System," is fairly self-explanatory: In a high-paced, free-market capitalist system, obviously a lot of toes are stepped on and a lot of the old safety nets are eroded. People get mad. This section begins by discussing antiglobalist terrorism of various flavors, then moves on to "The Groundswell (Or the Backlash Against the Backlash," in Chapter 16. Essentially: "Things are different now. Some people don't like it. Most people do."
Part Four is called "America and the System." In Chapter 17, "Rational Exuberance," Friedman argues that the USA is so well suited to surviving in a global economy that it might have been custom-designed for the job. He cites the prevalence of venture capitalism, our historic acceptance of immigrants (new ideas, new energy, etc.), and the ease with which businesses may add or eliminate jobs (we don't really do lifelong contracts, do we?) as factors in our economic flexibility, which he says gave us a head-start in adapting to the new global economy. "And if post-communist societies have learned anything in these past ten years, it is that the rule of law is the foundation on which all of America's prosperity is built. As Russia, most of all, has discovered, no prosperity is sustainable without it" (374).
Friedman is obviously a patriot, and that's certainly laudable. He's also religious, and that's great. I just wish he could have kept his non-economic opinions out of a non-fiction book about the economy. In the last chapter, "There is a Way Forward," Friedman begins with a very good discussion of how America should adapt to thrive in the new, high-paced global economy. Then, in the last eight pages, he decides that this already-enormous treatise just won't be complete without his two cents on religion and ethics in the global age. Pages 468-470 are all about how to stay moral in an age where almost any kind of information and entertainment is available online. Friedman, who is Jewish, takes a moment to advocate for godly behavior online: "We are responsible for making God's presence manifest by what we do." This is a great sentiment, don't get me wrong, but I found it very jarring in what I thought was an economics text. The remainder of the chapter finishes in the same vein. I can only guess that Friedman, having spent most of the book discussing the coming of the Lexus and the great changes it's wrought upon the world, has decided to finish by imploring us not to destroy our olive trees.
Overall, I really enjoyed The Lexus and the Olive Tree, and I think reading it has been a valuable experience for me. I wish that it had been a slightly easier read, or a little less tinged with authorial opinion (Friedman, for example, is horrified by the loss of traditional cultures. He seems to think, for example, that Japanese people should still spend most of their time wearing kimonos and eating sushi, rather than allow themselves to be so tainted by outside cultural influences that they come to accept McDonald's as part of their own culture. I agree that the erasure or blending of traditional cultures is very sad, and that steps should be taken to preserve at least the memory of as many endangered cultures and languages as possible. I think, however, that it's a little arrogant of Friedman to pass judgement on people for choosing to reject some of their olive trees in favor of American-flavored modernization-- it is, after all, exactly what America has done throughout its entire history.) The book is very heavy with anecdotes and extended metaphors. They help to make it approachable, but also help to make it a very long read. I also wish that Friedman had exercised a bit of restraint in constructing about half of his sentences. He tends to run on and on, giving the book a "conversational" rhythm that is at times extremely difficult to follow.
In spite of all that, The Lexus and the Olive Tree is a very important read for anyone who wants to know why things work the way they do in the age of the Internet. I'd definitely recommend it, and I imagine I'll be returning to it several times in the future. When I have time, I'm looking forward to reading some of the author's other work. Thanks for reading. : )
My copy of Lexus is the 2000 edition. I'm still in the habit of thinking anything from 1999 or later is quite recent-- it's a little jarring to realize that the first edition of this book came out ten years ago. It's very interesting to read a book on global economics and politics that was written before 9/11 (and before the disappearance, in the U.S., of "a substantial budget surplus projected into the new millenium" (450).) Even though it's a bit out of date, however, it's still quite relevant and a very important read.
Friedman pulls in examples from all over the world to illustrate the impacts of "The Electronic Herd," his name for global investors operating primarily through the Internet. In the last section of four, he focuses more exclusively on the United States. The "Lexus," of course, is used throughout the book as a symbol of new technology. The "olive tree" stands for traditional values and cultures, things that are being eroded by globalization.
Friedman believes-- and I agree with him-- that there is no real way to stop globalization short of completely destroying the Internet. The advent of the Internet is constantly lowering intercultural "walls," and the resulting free flow of information is causing deep and far-reaching changes in every culture affected. These changes cannot be reversed; they can only, to some extent, be directed. (As Octavia Butler said (more or less) in Parable of the Talents, "God is change. Shape change. Shape God.")
Part One, "Seeing the System," is an introduction to the idea of globalization. It describes how the Internet and other new technologies have changed the way the global economy works. Part Two, "Plugging into the System," uses a fairly laborious "hardware/OS/software" metaphor to discuss why some countries are adapting better than others to globalization. Friedman believes, and repeats often, that countries no longer have a choice of two (or many) ideologies or political systems, as they did in the Cold War:
"Suddenly, we found ourselves at a remarkable moment in history: For the first time, virtually every country in the world had the same basic hardware-- free-market capitalism. Once that happened, the whole game changed. Countries no longer had to decide which hardware to choose, just how to make the best of the only hardware that seemed to work-- free-market capitalism" (152).
The third and shortest section, "The Backlash Against the System," is fairly self-explanatory: In a high-paced, free-market capitalist system, obviously a lot of toes are stepped on and a lot of the old safety nets are eroded. People get mad. This section begins by discussing antiglobalist terrorism of various flavors, then moves on to "The Groundswell (Or the Backlash Against the Backlash," in Chapter 16. Essentially: "Things are different now. Some people don't like it. Most people do."
Part Four is called "America and the System." In Chapter 17, "Rational Exuberance," Friedman argues that the USA is so well suited to surviving in a global economy that it might have been custom-designed for the job. He cites the prevalence of venture capitalism, our historic acceptance of immigrants (new ideas, new energy, etc.), and the ease with which businesses may add or eliminate jobs (we don't really do lifelong contracts, do we?) as factors in our economic flexibility, which he says gave us a head-start in adapting to the new global economy. "And if post-communist societies have learned anything in these past ten years, it is that the rule of law is the foundation on which all of America's prosperity is built. As Russia, most of all, has discovered, no prosperity is sustainable without it" (374).
Friedman is obviously a patriot, and that's certainly laudable. He's also religious, and that's great. I just wish he could have kept his non-economic opinions out of a non-fiction book about the economy. In the last chapter, "There is a Way Forward," Friedman begins with a very good discussion of how America should adapt to thrive in the new, high-paced global economy. Then, in the last eight pages, he decides that this already-enormous treatise just won't be complete without his two cents on religion and ethics in the global age. Pages 468-470 are all about how to stay moral in an age where almost any kind of information and entertainment is available online. Friedman, who is Jewish, takes a moment to advocate for godly behavior online: "We are responsible for making God's presence manifest by what we do." This is a great sentiment, don't get me wrong, but I found it very jarring in what I thought was an economics text. The remainder of the chapter finishes in the same vein. I can only guess that Friedman, having spent most of the book discussing the coming of the Lexus and the great changes it's wrought upon the world, has decided to finish by imploring us not to destroy our olive trees.
Overall, I really enjoyed The Lexus and the Olive Tree, and I think reading it has been a valuable experience for me. I wish that it had been a slightly easier read, or a little less tinged with authorial opinion (Friedman, for example, is horrified by the loss of traditional cultures. He seems to think, for example, that Japanese people should still spend most of their time wearing kimonos and eating sushi, rather than allow themselves to be so tainted by outside cultural influences that they come to accept McDonald's as part of their own culture. I agree that the erasure or blending of traditional cultures is very sad, and that steps should be taken to preserve at least the memory of as many endangered cultures and languages as possible. I think, however, that it's a little arrogant of Friedman to pass judgement on people for choosing to reject some of their olive trees in favor of American-flavored modernization-- it is, after all, exactly what America has done throughout its entire history.) The book is very heavy with anecdotes and extended metaphors. They help to make it approachable, but also help to make it a very long read. I also wish that Friedman had exercised a bit of restraint in constructing about half of his sentences. He tends to run on and on, giving the book a "conversational" rhythm that is at times extremely difficult to follow.
In spite of all that, The Lexus and the Olive Tree is a very important read for anyone who wants to know why things work the way they do in the age of the Internet. I'd definitely recommend it, and I imagine I'll be returning to it several times in the future. When I have time, I'm looking forward to reading some of the author's other work. Thanks for reading. : )
November 21, 2018
Phù. Cuối cùng cũng kết thúc quyển sách được đúng deadline.
Hay. Quá hay.
Mình đọc quyển này khi nó ra đời khéo phải gần 20 năm. Và những gì trong sách đúng với tiến trình phát triển của VN mà mình chứng kiến. Nhớ hồi đầu những năm 2000, khi mà Internet với tràn vào tỉnh lẻ nhà mình - nó như mở ra cả một thế giới to lớn với con bé chưa từng đi đâu xa quá HN. Tới giờ là gần 20 năm qua rồi và Internet thành một phần của cuộc sống. Nhờ nó mà tầm mắt của mình mở rộng hơn - ước mơ cũng lớn hơn nhiều nhiều.
Mình cực thích quyển sách này còn bởi nó được viết do một người được đi khắp thế giới và được tiếp xúc với những người có tầm nhìn nhất thế giới. Như thể được đứng trên 1 tòa tháp cao ngất và nhìn vào từng quốc gia. Đột nhiên cảm thấy trái đất thu bé lại và hoàn toàn có thể hiểu được. Những ảo tưởng về phương Tây cũng bớt đi và ánh mắt thực tế hơn.
Mình cũng rất thích cách hiểu về Cành Oliu. Đối với thế hệ trẻ lớn lên trong giao thời như mình, cái gắn bó với gốc rễ phong tục có gì đó rất mờ nhạt và đôi khi còn tỏ ra khinh thường nữa. Lớp trẻ ở tỉnh mình được gọi là " một chốn bốn quê": quê bố, quê mẹ, nơi sinh ra và nơi đi làm. Có đôi khi cảm thấy bản thân chả thuộc về một nơi chốn nào hết. Phong tục tập quán cũng chả có gì để mà hiểu sâu hay cần phải tiếp tục duy trì. Nhưng đứng trong cả một thế giới đang toàn cầu hóa mạnh mẽ thì cành oliu của VN mới hiện rõ ràng và gần gũi. Nhờ đó mà mình cũng hiểu hơn tại sao Việt Kiều thường hướng về văn hóa dân tộc còn lớp trẻ mới lớn thì hay sùng bái phương Tây và chê bai gốc Việt.
Sẽ còn tìm đọc các tác phẩm khác của Friedman!
Hay. Quá hay.
Mình đọc quyển này khi nó ra đời khéo phải gần 20 năm. Và những gì trong sách đúng với tiến trình phát triển của VN mà mình chứng kiến. Nhớ hồi đầu những năm 2000, khi mà Internet với tràn vào tỉnh lẻ nhà mình - nó như mở ra cả một thế giới to lớn với con bé chưa từng đi đâu xa quá HN. Tới giờ là gần 20 năm qua rồi và Internet thành một phần của cuộc sống. Nhờ nó mà tầm mắt của mình mở rộng hơn - ước mơ cũng lớn hơn nhiều nhiều.
Mình cực thích quyển sách này còn bởi nó được viết do một người được đi khắp thế giới và được tiếp xúc với những người có tầm nhìn nhất thế giới. Như thể được đứng trên 1 tòa tháp cao ngất và nhìn vào từng quốc gia. Đột nhiên cảm thấy trái đất thu bé lại và hoàn toàn có thể hiểu được. Những ảo tưởng về phương Tây cũng bớt đi và ánh mắt thực tế hơn.
Mình cũng rất thích cách hiểu về Cành Oliu. Đối với thế hệ trẻ lớn lên trong giao thời như mình, cái gắn bó với gốc rễ phong tục có gì đó rất mờ nhạt và đôi khi còn tỏ ra khinh thường nữa. Lớp trẻ ở tỉnh mình được gọi là " một chốn bốn quê": quê bố, quê mẹ, nơi sinh ra và nơi đi làm. Có đôi khi cảm thấy bản thân chả thuộc về một nơi chốn nào hết. Phong tục tập quán cũng chả có gì để mà hiểu sâu hay cần phải tiếp tục duy trì. Nhưng đứng trong cả một thế giới đang toàn cầu hóa mạnh mẽ thì cành oliu của VN mới hiện rõ ràng và gần gũi. Nhờ đó mà mình cũng hiểu hơn tại sao Việt Kiều thường hướng về văn hóa dân tộc còn lớp trẻ mới lớn thì hay sùng bái phương Tây và chê bai gốc Việt.
Sẽ còn tìm đọc các tác phẩm khác của Friedman!
June 25, 2019
İlker Kuruöz'ün bloomberg ropörtajında ‘Verinin Demokratikleşmesi’ kavramı dikkat çekmişti.
Thomas Friedman’ın ( Newyork Times’ın köşe yazarı kendisi .. ) kitabından esinlenmiş…
Bu yüzden bugün artık Birinci Dünya, İkinci Dünya ve Üçüncü Dünya diye bir şey yok.
Bugün sadece Hızlı Dünya (her tarafı açık düzlüğün dünyası) ve Yavaş Dünya (yarı yolda gücü tükenenlerin ya da Hızlı Dünyayı fazla hızlı, fazla korkutucu, fazla homojenleştirici veya fazla dayatıcı buldukları için duvarlarla ayrılmış kendi yapay ovalarında yaşamayı seçenlerin dünyası) var.
Soğuk Savaş sırasında ortaya çıkan ilk ve en önemli değişim, iletişim tekniği olmuştur.
Ben bu değişime .teknolojinin demokratikleşmesi. diyorum.
Her gün daha çok insanın, sayısı her gün artan ev bilgisayarları, modemler, cep telefonları, kablolu sistemler ve internet bağlantıları aracılığıyla her zamankinden daha uzağa, daha çok sayıda ülkeye, daha hızlı, daha derinden, daha ucuza ulaşabilmesini sağlayan şey de bu değişim.
Washington D.C..deki Valley Spring.de, müşterilerine her türlü internet ve telefon bankacılığı hizmetleri sunan bir banka var.
Bankanın reklam cıngılı teknolojinin demokratikleşme sürecini çok güzel özetliyor.
Diyor ki: .İzin verin bankayı evinize getirelim.. Teknolojinin demokratikleşmesi sayesinde artık hepimizin evinde bir banka, bir işyeri, bir gazete, bir kitapevi, bir aracı kurum, bir fabrika, bir yatırım şirketi, bir okul olabilir.
Thomas Friedman’ın ( Newyork Times’ın köşe yazarı kendisi .. ) kitabından esinlenmiş…
Bu yüzden bugün artık Birinci Dünya, İkinci Dünya ve Üçüncü Dünya diye bir şey yok.
Bugün sadece Hızlı Dünya (her tarafı açık düzlüğün dünyası) ve Yavaş Dünya (yarı yolda gücü tükenenlerin ya da Hızlı Dünyayı fazla hızlı, fazla korkutucu, fazla homojenleştirici veya fazla dayatıcı buldukları için duvarlarla ayrılmış kendi yapay ovalarında yaşamayı seçenlerin dünyası) var.
Soğuk Savaş sırasında ortaya çıkan ilk ve en önemli değişim, iletişim tekniği olmuştur.
Ben bu değişime .teknolojinin demokratikleşmesi. diyorum.
Her gün daha çok insanın, sayısı her gün artan ev bilgisayarları, modemler, cep telefonları, kablolu sistemler ve internet bağlantıları aracılığıyla her zamankinden daha uzağa, daha çok sayıda ülkeye, daha hızlı, daha derinden, daha ucuza ulaşabilmesini sağlayan şey de bu değişim.
Washington D.C..deki Valley Spring.de, müşterilerine her türlü internet ve telefon bankacılığı hizmetleri sunan bir banka var.
Bankanın reklam cıngılı teknolojinin demokratikleşme sürecini çok güzel özetliyor.
Diyor ki: .İzin verin bankayı evinize getirelim.. Teknolojinin demokratikleşmesi sayesinde artık hepimizin evinde bir banka, bir işyeri, bir gazete, bir kitapevi, bir aracı kurum, bir fabrika, bir yatırım şirketi, bir okul olabilir.
February 25, 2024
An olive tree lives between 500 and 1500 years. A Lexus loses 30% of its value as soon as you drive it off the lot and will be trade in in 6.8 years. There is the problem with Tom Friedman’s comparisons, and his book.
“The Lexus and the Olive Tree” is Friedman’s book, written about globalization at the turn of the millennium. Friedman declares himself a ‘globalist’; which I don’t think had the same baggage 25 years ago as it does today. Back then the term conjured hope and wonder and curiosity. Nowadays instead it suggests deaths of despair, pollution, and the tyranny of crappy stuff.
Globalism was seen as an unchallengeable truth. Like it or not, we’re gonna globalize. For the elites, this means you will have more in common with others from the “Archipelagos of the Winners” (my term: Tokyo and Hong Kong and New York and The Capital in Hunger Games) than you do with people from Appalachia, from Maiduguri or from District 12. And we did, what Friedman described was a global process of market consolidation that has absolutely happened. Securitization, the overwhelming power of the information revolution and how it changed every society. What didn’t change was human nature. Friedman quotes Fukuyama a lot, the prophet of the in-between times — the man who couldn’t see what was right in front of him or right around the corner. Friedman also bought in, though he says he didn’t. He was convinced that the world would democratize. He was convinced China’s CCP would fall away. He was convinced, in short, of humanity’s capacity for progress.
I’ve been reading a lot about debt these days. In 1950 global debt was about T100$. These days it just passed T300$. That is $37,500 debt for every man, woman and child on the planet right now. That might not seem that much to you in the Archipelagos, but ‘globalism’ left 90% of the world behind. In DRC (just as an example, I could easily have used Nigeria or Pakistan or Ethiopia or Sudan or India or Honduras), per capita income has never arrived at $700 per year (and it peaked in 1980). This means that my food distribution manager from Idjwi Island who had nine children owes $412,000; and since he’s the only breadwinner it would take him 589 years of work using all his salary to pay off that debt. Even if he put his nine children into sweat shops (something increasingly common) it would take all of them together working 53 years and giving all their money to pay back their debt. But what would they live on? And what about the trillions in new debt every year? The dramatic rise in debt since 1950 isn’t even government debt, that came out of WWII already quite high. It is personal and corporate debt. Personal debt went from essentially 0 in 1960 to T100$ in those years.
Globalism is a loan shark.
But even more than debt, it’s the toxic mix of inequality and inter-generational inelasticity that is causing the stress. Debt causes us to malinvest. I think the creation of the FED might have been the worst decision in American history. FED gives money to governments to do as they wish without responsibility and restraint. It encourages emergencies, which allows money to move more freely. And it borrows from the future — my child’s future. But also, those who get earliest access to the fake money become the most powerful. Consider this, bankers get the first grab. Then companies; then people with good credit. By the time the poor get their hands on it, a 5% interest rate on a T note has become a 23% credit card rate. Debt is a tax on the poor. This causes the inequality. Meanwhile, our rapidly changing world favors those in stable homes, in good zip codes, with a lot of time to learn and adapt and send their kids to extra STEM courses. Which leads to, as Angus Deaton said, people “Raising the ladders as they ascend”. Inter-generational elasticity, the change in how children do compared to parents, is at its lowest point in America. Our children will do worse than we will, except for a lucky few. There’s just too much churn; things are too expensive (inflation is also a tax on the poor, and it’s also caused by the FED). And this says nothing about people lost in Africa or Central America who never really had a chance in the first place.
The olive trees have been fighting back, sort of like the Ents in Middle Earth. They see the aberrations that Saruman’s globalism brought and have decided it must end. Sure, they are patient and slow but when they put their mind to destruction, the Orcs had better watch out. Dictatorship survived the surge of libertarian chaos in the ’90s. Sure lots of countries became nominal ‘democracies’ (though only in function not really in form) but as the tidal waves of euphoria began to recede the olive trees proved to be the only life that was not washed away. In places that have not reverted to totalitarianism, criminal gangs filled the void. Latin America is essentially controlled by powerful gangs who move drugs and people and slaves. In the Sahel, people join ISIS and Boko Haram and Al Qaida. In Somalia they join Al Shabbab. In Lebanon they join Hezbollah. Democracy made a terrible mistake, in the late ’90s. It linked its governing ideology to ‘liberalism’; it became overly technocratic; it became missionary, exclusionary, and utopian — and it ceased to understand tragedy. It forgot that the olive tree mattered, and even sought to chop them all down.
We can mass produce olives, after all. They may not taste the same and in my heart of hearts I may know that these are no longer the olives that my ancestors ate, but they are 99 cents at the Dollar Store — so who cares, the promise of ‘liberalism’; the democratization of crappy stuff purchased by debt, is alive and well. Except that the world seems to have woken up. I wonder if it’s too late.
“The Lexus and the Olive Tree” is Friedman’s book, written about globalization at the turn of the millennium. Friedman declares himself a ‘globalist’; which I don’t think had the same baggage 25 years ago as it does today. Back then the term conjured hope and wonder and curiosity. Nowadays instead it suggests deaths of despair, pollution, and the tyranny of crappy stuff.
Globalism was seen as an unchallengeable truth. Like it or not, we’re gonna globalize. For the elites, this means you will have more in common with others from the “Archipelagos of the Winners” (my term: Tokyo and Hong Kong and New York and The Capital in Hunger Games) than you do with people from Appalachia, from Maiduguri or from District 12. And we did, what Friedman described was a global process of market consolidation that has absolutely happened. Securitization, the overwhelming power of the information revolution and how it changed every society. What didn’t change was human nature. Friedman quotes Fukuyama a lot, the prophet of the in-between times — the man who couldn’t see what was right in front of him or right around the corner. Friedman also bought in, though he says he didn’t. He was convinced that the world would democratize. He was convinced China’s CCP would fall away. He was convinced, in short, of humanity’s capacity for progress.
I’ve been reading a lot about debt these days. In 1950 global debt was about T100$. These days it just passed T300$. That is $37,500 debt for every man, woman and child on the planet right now. That might not seem that much to you in the Archipelagos, but ‘globalism’ left 90% of the world behind. In DRC (just as an example, I could easily have used Nigeria or Pakistan or Ethiopia or Sudan or India or Honduras), per capita income has never arrived at $700 per year (and it peaked in 1980). This means that my food distribution manager from Idjwi Island who had nine children owes $412,000; and since he’s the only breadwinner it would take him 589 years of work using all his salary to pay off that debt. Even if he put his nine children into sweat shops (something increasingly common) it would take all of them together working 53 years and giving all their money to pay back their debt. But what would they live on? And what about the trillions in new debt every year? The dramatic rise in debt since 1950 isn’t even government debt, that came out of WWII already quite high. It is personal and corporate debt. Personal debt went from essentially 0 in 1960 to T100$ in those years.
Globalism is a loan shark.
But even more than debt, it’s the toxic mix of inequality and inter-generational inelasticity that is causing the stress. Debt causes us to malinvest. I think the creation of the FED might have been the worst decision in American history. FED gives money to governments to do as they wish without responsibility and restraint. It encourages emergencies, which allows money to move more freely. And it borrows from the future — my child’s future. But also, those who get earliest access to the fake money become the most powerful. Consider this, bankers get the first grab. Then companies; then people with good credit. By the time the poor get their hands on it, a 5% interest rate on a T note has become a 23% credit card rate. Debt is a tax on the poor. This causes the inequality. Meanwhile, our rapidly changing world favors those in stable homes, in good zip codes, with a lot of time to learn and adapt and send their kids to extra STEM courses. Which leads to, as Angus Deaton said, people “Raising the ladders as they ascend”. Inter-generational elasticity, the change in how children do compared to parents, is at its lowest point in America. Our children will do worse than we will, except for a lucky few. There’s just too much churn; things are too expensive (inflation is also a tax on the poor, and it’s also caused by the FED). And this says nothing about people lost in Africa or Central America who never really had a chance in the first place.
The olive trees have been fighting back, sort of like the Ents in Middle Earth. They see the aberrations that Saruman’s globalism brought and have decided it must end. Sure, they are patient and slow but when they put their mind to destruction, the Orcs had better watch out. Dictatorship survived the surge of libertarian chaos in the ’90s. Sure lots of countries became nominal ‘democracies’ (though only in function not really in form) but as the tidal waves of euphoria began to recede the olive trees proved to be the only life that was not washed away. In places that have not reverted to totalitarianism, criminal gangs filled the void. Latin America is essentially controlled by powerful gangs who move drugs and people and slaves. In the Sahel, people join ISIS and Boko Haram and Al Qaida. In Somalia they join Al Shabbab. In Lebanon they join Hezbollah. Democracy made a terrible mistake, in the late ’90s. It linked its governing ideology to ‘liberalism’; it became overly technocratic; it became missionary, exclusionary, and utopian — and it ceased to understand tragedy. It forgot that the olive tree mattered, and even sought to chop them all down.
We can mass produce olives, after all. They may not taste the same and in my heart of hearts I may know that these are no longer the olives that my ancestors ate, but they are 99 cents at the Dollar Store — so who cares, the promise of ‘liberalism’; the democratization of crappy stuff purchased by debt, is alive and well. Except that the world seems to have woken up. I wonder if it’s too late.
January 11, 2018
The title IS catchy. And this is probably the only reason I have picked this volume up, as the cover is s*** pretty much like the text. An ignoramus talking about the emotional term Globalization that comes after the emotional era of Cold War. The actual Globalization started some time around 1492. And the Cold War is a catchy term for a bipolar World. Which is no more. And attention whores like Friedman are unable to grasp a world without a leader about whom they can write about. These are the people who cried when Lenin died. Or when Stalin died. Which boot to kiss now? Oh, the world is too complicated!
March 29, 2022
This book does incredibly well in explaining the complicated topic of globalization. It's very readable but is not dumbed-down in any manner. Mr. Friedman tries hard to be objective with his views of the world. Although on some chapters, you can tell that he belongs to the optimistic group of the globalization debate. Whether or not you agree with his perspective, it still is worthwhile to read to see if his pronouncements will at least challenge your own position.
April 22, 2023
There are so many anecdotes and constant metaphors that it just became confusing and infuriating. Some of it was also very questionable (the long rambles about the Golden Straitjacket added nothing to my understanding...)
July 18, 2020
Mostly hollow and repetitive.
March 11, 2023
The book is dated (pre 9/11), which makes it both interesting to read and a bore at times. Friedman is a good writer, though, and his insights into economics are interesting. It gives a good history lesson, but if you're looking for much insight into today's interconnected global society, you would probably be better served by a more modern book.
January 6, 2021
Didn't finish it - it was out of date and boring.
February 15, 2021
For the lay person this was a very instructional book. I learned about 'globalization' and the factors involved for all countries of the world. The impact of globalization on all aspects of a society. As the timeline moves through the 1990's, I am wondering about the impact of the USA's last 4 years under the Trump administration. The influence of the USA over those last 4 years has not been that guiding light on the hill, that Thomas L. Friedman refers.
Read
June 16, 2020This book is about globalization as the new world order following the Cold War and how our world/country need to adapt to survive and be successful in this new world order.
I've got two big problems with this book and I'll tell them to you right here. 1.) It's almost 400 pages long and very, very detailed. 2.) It's written by Thomas Friedman. I've got a few things to say about Thomas Friedman. I said, after reading "The World is Flat" that I didn't care to read anything he had to say again, but here we are. First of all, I believe the man is a thinly veiled xenophobe-- the American way of doing things is the only way to do things, according to him. He always prefaces these bashings of other cultures with, "I know nobody wants to hear this, but it's just true, so I'm going to say it." Second of all, he develops all these grandiose plans for how we should all run our lives and our governments. It's like one of those self-help books where each chapter is a different tip. It's almost funny because the whole time you find yourself thinking, "Who is this guy and where does he get off acting like he knows the meaning of life?" Third of all, he excuses poverty and inequality as a inevitable, or even necessary, byproduct of capitalism and globalization, implying in some ways that we should just get used to it, at least until the dust settles and I can only assume, the "superior capitalists" are left standing.
So okay, this wasn't a book I enjoyed reading, but there were a couple of interesting points in it. He talks about the process by which some people are left behind in a world where companies often lose sight of people who don't have immediate access to technology. The example he used was about airlines charging an extra fee for tickets not purchased through the website. I'm sure we can all think of people who've come into our labs who have been forced to go online for one service or another.
He talks about how as globalization proceeds, people will begin to feel more and more disconnected from the process, saying "even their elected representatives have to bow now to unelected market dictators".With politics happening on such transnational spheres now, how does one person's political or community activity matter? Of course, I think Americorps is a direct rebuttal to that concern.
He talks about how fewer and fewer people are needed to perform more and more services: "It takes 2 percent of Americans to feed us all, and 5 percent to make everything we need. Everything else will be service and information technology..." This only emphasizes the need for people to continue to learn new skills, new job competencies, and to increase their access to information. People can't hope to grow up and get a good job in a factory or an assembly line anymore..that is no longer the road to a middle-class lifestyle.
CTEP is just one social net that can help to catch people who are falling off the globalization train because of lack of skills, knowledge or resources. Learning how to survive in the information age could very well be the major challenge of our generation, and is perhaps at the root of the recession American is experiencing right now.
I've got two big problems with this book and I'll tell them to you right here. 1.) It's almost 400 pages long and very, very detailed. 2.) It's written by Thomas Friedman. I've got a few things to say about Thomas Friedman. I said, after reading "The World is Flat" that I didn't care to read anything he had to say again, but here we are. First of all, I believe the man is a thinly veiled xenophobe-- the American way of doing things is the only way to do things, according to him. He always prefaces these bashings of other cultures with, "I know nobody wants to hear this, but it's just true, so I'm going to say it." Second of all, he develops all these grandiose plans for how we should all run our lives and our governments. It's like one of those self-help books where each chapter is a different tip. It's almost funny because the whole time you find yourself thinking, "Who is this guy and where does he get off acting like he knows the meaning of life?" Third of all, he excuses poverty and inequality as a inevitable, or even necessary, byproduct of capitalism and globalization, implying in some ways that we should just get used to it, at least until the dust settles and I can only assume, the "superior capitalists" are left standing.
So okay, this wasn't a book I enjoyed reading, but there were a couple of interesting points in it. He talks about the process by which some people are left behind in a world where companies often lose sight of people who don't have immediate access to technology. The example he used was about airlines charging an extra fee for tickets not purchased through the website. I'm sure we can all think of people who've come into our labs who have been forced to go online for one service or another.
He talks about how as globalization proceeds, people will begin to feel more and more disconnected from the process, saying "even their elected representatives have to bow now to unelected market dictators".With politics happening on such transnational spheres now, how does one person's political or community activity matter? Of course, I think Americorps is a direct rebuttal to that concern.
He talks about how fewer and fewer people are needed to perform more and more services: "It takes 2 percent of Americans to feed us all, and 5 percent to make everything we need. Everything else will be service and information technology..." This only emphasizes the need for people to continue to learn new skills, new job competencies, and to increase their access to information. People can't hope to grow up and get a good job in a factory or an assembly line anymore..that is no longer the road to a middle-class lifestyle.
CTEP is just one social net that can help to catch people who are falling off the globalization train because of lack of skills, knowledge or resources. Learning how to survive in the information age could very well be the major challenge of our generation, and is perhaps at the root of the recession American is experiencing right now.
March 30, 2009
This book by Thomas Friedman is about globalization and how it affects us. Basically, Friedman believes that Globalization, in sum total, is good for the world, notwithstanding its negative effects.
Friedman's primary thesis is that the cold war politics conditioned the behavior of nation states till 1990. Now, it is 'Globalization' and its inexorable movement forward that shapes nations and their behavior internally as well as one another. Friedman introduces the term 'the Electronic herd' in explaining his theories. The Electronic Herd has two parts to it - the Short horn and the Long horn. The Short horn refers to currency traders; mutual, pension and hedge funds; insurance companies or bank trading rooms. They are known as short-horn cattle because they move money around the world, often on a very short-term basis. Long-horn cattle represents the large multi-national corporations e.g. General Electric, General Motors, IBM, Intel, Siemens etc, which increasingly invest in or move production to foreign countries. They are known as long-horn cattle because they have to make long term commitments when investing. It is important for nation states to keep the Herd satisfied through transparency, responsible fiscal behavior and legitimate practices as otherwise they will take their money away from you and invest it where these features are represented better. The degrees of freedom for adventurism of nation states are reduced because their economy would be in difficulties if the Herd gives them a bad rating due to irresponsible policies. Friedman cites examples from the South-East Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s. Also, the Herd frowns against war and its dislocating effects. So, Friedman believes that Globalization has been good in reducing violent conflicts around the world. Only countries which do not plug into Globalization have the freedom to amke conflict and reap its consequences. he cites examples of N.Korea, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan etc.
Friedman is not naive. He realizes that Globalization has its bad effects on good things in traditional societies. His Lexua is an euphemism for Globalization and the 'Olive tree' for tradition. He discusses the challenges posed by Globalization to valuable traditions and the importance of old cultures in keeping to them on the face of the onslaught from Globalization. He also devotes many chapters on the unique role the US can play to harness it all.
Overall, the argument is compelling and well-reasoned. People who are deadly opposed to Globalization would trash many of his arguments. But, as one coming from India and living in the US, I can relate to the arguments in the book and find validity in them.
The book is well-written and it is an easy read, just like his other books on the subject. I would recommend the book strongly for one interested in the subject.
Friedman's primary thesis is that the cold war politics conditioned the behavior of nation states till 1990. Now, it is 'Globalization' and its inexorable movement forward that shapes nations and their behavior internally as well as one another. Friedman introduces the term 'the Electronic herd' in explaining his theories. The Electronic Herd has two parts to it - the Short horn and the Long horn. The Short horn refers to currency traders; mutual, pension and hedge funds; insurance companies or bank trading rooms. They are known as short-horn cattle because they move money around the world, often on a very short-term basis. Long-horn cattle represents the large multi-national corporations e.g. General Electric, General Motors, IBM, Intel, Siemens etc, which increasingly invest in or move production to foreign countries. They are known as long-horn cattle because they have to make long term commitments when investing. It is important for nation states to keep the Herd satisfied through transparency, responsible fiscal behavior and legitimate practices as otherwise they will take their money away from you and invest it where these features are represented better. The degrees of freedom for adventurism of nation states are reduced because their economy would be in difficulties if the Herd gives them a bad rating due to irresponsible policies. Friedman cites examples from the South-East Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s. Also, the Herd frowns against war and its dislocating effects. So, Friedman believes that Globalization has been good in reducing violent conflicts around the world. Only countries which do not plug into Globalization have the freedom to amke conflict and reap its consequences. he cites examples of N.Korea, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan etc.
Friedman is not naive. He realizes that Globalization has its bad effects on good things in traditional societies. His Lexua is an euphemism for Globalization and the 'Olive tree' for tradition. He discusses the challenges posed by Globalization to valuable traditions and the importance of old cultures in keeping to them on the face of the onslaught from Globalization. He also devotes many chapters on the unique role the US can play to harness it all.
Overall, the argument is compelling and well-reasoned. People who are deadly opposed to Globalization would trash many of his arguments. But, as one coming from India and living in the US, I can relate to the arguments in the book and find validity in them.
The book is well-written and it is an easy read, just like his other books on the subject. I would recommend the book strongly for one interested in the subject.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 495 reviews