Friedman's The Lexus and the Olive Tree served as one of the primary source materials for my undergraduate thesis on the history and literature of indigenous rebellion in Mexico in the context of late-twentieth century international neoliberalism. The book is an imbalanced and under-researched political screed that attempts to make the case for neoliberalism through the deployment of terse and highly oversimplified anecdotes about major geopolitical and historical events.

Friedman accepts establishment claims at face value about the intention and outcome of major historical and economic events and eschews close readings and measured analysis of the academic consensus on matters for which he holds no meaningful expertise or authority. Indeed, there is no effort to analyze the literature of the subject matters that he reviews and the absence of a bibliography is highly alarming, particularly for such an extensive piece of writing covering such diverse topics as the war in Kosovo, press freedoms in the People's Republic of China, the 1997-1998 financial crisis in Southeast Asia, and the Zapatista uprising in Chiapas, Mexico—to name but a few. These are the makings of an intellectual train wreck, which the author gleefully trots into, unbothered by concerns about nuance, rigorous analysis, or personal bias. His frequent and unqualified use of sources like The Wall Street Journal and Foreign Affairs in addition to such wildly nonstandard sources like the United Airlines Hemisphere magazine (p. 175) and a Brazilian management consultant (p. 134-135) is indicative of the absence of effort Friedman put into measured analysis grounded in research. Rigorous, even-handed analysis of the extant literature is entirely missing.

Cheeky turns of phrase like the "electronic herd" and "The Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention" are memorable without being accurate or empirical. They speak to a wider effort to connect with a lay audience interested in geopolitics and capitalist economics but also lay bare the thinly veiled unseriousness of this book as an authoritative resource.

Friedman is an institutional hack, and this tome is a work of political propaganda written for a general audience who the author must only imagine will not question his credentials or research. In the end, he lacks both. The arguments that Friedman presents undervalue historical context, particularly when it does not suit or would perhaps complicate the conclusion he wishes to draw.

This work will be most useful to researchers interested in capitalist propaganda regarding neoliberalism.

Thomas Friedman is one of my favorite voices in Economics which is, admittedly, one of my least favorite subjects of discussion. Still, someone who's serious about making a living in the business world would benefit from at least thinking about the issues addressed here. Yes, the book is 15 years old at this point and some of his predictions have already played out, but it may help you look at some of your entrepreneurial challenges in a different light.

I really wanted to rate this book more highly, and my rating does bear in mind that it is a book written 20 years ago, but the last section really got my back up. I assume Friedman is writing to an American audience, which in a way is funny, because it completely misses his own point - that even the literature world is globalised now and when you spend 100 pages telling your country how freaking amazing it is, you literally just perpetuate the very issue you discuss - how good America can be at really pissing off the rest of the world. But I digress.
Given this book was written in the 90s, pre-9/11, GFC etc, he does a pretty impressive job predicting much of globalisation's (and thus the world's) future. He talks about the risk of terrorism, about the risk of financial crises, about the invention of something to keep us connected 24/7 (he calls it Evernet, we call it Wi-fi - an Australian discovery!). His points are valid and nail much of what actually did happen over the past twenty years - the future to Friedman at the time, the past to us now. But then he uses the last 100 pages to talk up America and how integral it is to globalisation. And its not that he's wrong because it is. What he fails to understand is that America isn't actually as pro-globalisation as it might appear - he misses Trump and the strong anti-globalisation sentiment in the states, he misses the fact that America is still much better at pulling down other's trade barriers than it is its own, he misses the fact that America literally caused GFC because of insufficient regulation. And he misses (though he claims otherwise) America's arrogance, by talking about how good damn awesome they are, and how god damn shit the rest of us are. I love you, America, I really do, but bloody hell, I get so tired of you thinking your perfect. I know my country isn't perfect - I'm not blind to its faults - but far out America, you need to invest some of that capital in a mirror!

Interesting but dated book that captures a “time capsule” view of how the world was changing at the turn of the millennium. The glowing references to Enron did not age well. Although this book was published a year and a half before 9/11, it actually accurately predicted, to a large degree, the cultural and historical movements that resulted—including the American-led military response, the Islamic State, and the resurgence of far-right political movements.

Overall, this book attempts to make sense of the new world that arose at the nexus of the end of the Cold War and the beginning of technology-driven global connectedness.

Friedman certainly has some insightful observations and a functional structure for interpreting and understanding globalization. Certain facets of this work did not age well, and the overarching tone of optimism seems out of place with the eighteen years that have passed since. Additionally, I found Friedman’s writing style to be grating and arrogant. Nonetheless, a worthwhile book to read if one wants a deeper understanding of globalization and a sense of the Clinton-era optimism about a new and better world enabled by technology.

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!

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!

I might have been more impressed if this had been the first thing I'd read on the subject of globalization. Though he tries to present his views as balanced, there are too many times when he simply gushes about the benefits, glosses over the dark side, and depicts globalization skeptics as naive or worse.

Plus he has more annoying narrative habits than you can shake a stick at: speaking in an omniscient voice, beating metaphors to death, making important and sometimes debatable points via trite anecdotes, repeatedly and uncritically quoting famous movers and shakers who share his views, and not-so-subtly associating himself with those movers and shakers by pontificating like they do about what various countries and rulers need to do to get on board with globalization.

Oh, and not a single footnote or endnote – which fits with the subjective, memoirist style of the book. He is the book's protagonist and his own best source.

Below are key excerpts from the book that I found particularly insightful:

1- "While there are a lot of similarities in kind between the previous era of globalization and the one we are now in, what is new today is the degree and intensity with which the world is being tied together into a single globalized marketplace and village. What is also new is the sheer number of people and countries able to partake of today's globalized economy and information networks, and to be affected by them."

2- "As you will see from the book, I am keenly aware of them. I believe the best way for us to deal with the brutalities of globalization is by first understanding the logic of the system and its moving parts, and them figuring out how this system can benefit the most people. While inflicting the least amount of pain. That is the spirit that motivated this book."

3- "The driving idea behind globalization is free-market capitalism—the more you let market forces rule and the more you open your economy to free trade and competition, the more efficient and flourishing your economy will be. Globalization means the spread of free-market capitalism to virtually every country in the world. Therefore, globalization also has its own set of economic rules—rules that revolve around opening, deregulating and privatizing your economy, in order to make it more competitive and attractive to foreign investment."

4- "Globalization also has its own demographic pattern—a rapid acceleration of the movement of people from rural areas and agricultural lifestyles to urban areas and urban lifestyles more intimately linked with global fashion, food, markets and entertainment trends."

5- "The globalization system, by contrast, is built around three balances. which overlap and affect one another. The first is the traditional balance between nation-states...The second balance in the globalization system is between nation-states and global markets...The third balance that you have to pay attention to in the globalization system—the one that is really the newest of all—is the balance between individuals and nation-states."

6- "So what to do? How to understand and explain this incredibly complex system of globalization? The short answer is that I learned you need to do two things at once— look at the world through a multilens perspective and, at the same time, convey that complexity to readers through simple stories, not grand theories. I use two techniques: I "do information arbitrage" in order to understand the world, and I "tell stories" in order to explain it."

7- "The challenge in this era of globalization—for countries and Individuals—is to find a healthy balance between preserving a sense of identity, home and community and doing what it takes to survive within the globalization system. Any society that wants to thrive economically today must constantly be trying to build a better Lexus and driving it out into the world.But no one should have any illusions that merely participating in this global economy will make a society healthy. If that participation comes at the price of a country's identity, if individuals feel their olive tree roots crushed, or washed out, by this global system, those olive tree roots will rebel. They will rise up and strangle the process. Therefore the survival of globalization as a system will depend, in part, on how well all of us strike this balance."

8- "To fit into the Golden Straitjacket a country must either adopt, or be seen as moving toward, the following golden rules: making the private sector the primary engine of its economic growth, maintaining a low rate of inflation and price stability, shrinking the size of its state bureaucracy. maintaining as close to a balanced budget as possible, if not a surplus, eliminating and lowering tariffs on imported goods, removing restrictions on foreign investment, getting rid of quotas and domestic monopolies, increasing exports, privatizing state-owned industries and utilities. deregulating capital markets, making its currency convertible, opening its industries, stock and bond markets to direct foreign ownership and investment, deregulating its economy to promote as much domestic competition as possible, eliminating government corruption, subsidies d kickbacks as much as possible, opening its banking and telecommunications systems to private ownership and competition and allowing its citizens to choose from an array of competing pension options and foreign-run pension and mutual funds. When you stitch all of these pieces together you have the Golden Straitjacket. Unfortunately, this Golden Straitjacket is pretty much "one size fits all." So it pinches certain groups, squeezes others and keeps a society under pressure to constantly streamline its economic institutions and upgrade its performance. It leaves people behind quicker than ever if they shuck it off, and it helps them catch up quicker than ever if they wear it right. It is not always pretty or gentle or comfortable. But it's here and it's the only model on the rack this historical season."

9- "While we are on the subject of the diversity of the Electronic Herd, there is one other critically important thing we should always keep in mind about it—this herd is not simply an exogenous force. It is lot just made up of stateless offshore money funds, Internet investors from abroad and distant Supermarkets. It is also made up of locals in every country that has opened itself to the herd. What gives the herd its power is not only the fact that when capital controls in a country are lifted foreigners can easily come in and buy and sell currency, stocks and bonds. It is the fact that the locals can easily go out!"

10- "In the globalization system your state matters more, not less. Because the quality of your state really means the quality of the software and operating system you have to deal with the Electronic Herd. The ability of an economy to withstand the inevitable ups and downs of the herd depends in large part on the quality of its legal system, financial system and economic management—all matters still under the control of governments and bureaucrats."

11- "To be an effective shaper you have to be able to attract a lot of adapters. But the key to having a lot of adapters to your standard is that it be able to create a lot of value for other people too—whether it is a product, a human value or a set of geopolitical rules. If people become reluctant members of your value network, eventually they will rebel against it by seeking a different standard. So one thing a shaper always has to be aware of is whether he is leaving room in his value chain—some food on the table—so that others will have an incentive to adapt to his standards."

12- "The best countries and companies will mirror one another's habits. So, after asking the two most basic questions—how wired is your country or company and is it a shaper or adapter—here are the other nine questions I ask to measure its economic power and potential. 1) How Fast Is Your Country or Company? 2) Is Your Country or Company Harvesting Its Knowledge? 3) How Much Does Your Country or Company Weigh? 4) Does Your Country or Company Dare to Be Open on the Outside? 5) Does Your Country or Company Dare to Be Open on the Inside? 6) Does Your Country's or Company's Management Get It and Can You Change Management If They Don't? 7) Is Your Country or Company Willing to Shoot Its Wounded and Suckle the Survivors? 8) How Good Is Your Country or Company at Making Friends?"

13- "The Golden Arches Theory highlights one way in which globalization affects geopolitics—by greatly raising the cost of warfare through economic integration. But globalization influences geopolitics in many other ways. For instance, it creates new sources of power, beyond the classic military measures of tanks, planes and missiles, and it creates new sources of pressure on countries to change how they organize themselves, pressures that come not from classic military incursions of one state into another, but rather by more invisible invasion lie invasions of Supermarkets and Super-empowered individuals."

14- "The other method for greening globalization is to demonstrate to corporations and their shareholders that their profits and share prices will increase if they adopt environmentally sound production methods."

15- "If the intellectual critics of globalization would spend more time thinking about how to use the system, and less time thinking about how to tear it down, they might realize what a lot of these little folks have already realized—that globalization can create as many solutions and opportunities as it can problems."

16- "How we learn to strike the right balance between globalization's inherently empowering and humanizing aspects and its inherently disempowering and dehumanizing aspects will determine whether it is reversible or irreversible, a passing phase or a fundamental revolution in he evolution of human society."

17- "America does have a shared national interest to pursue in today's globalization system—one that constitutes both a big opportunity and a big responsibility. Put simply: As the country that benefits most from today's global integration—as the country whose people, products, values, technologies and ideas are being most globalized—it is our job to make sure that globalization is sustainable. And the way we do that is by ensuring that the international system remains stable and that advances lead declines for as many people as possible, in as many countries as possible, on as many days as possible."

18- "First, we want as open, and growing, a free-market-oriented economy as possible, in which people are encouraged to swing free and take crazy leaps. Without risk takers and venture capitalists, there is no entrepreneurship and without entrepreneurship there is no growth. Therefore, at the heart of every healthy economy are the free-swinging trapeze of free markets. Because there is no better safety net than a healthy economy with low unemployment."

19- "Democratizing globalization—it's not only the most effective way to make it sustainable, it's the most self-interested and moral policy that any government can pursue."

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.

يسرد الكاتب عن العولمه أو كما يحب أن يسميها البعض الأمركه يرى أن العالم رغب أو لم يرغب سيصل إليه العولمه والدول التي تتأخر عن الإنظمام إلى ركب الدول المنظمه ستجد نفسها تجلد من قبل القطيع الإلكتروني إلى أن تنظم هي الأخرى إليهم هي كما يصفه الكاتب بأنه إذ كان هناك شيء وحيد يمكن لأدول أن تقدمه لشعوبها هو الإنظمام إلى هذا النظام هذا كان رئي الكاتب وأنا لا أوافقه في ذالك لهذا ربما كان تشبتنا بأشجار زيتوننا أفضل لنا من ركوب سياراتهم اليكساس .

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.

cuốn sách miêu tả rất chi tiết về toàn cầu hóa,về vị trí con người,tiến trình toàn cầu hóa ,cách thức tiếp cận của các nước,những lợi ích và bất lợi của toàn cầu hóa gây ra cho các nước.tuy nhiên,cuốn sách thể hiện lập trường quá thiên vị của tác giả đối với nước Mỹ.quân đội Mỹ ko chỉ lo bảo vệ lợi ích kinh tế của Mỹ mà còn gây rối,phá hoại ,can thiệp quá sâu vào nội bộ các nước,lập trường quá thiên vị đã khiến cho cuốn sách mất sức hấp dẫn của nó