Friedman presents a list of world flatteners. It includes digital inventions such as the PC, the browser, application software, the Internet and search engines; the open-source projects whereby programmers worldwide contribute to the development of free programs, such as Apache and Linux; and the new business approaches of outsourcing, offshoring and integrated supply chains.
Friedman is easy to read and easy to understand. He writes so well you are carried into his point of view without realizing it. The whole book is a paean to globalization. Yes, free trade has some drawbacks, he says, but it is inevitable and will increase the standard of living of poor countries as well as that of America. Protection will only isolate us and make us poorer.
Sure, some people will lose jobs, some businesses will lose out. But we can surmount these problems and reach a higher plane of prosperity through wage insurance, more education and more help to those who can't make it.
I agree that globalization may be a force for good, but not as Friedman describes it. The entire book is presented from a Big Business point of view. He describes many, many discussions with CEOs. Where are the labor leaders? Where are the educators, the environmentalists, social scientists, politicians and others whose viewpoints should be considered?
One of the big examples Friedman admiringly presents of world flattening is Wal Mart. He shows how the company uses supply-chain management to become very efficient and to sell at the lowest prices. In the process, wages are cut relentlessly - something he mentions in passing.
Although he does not directly compare Wal Mart with Hewlett Packard, he does describe the latter company as an example of great collaboration between a multinational company and poor people of India. HP went to a small local government called Andhra Pradish, found out what their local needs were, and then built a mobile photo studio powered by a solar panel that the villagers use constantly.
Friedman evidently prefers Wal Mart because it has very little "fat." Wal Mart comes to poor villages and lays the law down. It tells them exactly what it wants, how to do it and how much it will pay. The locals can do it or forget about doing business with Wal Mart.
I prefer HP because it is compassionate - has some "fat." HP comes to a village and finds out by talking to the people what their needs and wants are, and then collaborates with them to find a solution that benefits both. This is the type of globalization we need, not the ferocious and vicious type used by Wal Mart.
Wal Mart is the preferred roll model of business and that is why globalization needs regulation. Left to its own devices, Wal Mart will race us all to the bottom. Sooner or later, all wages will go down. It has already started.
To make sure we can compete in this new flat world, Friedman uses the metaphor of the ice cream sundae and tells us that we must work hard with our "plain vanilla" talents and skills by adding whipped cream, sauce, nuts and cherry to become better competitors. Whatever stands in the way of our achieving flatness, or efficiency, he calls fat. Thus, human relations, healthy working conditions, medical and retirment benefits are fat.
He has it backward. Too many sundaes give you too much fat. So much fat, that it may lead to heart disease. You no longer consider workers as people, but as commodities. What Friedman calls "fat" is where the real meat is. After all, what is the purpose of an economy? To improve the life of people.
Friedman goes too far in his discussion of fat, or friction:
"The biggest source of friction, of course, has always been the nation-state, with its clearly defined boundaries and laws. Are national boundaries as source of friction we should want to preserve, or even can preserve, in a flat world? What about legal barriers to the free flow of information, intellectual property, and capital - such as copyrights, worker protections, and minimum wages."
So he is so enamored of globaliztion that he is willing to do without the "friction" of the nation-state. Scary. He is ready to forego the democracy of U.S. for the dictatorship of business!
Everyone ought to read this book to see what forces we will face in the flat world. However, let's make sure that our nation-state - U.S. - is in control, and not Big Business. Let's also make sure that labor and other elements of society have a say on how globalization develops.
