|
Spencer M. Ross
Student #0026660
Introduction to Comparative Politics 160-211A
Professor Bassel Salloukh
TA: Jonathan Paquin
Conference: 11-12pm, Friday
Review- The Lexus and the
Olive Tree. Thomas Friedman. New York: Anchor Books. 2000. 490
pp.
The world is getting
smaller every day. Mankind has passed through the ice age,
the stone age, and the iron age to finally come to the
information age, where we are no
longer bound to helping ourselves alone, but also to help people
around the world.
Former New York Times foreign affairs columnist Thomas L.
Friedman recognizes this
idea that as the information age grows, the trends in global
economics do as well. In his
book, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Friedman attempts to explain
the post-Cold War
syndrome of globalization and the increasing development of free
markets and trade
around the world. Interdependency has replaced independence of
countries in this new
technological era.
In the beginning of the book, Friedman sets up his main thesis
about how
"globalization has replaced the Cold War as the defining
international system" (p. 7).
Globalization's driving force is free-market capitalism that
integrates countries together.
The new tool of globalization is the world wide web, through
which any information can
be sent/received nearly instantaneously, allowing for
inter-country trade to rapidly
improve. In order to survive in this "new world," one
must be able to handle multi-
tasking. Friedman writes how globalization is a homogenization of
cultures but that, in
the era of technology and information, we must be able to retain
our own self-identities.
He uses the metaphor of the Lexus to represent "improvement,
prosperity, and
modernization" (p. 33). Its counterpart, the olive tree,
represents "warmth of family, as
well as the confidence and security to reach out and encounter
others" (p. 31). There are
several anecdotes (a style that is common throughout this book)
which are recounted in
order to demonstrate the relationship between the Lexus and the
olive tree and how, in
current times, it is becoming increasingly more important to
balance both the new and the
old.
The first part of the book is the impetus for which the other
three parts are based
on. In order for globalization to work, Friedman calls for three
types of democracies:
"the democratization of technology" (how we use
computers and the internet to enable
quicker communication with one another), "the
democratization of finance" (how we
invest our money through bonds, stocks, etc.), and "the
democratization of information"
(how we look at the world through different media outlets). Key
to a successful economy
is the need for computing technology and the ability to plug into
what Friedman describes
as "the electronic herd." He describes the herd as
composed of "often anonymous stock,
bond and currency traders and multinational investors, connected
by screens and
networks" (p. 113). The fates- but more specifically, the
economic fates- of countries are
no longer in the hands of the country people, but in the hands of
virtually anyone with
access to a computer and the internet.
Having set up the basic principles of globalization and the
premises for this book,
Friedman moves into the second section, "Plugging into the
System," which is about the
necessity for a country to be technologically up to date in order
to thrive in today's
rapidly paced free-market economy. The brunt of this book is
comprised of this section
and Friedman starts it by using another computer analogy.
Countries are composed of
three parts: the hardware (the machine), the operating system
(the macroeconomic
policies), and the software (the laws that the country has to
optimize the economy). He uses a pretend "operating system," DOScapital 6.0, as a
means to measure a country's
post-Cold War economic success. Free-market democracies that are
successful are closer
to DOScapital 6.0 than others, which may be closer to DOScapital
1.0. Friedman
assumes the state's role in the country's economy is important,
but merely to prevent
corruption. Countries and companies have to be a lot more willing
to expose themselves
on a global scale if they think they are going to be successful.
As computers take over
our lives and information is more readily disseminated, it is
important for countries and
companies to be open, to live up to global standards of living
and working conditions,
and to allow the people freedom of information in order for the
country/company to
thrive.
Just before the third section, Friedman talks about
"glocalization"-
"the ability of a
culture, when it encounters
other strong cultures, to absorb influences
that naturally fit into and can enrich that
culture, to resist those things that are truly
alien and to compartmentalize those things
that, while different, can nevertheless be enjoyed
and celebrated as different" (p. 295).
Following that is a
discussion on the rise in the global popularity of the NBA,
which is one of the many examples Friedman uses to describe
Americanization of other
countries. This readily leads into the last two sections-
"Backlash Against the System"
and "America and the System." In "Backlash,"
he says that the rapid change that globalization brings will eventually lead to cultural backlash.
However, globalization is
not controlled by any one entity but rather, by the individual
who seeks innovation and
creates his own company and the rules to his own game. This leads
to the idea of
"groundswell," where more people seek to enter this age
of globalization. In "America,"
Friedman claims the United States to be the leading role model in
free-market trade as a
result of a willingness to modernize and accept technological
change. America's
economy works as a result of the "politics of sustainable
globalization": risk taking, the
creation of programs that catch workers who lag behind and bounce
them back into the
economy, and the creation of programs like social security,
Medicare, and Medicaid, to
help those who will try to fit into the system of globalization
but never make it.
"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," Friedman
claims (p. 451).
As a proponent of the computer and information age myself, it is
easier for me to
find Friedman's assumptions not only tolerable, but also
completely valid. (It's hard to
argue with a man who backs up his ideas with multiple economic
anecdotes from around
the world.) The more wired we are becoming, the greater our
economies are booming.
I'm sure that if we were to look at the rise of home internet use
versus countries' micro
and macroeconomics, we would find a positive gain in free-market
capital. Friedman
mentions countries/companies' need to stay wired and be on the
technological cutting
edge however, one point he might have been able to address in a
more detailed manner is
Moore's Law. Moore's Law states that any computer technology
becomes obsolete after
18 months. This principle would further explain economic
development, as countries in
competition will constantly be seeking the newest technology.
In my opinion, one of Friedman's most important issues (as well
as the point of
the book), glocalization and the balance between the Lexus and
the olive tree, was
addressed with the weakest solution. Although it is true that
companies/countries must
have technological standards, there is definitely a place for
state politics to intervene, if necessary, in order to preserve cultural identity. Friedman
himself says that, "IN THE
GLOBALIZATION SYSTEM YOUR STATE MATTERS MORE, NOT LESS" (p.
158). If the economics and cultures are supposedly being
Americanized, then Friedman's
statement holds true, not just to economical globalization, but
to cultural globalization as
well. Perhaps just as cutthroat as economic capitalism is
cultural capitalism where,
unfortunately, America is again perceived as the leading
superpower.
It is almost as if the suggestion should be made that there be
some sort of global
government set up to regulate inter-country affairs. While
Friedman acknowledges
globalization's capitalistic base, he seems to say that while
each country fends for itself,
there still needs to be efforts made to get lagging countries to
catch up to the rest of the
world. This case is particularly demonstrated by his idea of
"politics of sustainable
globalization." A global government would also help to
facilitate the balance between
the Lexus and the olive tree. In the information age, its is easy
for anybody to create a
website and publish whatever information they would like with
little consequence- even
if it is false. Friedman brings up the tragedy at Columbine High School in the United
States, where information on weaponry as well as threats against students was published
on the killers' web sites before the shootings. Whereas a cliché might have formerly
been heard as "If you see it on TV, it must be true,"
today that cliché would be "If you
see it on the web, it must be true." There is no regulation
of what is said on the net,
which almost brings a shred of skepticism to the information that it provides. This has
potential to have impact on the economy when people start to doubt the validity of stock
quotes on Ameritrade.com or the news on CNN.com.
This "global government" would most likely not only
benefit economy in the
globalization age, but cultures as well. Since this is the second
edition of this book and
technology is developing so rapidly, Friedman didn't get to
address one of the most
impacting cases in the balance between the Lexus and the olive
tree. This case is the
right to intellectual property and the war over mp3s. Mp3 (mpeg
layer 3) is a
compression technology that allows users to store songs on a
computer's hard drive using
relatively little disk space. Because of the small file sizes, it
is easy to trade mp3s on any
bandwidth speed. As a result, Sean Fanning created a program
called Napster in order to
make it easier for mp3 owners to trade mp3s. However, this brings
up the question of
who owns the rights to music distribution; the artist or the
listener? If the listener pays
for the album and then freely distributes it, is it fair to the
artist, who put in the effort and
money to record the song? It not, then how is the artist supposed
to be financially
compensated by companies such as Napster, iMesh, or Scour? This
debate, still pending
in American courts, is likely to set precedent in the information
age, where information
doesn't just include hard data, but art as well. And yet, if
Napster is ordered to shut
down, what's to prevent another company like it from starting up
elsewhere in the world
where these laws do not exist? Nothing. This is why, regardless
of how little
involvement government should play in globalization, there needs
to be some rules set to
make the game a "fair game."
The points Thomas Friedman raises in The Lexus and the Olive
Tree, are
definitely on the right track though. He makes it apparent that
we will continue to require technology's aid in economics, but that we should still maintain
our cultural and self-
identities. It is hard to say that globalization has a grossly
negative impact but if it does,
unfortunately, there is no real way to stop it. We're headed for
a more interdependent
world and this fact is increasingly less avoidable, even for
those who would wish
otherwise. Darwin's theory of "survival of the fittest"
still applies though. Those who cannot cope with the technological revolution will suffer, but
perhaps the biggest
sufferers will be those who cannot balance their Lexuses and
their olive trees.
|
