The World Is Flat: A Brief History Of The Twenty-first Century (2006) - Plot & Excerpts
For those about to read this, I commend your bravery. “The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the 21st Century” is a non-fiction book regarding business, recent history concerning globalization and its implications in the Information Age, and current affairs pertaining to the resulting effect, which Friedman calls the ‘flattening of the world’. This compels me to warn you of the reasons this review will suck; I am not a celebrated (or even competent) book critic, I also do not read many business books, I am lacking computer knowledge and a general understanding of economic matters, and I’ve long since allowed my membership to the Flat Earth Society lapse. With such a high probability of failure here, you might be wondering why you should read this review. This much I think I am capable of, as this explanation panders to your interests; this review will be less than 10,000 characters in length, whereas “The World is Flat” will probably bore the tits off you for over 600 pages, all said, I’m trying to save you some time here. Also, throughout “The World is Flat” author Tommy Friedman will also confess to his own lacking credentials, which are almost identical to my own except for his repeated and humble confession he’s a Pulitzer Prize-winning writer, so he’s willing to tackle the important issue of the flattening of the world in a 600-page tome largely regarded as a masterpiece (presumably by people with no real world experience, who have just started their first job and have finally gotten some sort of hint about the way the business world works, or who are aspiring to land that first, comfy office job after graduating from the fast-food/retail minor leagues). To sum up this weak introduction, I’m hoping the three minutes you spend here save you hours down the road.tSure, I am a long-winded clown with nothing of significance to say, inspired to repeat my meaningless gibberish over and over ad infinitum. After reading “The World is Flat”, I can safely say that I can’t hold a candle to Tommy-Gun Friedman in terms of sheer ability to incessantly babble on about the same points; often, he not only beats a horse to death, but rolls it over, and eventually gives it what some have called the ‘dead horse’ treatment, unless, of course, the point he’s mulling over is firmly rooted in logic and runs counter to his beliefs, at which point he’ll quickly gloss over it and dismiss it by citing a far-fetched example which couldn’t be given any more credence than the ultimate exception to the rule. For anything which does manage to coexist with Friedman’s system of beliefs, he reiterates each point dozens of times (which of course makes it more legitimate through repetition) and also provides confirmation via his preferred method, a ‘proof is in the pudding’ real life example, complete with an exciting “holy shit!” conclusion to the story, such as “only in a flat world can a man in Omaha call a customer service center, and speak to an Indian about replacement parts being manufactured in Shanghai!” These testimonials to ‘the way things are’ appear to be little more than anecdotes which allow him to brag about leaders of industry he’s currently hobnobbing with, almost always due to the critical acclaim his previous book, “The Lexus and the Olive Tree”, was awarded. tTo borrow Tommy’s style briefly, let me repeat: “The Lexus and the Olive Tree” (TLATOT, from now on) is his significant 1999 work which I don’t even feel I need to read, seeing as Friedman consults it heavily for material for “The World is Flat”. How do I know it was published in 1999, he even mentions this fact multiple times; if every reference to “TLATOT” was removed, the book would be about 20 pages shorter. Here’s a real example, taken directly from the book: “In 1999 I published a book on globalization called TLATOT. The phenomenon we call globalization was just taking off then, and TLATOT was one of the early attempts to put a frame around it. This book is not meant to replace TLATOT but rather to build on it and push the arguments forward as the world has evolved.” Reading the words “The Lexus and the Olive Tree” so many times was headache-inducing, akin to listening to a CD skipping, without the benefit of hearing one of your preferred bands kicking out the jams.tNone of this is very promising. What I find downright offensive in this book though, is the decision to include the word “history” in the title. When I want some history, I want facts, data, photo evidence, fossils, hell maybe even a few mathematic equations which somehow back your statement: I want truths, not bias. As far as this being a “history” of the 21st century, this book is a complete fucking failure. I can sum up Friedman’s historical account in one long, crappy sentence: “computer technology became big business and assisted every industry in reaching all corners of the globe, while changing the way everything was done and everyone’s life, and the goddam rotten Bush administration is screwing it all up.” This may or may not be true, but at the same time, for every issue which Friedman feels is impeding the stampeding march of technological advancement and globalization, he dumps the blame squarely on the front door of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Education is on the skids: Blame George Bush. Lagging economy: Ditto. Science/Tech research: George-Dub did it. Rising male impotence and shrinking penile girth: “W”s fault. tFor someone to present a book alluding to the representation of facts, I’d expect it to be less subjective, instead Friedman carries his bias to ridiculous lengths and basically looks like a novice with his ceaseless slander of the current regime. The slanted journalism is a major drawback, and Tommy’s maligning political entities appears to stop with the Bush Administration and the Republican party, as he quotes several “wise” Democrat congressmen throughout. Also deserving of Friedman’s praise (and thus that of an enlightened reader) are what he calls the 10 Flatteners (in a long-rambling 150 page dissection of events from the demise of the Berlin Wall to the outsourcing trend), Bill Gates, Sam Walton, and of course, Thomas Friedman. Yes, in this version of his work, cleverly given the Version 3.0 tag, Friedman shows he has no qualms with shamelessly soliciting praise for his work to include in this update; a great example being how two teachers continents apart were so inspired by his wisdom to create a virtual/‘flat’ classroom, and it should come to no shock that he Googled his masterpiece to see what public reaction was, only to be assured “many references are neutral or full of praise, others are vitriolic or flat-out nuts.” After reading this book, I am hoping that in Version 4.0 Friedman takes the time to congratulate himself by asserting his work is the Eleventh Flattener.tI would be wrong to state there is nothing of interest in “The World is Flat”, however, it’s unfortunate that most of it comes at the beginning of the book, leaving the remaining 400 pages relatively pathetic and dedicated to Tom’s musings. While describing his 10 Flatteners, Friedman isn’t given as much opportunity to state his opinion as he is later, so he does focus more on hard facts. For someone who isn’t too computer savvy or overly interested in computers in general, the history of the Internet was surprisingly engrossing. The thing which resonated most with me was his evaluation of international trade and the modern supply chain, which isn’t too shocking seeing as I happen to be a logistician myself. While it is nice to see Friedman show proper respect to the badasses working in a supply chain capacity, it is somewhat nullified that at after any tidbit he learns, he pulls off the can-you-believe-it! schtick as an exclamation point. tStill, even with the author giving thanks to the zombies slaving away in my profession, I found most of this book extremely difficult to digest; mainly due to Tom’s insistence to surround his opinions with facts, in an attempt to solidify their righteousness. And each one of these things “has always been his belief”; he must say that about 100 times, leading me to think not only must he not do a whole hell of a lot of listening to opposition opinions, but it also seems weird that for a guy who apparently just learned this item or the other, that’s he’s always had an stance on it. Some of the things he’s always been sure of: Unchecked, rampant capitalism is a godsend and the mother of invention, big government, regulation, and any political beliefs differing from his own will ultimately stop progress dead in its tracks. Getting rich quick off some online gimmick that serves no benefit to humanity is completely awesome, participants in internet sex of any sort are filthmongers and the scourge of the Information Age. But my biggest disagreement with his beliefs is in our world-view. Friedman is stoked that almost anyone, anywhere can no compete in business nowadays, as sees this trend as the salvation to the destitute masses globally. I couldn’t disagree more, I’m more of a ‘clean your own backyard first’ guy, I could never understand extending any sort of help to anyone without knowing that my peeps are taken care of first, and I’m not particularly fond of this change in the world, in which my peeps are pissing away any advantage we once had by spreading the peas too far on the plate. I see the culmination of Friedman’s principles resulting in the American middle class becoming the working poor, whereas his book concludes with his affirming and promising account of a Pulitzer Prize winner dropping his daughter off at an affluent university on a serene September day.
The premise is that due in large part to technology the world is becoming flatter. Thomas Friedman clearly thinks this is a great thing with very few drawbacks. In fact, he doesn't address any drawback except in passing (other than the random aside that terrorists can use the Internet to network too) until the penultimate chapter.This is clearly meant to be a book about how globalization affects the individual. Friedman tries to show this by sharing anecdotes and interviews but nearly every single person he talks to and every story he shares is about a founder or head of a company and the few that aren't deal with people who are no more than 3 levels from the top of the company. Hardly "everyman." The book has a lot to say about what CEOs and entrepreneurs can do to stay competitive (mainly keep innovating, not exactly a new idea) but there is very little about what the rest of us can do besides "continue to try to make ourselves employable."He proposes that companies make sure their employees are employable and in return employees give their loyalty. This seems unrealistic given today’s business climate.He views the Internet as a great leveling force, but mentions the censorship in China only in passing and doesn’t discuss how it affects his theory. I believe he thinks the situation is temporary but as major companies seem happy to cooperate with filtering, I don't see change in the near future. Friedman is also very big on the idea of globalization as an economic equalizer. He goes on at length about how it's a force for good because it dramatically raises the standard of living in developing nations, particularly India, but it isn't until the penultimate chapter that he admits that's only true for about 2% of India's population. And while he's busy talking about what a great opportunity it is in terms of income and how Indians no longer have to emigrate to have a much improved standard of living and that even those abroad can have access to hometown newspapers ,etc. he doesn't seem to realize the contradiction when he mentions a man who started an elementary school for India's Untouchable class, hoping to prove that with the right education they can be just like the higher castes but who then must to move elsewhere after they are educated because their last name reveals their caste. While he was trying to argue that the Internet will eventually bring more income equality it seemed to me that it made the rich richer and the poor were still left behind. (And never a word about the exponential difference between CEOs and the lowest paid employee). It’s good that high caste Indians have a better standard of living but we're still seeing the standards improve for the people at the top and not much change for everyone else.He talks about Wal-Mart’s "just in time" model of business and in his penultimate chapter he does address some of the problems. A global supply chain can be decimated by war, disease, or natural disaster and if things are only delivered "just in time" companies can be completely screwed. The advantage of this is that it makes countries think twice about going to war (specifically countries like India/Pakistan and China/Taiwan) because they know if they screw up the global supply chain companies will be extremely wary of ever investing in that country again. But Friedman extols the virtues of Wal-Mart's use of RFID technology without mentioning the concerns of privacy advocates.I think one of Friedman's biggest failings is that so much of the book is about the Internet as a great equalizer and there is not one word about Net Neutrality. The book was updated, revised and re released in April of 2006 so Net Neutrality was a known issue. Having said all of that, the book was still an interesting read. I learned a lot of random things about various companies.
What do You think about The World Is Flat: A Brief History Of The Twenty-first Century (2006)?
The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Centuryby Thomas FriedmanThe only reason I decided to read The World is Flat was because I really wanted to read Thomas Friedman’s new book; Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution--And How It Can Renew America. I am not even going to try.Here is my feeble attempt of a quick summary of an incredibly LONG book. Friedman’s view is that the world has become smaller because of ten “flatteners”. These flatteners range from the fall of the Berlin Wall to work flow software to outsourcing. When the flatteners converge with; the opening up of China and India, and businesses/people that begin to understand the capabilities of these new technologies, globalization takes off.The World is Flat goes in to great detail of each of the flatteners as well as the triple convergence. Many examples and antidotes are given. The weakest part of the book is how Friedman describes the world as either utopian or catastrophic. I was at times excited about America’s possibilities only to be crushed a few pages later by our inevitable demise. The hope I did see in the new globalized world was that the smartest, most creative workers will survive and I have no doubt that my kids will be successful. I cannot recommend this book. It is too long. It took me almost two months to finish. Towards the end, I was reading only for the purpose of getting closer to the end. In fact, this book left me a little flat.
—Charlie
I listened to the audiobook version while traveling with some quiet folks. So this was about all I heard. And it seemed to me that most of the time I spent listening was hearing the author repeat his thesis, "the world is flat". And each time he would express his amazement and gush about how relevant his revelation is to modern life. It felt like he had a hard time getting over how brilliant he is.This book could have been compressed into a booklet. And a mighty fine one at that. Had that been done, I would have praised that booklet for it's value and it's careful analysis of how globalization of our economy and market is affecting our way of life and how it is integrating into our daily activities.Borrow the book from a friend, read the first few chapters, read the titles of the middle chapters, skim the end, and you would have done some worthwhile reading. But the rest of it most likely not worth your time.If however, you happen to be new to the powers of the internet and things like satellites and fiber optic cables, then disregard what I've said above, and go read the book. This book seems to have been written for just that demographic. (And that demographic is not a bad thing)
—Chris M.
Non-Fiction. Friedman explains to us, over and over, how globalization has effectively turned the world into a very very small place -- I was okay with his metaphor of a flat world at first, but over time it started to irritate me. It's neither elegant nor practical. No matter how many virtual conference rooms you have, in a flat world it's still going to take forever to get material goods moved from China to the US, unlike our current round model; later he even starts to talk about how some parts of the world are unflat, ow, my head -- but still, his point remains: digitization, miniaturization, virtualization, and personalization have conspired to make our planet very small indeed, metaphorically speaking. For the most part, Friedman has a highly romanticized view of globalization, looking at it as more of a fascinating academic theory than a real force, and only talking to people who have benefited from the rampant outsourcing and supply-chaining.The first two thirds of this book suffer from a distinct lack of real world consequence. It's all happy anecdotes and economic theory, which isn't exactly Friedman's strong point. Because of this, it took me about six months to read, was constantly inspiring me to nap, and was just generally twice as long as it needed to be. Friedman makes up a lot of jargon -- going as far as to repurpose common words for his own oblique purposes -- and it can be difficult to remember what he's talking about at any given moment. The other problem is Friedman's scope and focus. When I read non-fiction, I like each chapter to have a thesis. Friedman prefers to wander up and down the page, make the same point several times, dump a lot of irrelevant statistics on me, and then scurry off to deliver a glancing blow to a new perspective, only to doggedly return to his original thrice-made point as if I hadn't gotten it the first two times.But, if you can make it through all that, cold hard reality shows up in the third act and things finally get interesting. Friedman admits that only .2% of Indians are employed in the technological industry he was so happily touting just a few chapters before. He admits that the world is not entirely flat, and that it may never become fully flat due to poverty, war, or simple fear. He talks about the ramifications of a flat world, the ways it can go wrong, how terrorist networks take advantage of the same readily available work force and supply chain that Dell or Infosys does. He takes the first two thirds of the book and puts it into context. This part I read in just three days. This is the part I can use. Globalization isn't just about Americans losing jobs. It's so much bigger than that. It's about the flow of information, about vulnerability and anger, about global responsibility. Those last hundred and fifty pages were worth struggling through the first three hundred, but only highlight how The World is Flat is more mishmash than structured thesis.This gets two stars for the first two-thirds of the book and four stars for the last third, giving it an average of three stars.
—Punk
