The World Is Flat (Criticism)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century | |
 Original 1st edition cover |
|
| Author | Thomas L. Friedman |
|---|---|
| Country | United States |
| Language | English |
| Subject(s) | Globalization |
| Publisher | Farrar, Straus and Giroux |
| Publication date | April 5, 2005 |
| Media type | Print (Hardcover and Paperback) and audio-CD |
| Pages | 488 |
| ISBN | ISBN 0-374-29288-4 |
The central image of the book―the "flat" world―has been criticized by The Economist as an "inaccurate and empty image"[1] that does not suit Friedman's own argument. While Friedman points out that the world is increasingly inter-connected, his image may suggest the opposite, as a flat world would be harder to navigate than a spherical one. However, Friedman more likely meant the metaphor to imply the "playing field is flat" in the competitive sense.
There has also been criticism of Friedman's use of the flat earth theory in his book. Friedman perpetuates the myth that Christopher Columbus set out to prove the world was round, while his contemporaries believed it was flat and that his ships would sail off the edge of the Earth. This false idea was begun by a biography of Columbus written by Washington Irving, and many have felt that Friedman should know better. However, even some critics of the Columbus reference have still been subject to the popular myth of the flat-earth era. The well-respected publication 'The Economist', in a review of Friedman's book, stated incorrectly that "Mr Friedman claims that this proved Columbus's thesis that the world is round. It did nothing of the kind. Proof that the world is round came only in 1522, when the sole surviving ship from Ferdinand Magellan's little fleet returned to Spain."[1] In actuality, few people in 1492 believed the Earth to be flat.
Peak oil advocate James Howard Kunstler believes that the globalization model supported by Thomas Friedman is a "false doctrine" because it relies on cheap oil and implies a growth of its use, and in a century to be sealed by future oil depletion and global warming it is neither sustainable nor desirable.[2].
Harvard Professor Michael Sandel, disputes Friedman, calling the horizontal collaboration described in the book “just a nice name for the ability to hire cheap labor in India.” In the example that the book gives, India with its vast man power and technical know how was able to take on the tedious, and huge Y2K bug fix. This gave India a surge in the IT business that Friedman calls the second independence Day. However this could be seem as easily as a sign of dependence. The dependence of relying on the jobs that American no longer want, we can not predict the long term geopolitical consequences of having emerging powers reliant on scraps form the American economic table.
Friedman does not appear to spend much time outside of golf courses, five star hotels or restaurants, and limousines. His view of the flat world consists citizens of elites he interviews on his journey. The chief executive officers of Fortune 500 companies, Mexican ex-presidents, U.S. secretaries of state and military generals, Japanese financial consultants and Indian and Chinese ministers of trade inhibits in his version of the flat world. The other voices are not heard from such as farmers, factory workers and street vendors. These people are not presented in the text, which may tell a very different story of poverty, hunger and disease.
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ a b "Confusing Columbus", The Economist, 2005-05-31. Retrieved on 2006-07-20.
- ^ "Globalisation is an anomaly and its time is running out", The Guardian, 2005-08-04. Retrieved on 2005-08-04.
